Home » Need help responding.

Loc's picture

I would suggest saying

Submitted by Loc on March 12, 2008 - 3:13am.

I would suggest saying this.

You sir,are an idiot. I am loath to be in your presence lest your incredible lack of intelligence forms a black hole that sucks mine away too. It appears that in a ironic quirk of the evolution you don't believe,you are getting stupider with every passing moment,until you revert back to the mind state of your single celled ancestors. I perceive your intelligence in currently on par with that of the common crab.Except  where crabs are fun to look at and can be eaten,you have no apparent purpose.Do everyone a favor and read a book.I suggest starting with a coloring book,before moving on to the great literary works of our time,such as Dick and Jane.

ok don't really say that,but we can dream.

peknud wrote:

 


>>I guess it sounds good if you want to forego logic, but Mr. Harris should be reminded that naturalism/materialism is a religion that requires faith as well. Reason alone is non-sense because reason pre-supposes faith. Defense of reason by reason is circular, therefore worthless. His own arguement makes the same mistake he insists theists make and thus his statement self-destructs. [WTF?]

WTF? Like Rocas said,ask him to show you where materialism or reason are religions. It is ridiculous he is accusing you of circular logic when he's using the bible.

peknud wrote:
 >>When you study the information that we have concerning our existence it is clear that the odds of the existence of this world are beyond astronomical (no pun intended) and in fact would be deemed a miracle...... and that naturalism of course cannot provide any answer.  >>The simple fact that science states before time, matter and space exploded into being there was nothing. It doesn't take a great deal of logic to conclude that those properties coming from nothing and coming together in a life sustaining manner is in fact a miracle. We can debate the meaning of the word for all time but it wouldn't change the meaning for the majority. The card analogy does not match up because it is not making an equivical comparison. To make such a comparison we would first have to determine how the cards already exist then explain why they have logical designed principles to create such sequences. The universe will continue to "work" reqgardless of anyones philosophical beliefs. Herein lies why naturalism/materialism self-destructs because if there was no transcendant God and creator then the naturalist world has the burden of explaining how this world exists at all. Not only can "science" not explain the why, but it can't explain the how either. If everything is material then how did it come from nothing? Beyond the existence, naturalism can't even explain the species as bacteria has never been observed to mutate into anything, it stays bacteria. Time + matter + chance doesn't equate to new species because it has never been observed and time creates disorder, not order. The Second Law of Thermodynamics makes this clear in the principle of entropy. Darwinism self-destructs. All of this requires the naturalist to have a great deal of faith and this is just one reason why I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.    [Know everyone here has heard this tired point.
 Basically he's just presenting Argument from Fine Tuning and The Watchmaker Argument,both of which have been refuted to death. It should be easy to find arguments against them.(I'm too lazy to give some) To quote DG "Anyone who uses the Second Law of Thermodynamics is an idiot." The law only applies in closed system,which we are not due to the fact we have the sun giving huge amounts of energy. And by theist reasoning,we shouldn't grow because things can only degenerate right? Ask him if he's saying your better than him because you have more faith. Then tell him atheism doesn't  have any faith,idiot. 
peknud wrote:
>>How can someone honestly search for truth if they've already discounted a possible conclusion? That is what is happening when a naturalist dogmatically asserts that life arose spontaneously from it's non-living chemical components. Richard Lewontin confessed that materialism "cannot allow a divine foot in the door." This is pure, ideology giving way to unsupported theories. For the thinking Christian, based on the laws of logic and the observation of the evidence it requires more faith to believe in naturalism. There is such a thing as good science and bad science. Just as an example, bad science is believing in macroevolution JUST becuase microevolution can be observed. Unfortunately this sort of "science" is lumped into what is taught to the public as the only science and the public has unknowingly accepted it as truth. I come to my conclusions that best answers what we can logically determine based on observation and forensic evidence and is why I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
Wow.Just wow. The thinking christian? Is that like the flying hippo? Ask him to present this evidence he got with observation and forensic evidence.     

Loc'n'Load

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

"Don't stand beside my grave and cry,
I am not there. I did not die."

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Textual smileys will be replaced with graphical ones.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <p> <span> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <img> <map> <area> <hr> <br> <br /> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <table> <tr> <td> <em> <b> <u> <i> <strong> <font> <del> <ins> <sub> <sup> <quote> <blockquote> <pre> <address> <code> <cite> <embed> <obj
  • You can use BBCode tags in the text, URLs will automatically be converted to links.

More information about formatting options