Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.]

5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.]
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world.]

7. "God is all merciful," we hear quite often. Wouldn't it be more merciful of God to simply snap sinners out of existence rather than send them to hell? Or better yet, since he's all-knowing, not allow them to be born at all? - IG
ON GOD'S LOVE & HELL
1.) God's love is superlative.
2.) God's love of man exceeds man's love of self.
3.) Man's love of self prohibits torture.
4.) Considering God's greater love for us, Hell (eternal torture) is illogical.

8. Muslims are supposed to pray 5 times a day towards Mecca. Each prayer includes a variety of ritualism and posturing. If a muslim astronaut were to land on Mars. Prayer to Mecca would be ritualistically impossible due to the rotation of Earth and Mars. Are Muslims stuck here in Earth? IG [Note: Since this was first posted, a Muslim astronaut was faced with this very dilemma. The authoritative clergy informed him to pray as he normally would. I see this no where in the Koran. You see? Religions must change, or die out. It's interesting to note that, in the Koran, the moon is believed to be in the lowest Heaven, the level for those that barely made it to Heaven. Surah 71:15-16. One problem, no man can supposedly get to Heaven until they die. Yet, we've been to the moon. Our satellites beyond that.]

9. Why haven't we seen God reattach severed heads, restore someone who was burned alive or regrow amputated limbs? Surely these would be miracles difficult to deny. - Adam Majors and IG [Note: The typical answer is that man doesn't dictate God's actions. The conundrum here however is that, if God wants us to "know" him, then surely feats such as those mentioned above would be happening all over the world. Until they do, I'll remain an atheist.]

10. Why does God entrust the spreading of 'His' word to sinners? Why doesn't he do it himself? - IG [Note: Surely God would have known that not everyone would be convinced by the reality[sic] of his Bible. If God loves us so much, we are all going to Heaven. If God knew that I would be an atheist, and he doesn't like atheists, he shouldn't have allowed me to come into existence. But he did. Therefore, I must be serving the will of God, for I exist. Smiling]

11. In II Kings 2-23/24 we read about God sending 2 she-bears to attack children for calling the prophet Elisa bald, which he was, the bears killed 42 of the children. Was this a good thing to do? -- Brandon and IG[Note: I have heard some argue that the boys were a gang. So?! I didn't read anywhere in that passage where they laid a finger on the guy . Also, what kind of bears are these that can kill 42 kids? Super Bears? Surely the kids had to be running away.]

12. I have often heard from many believers that even Satan has a presence in the church, which is why even in church people can still have impure thoughts. If Satan can find his way in the church, how do Christians know that Satan didn't find his way into the Bible and twist the whole book? After all, men did vote on which books would make the Holy Bible. - The Infidel Guy

13. Why did God allow Lot and his daughters to escape from Sodom and Gomorra when he destroyed it only to later have Lot and his daughters engage in incestuous fornication. (Genesis 19:30-36) - Disillusioned [Note: To have intercourse with daddy dearest of course.]

14. Genesis 1:28-29 shows that man and all the animals were first created herbivorous. Most young-earth Christians (ones that believes the earth is less than 10,000 years old) say that the fall of man resulted in carnivorous animals ( hence death of animals). So, why did God punish the animal kingdom, making animals kill and devour each other because of man's mistake? Or, if you're an old-earth Christian (one that accepts that animals existed on earth for billions of years before man came on the scene) then how come fossils show carnivorous animals existed before man? - http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/contact.htm.

15. Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them? If so, again, where is his freewill and how is God thinking at all if everything seems to be one uncontrollable action/thoughts. - The Infidel Guy [Note: I'd say a God cannot think at all. To do so, would strip him of omniscience. Thinking is a temporal process.] ON GOD'S ATEMPORALITY
1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.
2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.
3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.
4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator the Universe.
[Note: I guess I should also note here that a timeless being would be without the proposition of past, and future. But to be omniscient, God must know the past and future. Hence a God that is atemporal and omniscient cannot logically exist. Smiling]

16. I have often heard that faith is all that is neccessary to believe in God and accept the Bible as true. If this is true aren't all supernatural beliefs true since they also require "faith"? - IG ON FAITH
1.) A prerequisite to believe in a Faith is faith.
2.) Having faith is all that is required to accept a Faith (belief) as true.
3.) All Faiths are true.
[Note: Of course all Faiths aren`t true, but this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from a person that states that, "Faith" is how one knows God.]

17. Why didn't God just kill Adam and Eve after the Fall and start from scratch? Actually, if God is all-knowing wouldn't he know that man would need to be killed eventually anyway, (the biblical flood)? Why create Adam and Eve at all? - and ON THE GARDEN OF EDEN
1.) God is omniscient (all-knowing).
2.) God knew that before he created man that they would eat of the tree of knowledge.
3.) God placed the tree of knowledge in the Garden anyway.
4.) God wanted sin to enter the world.
[Note: If God didn`t want sin to enter the world, why create Adam and Eve at all? He knew what would happen. Why place the forbidden trees in the Garden in the first place?]

18. If a spirit is non-physical but the human body is physical, how does a spirit stay in our bodies? - IG ON SPIRITS
1.) Spirits are not physical entities.
2.) Brains are physical entities.
3.) Past experiences are stored in our physical brains, we call that, Memory..
4.) Injury can damage portions of the physical brain that store memory and can alter or erase memories completely.
5.) If human spirits exist... after death, spirits can have no memory.
[Note: Some will say the spirit stores physical memories as well, but if true, the spirit would have to be physical at least to a degree. How could a non-physical spirit store, physical memories?]

19. Does God know his own future decisions? If God is all-knowing he actually shouldn't have any decisions to make at all. Nor can he choose anything over something else. For that would mean that he is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. In fact, he can't even think if this is the case. Since he can't DO anything, he might as well not exist. - IG ON GOD'S IMMUTABILITY - Unchangingness
1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5) - Theodore M. Drange

20. If God is all-knowing, how could he be disappointed in His creation? -- [Note: Indeed, wouldn't God know that before the creation of our Universe what creatures would disappoint him? That being the case why create those creatures at all? Also, in knowing absolutely the behavior of humans before creation, God cannot be disappointed either... for this world is exactly as he has planned it to be. If it's not, why create us at all?]

21. God struck down the Tower of Babel angry at the intent of the people that built them, if this is the case, many of the great pyramids ( which are bigger than any ziggurat) around the world should be rubble also, yet many still stand today. Were not the Egyptians and many other ancient pyramid builders reaching toward God /The Heavens? - IG [Note: In actuality, many of the Pharaoh's believed that, via their pyramids, they would become God's themselves.]

22. In the watchmaker analogy, a watch is used to show us intelligent design and compares that to the Universe as evidence of design. We know watches are designed because we have past experience with watches, as well as with other man made objects. My question is: What Universe is the Intelligent Design proponent using to compare this Universe with to draw such an analogy? What God did he see create a Universe? - IG

23. Why did God flood the earth to remove evil? It didn't work! Evil came right back, God should have known that would happen! So why did He bother? - PhineasBg [Note: A good example of how quickly sin returned, was Noah getting drunk just after they discovered land.]

24. If the garden of Eden was a perfect paradise as xians claim, then why did Eve even want to eat the fruit? Wouldn't a perfect place provide everything a person would want or desire and thus she would want nothing? - keyser soze [Note: Why were the trees there in the first place? Of course they love to throw the serpent into the equation. But ummm..who let the serpent into the Garden?... and why would God create such a creature knowing he would cause man's fall? Hmm.. God must have wanted the fall to happen.]

25. Why would an all-powerful god become flesh in order to sacrifice himself to himself so that his creation might escape the wrath of himself. Couldn't god, in his infinite wisdom, come up with something a little more efficient? - ON THE BODY OF CHRIST
1.) God?s flesh was known as Jesus.
2.) Flesh cannot enter into Heaven (according to Paul)
3.) God is no longer Jesus.
4.) Jesus doesn?t exist.

(Note: Many at this point will state that the spirit lives on so therefore Jesus lives. This really depends on what you believe about Jesus. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh? If Jesus is merely the son there is no problem.However, if Jesus ?is? God himself, we do. You see, Jesus is called Jesus because of the attribute of Flesh. If Jesus = God (who is spirit) then the entity known as Jesus ceases to exist. The flesh/body of Jesus, no longer exists and the spirit of God is still the unchanging spirit of God. No Jesus at that point. The Flesh, called Jesus, is dead.)

26. After 9/11 a lot of people have been tossing around " god bless america". Why do they keep saying this? From the looks of it god hasn't blessed anything. If god had blessed america, the 9/11 event would've never happened. Theists seem to give the answer of "everything is part of gods big plan". If everything is part of gods big plan, why are we after Bin Laden? Wasn't he and other terrorists just carrying out gods desired plan? So it seems that Bin Laden/ terrorism isnt our enemy, but god . - [Note: Unfortunately many religious nuts believe they are fulfilling their God's plan by going to war.]

27. Christians say that God is NOT the author of confusion. Can you say, Tower of Babel? - The Screaming Monkeys

28. If Noah's flood supposedly covered the earth for a year, regardless of whether or not all the animals could fit on the ark, what the heck happened to all the plants? Can you imagine a cactus surviving under 4 miles of water for a year? I can't either! - Kyle Giblet [Note: With God all things are possible. Oh wait, except in Judges 1:19.]

29. The highest rainfall ever recorded in a 24 hour period was 47inches in the Reunion Islands in 1947 (during a severe tropical storm). To cover the whole earth to a depth of 5.6 miles, and cover the mountain tops (i.e. Mount Everest), it would need to rain at a rate of 372 (three hundred and seventy two) inches per hour, over the entire surface of the earth. Can rain fall at such an astronomical rate? Where did all the water come from?? Where did it all go to??? And would not the dynamics of the earth be so out of balance (tides etc.) that the earth would become so unstable that it would wobble off into outer space???? -

30. What do Muslim women get in Paradise? - IG [Note: Some Muslims I have interviewed about this say that Muslim women will get the same thing men get or equal value. Smiling Oh really? So Muslim women will get 72 virgin men? lol. If Muslim men get 72 virgins, where are all these virgin women coming from? What of their freewill? Is Allah creating these women to be slaves to the men in Paradise?]

31. In the "Last Days" Jesus is supposed to appear in the clouds. How are the Christians on the opposite end of the world going to see him? Are there going to be millions of Jesus'? What about people that work underground? What about people in deep space? -

32. The Bible says that God is a jealous God . How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow? - IG ON GOD`S JEALOUSY
1.) "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2.) "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3.) "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
4.) The Christian god cannot logically exist.
(NOte: Basically love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can`t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is.)

33. A true Muslim man is not supposed to do anything that the prophet Muhammad didn't do. If one remembers there was a big debate over whether or not Muslims should eat Mangos. If this is true, why in the Hell were these Islamic Fundamentalists flying airplanes? - IG

34. If the earth was covered by a complete global flood, every living creature killed except those surviving on the ark, why are there many completely unique animal species in Australia that are found no where else indigenously on the earth? -

35. If god is omniscient and " god is love," why would he allow a child to be conceived, knowing that that child would one day reject him and spend eternity burning in a lake of fire?- TiredTurkeyProd

36. Revelations is supposed to take place on Earth. What if we colonize the moon or Mars or inhabit a self-sustaining space station? Do we escape "judgement"? -- Ray Sommers [Note: No we don't Ray... and of course we all know that if there is any intelligent life out there besides us, they are all going to Hell too. Eye-wink]

37. Isaiah 40:28 says, "...the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is he weary?" If this is true, why did God rest on the seventh day?- IG

38. Everytime I go to a funeral the preacher and guests always say that " God " has called that person to Heaven or they say, " God said it was time to come home", or some such variation. If God is calling these people "home", why are we putting the murderers of these victims in prison? How can we punish a man or woman for doing God's will? - IG

39. Does God have a gender? In most churches, God is predominately referred to as a "he"? - IG [Note: The Bible says God is male, but what does this mean? Does God have a penis? Does he have hormones that dictate his gender? Smiling]

40. Why can't we wait until we get to Heaven to worship God ? Why would it be too late? - IG

41. What is the purpose of prayer? What can a finite being on Earth possibly tell an omnipotent, omniscient deity that he doesn't know already? - IG ON PRAYER
1.) Humans can?t change God?s mind for he has a divine plan and is unchangeable.
2.) Prayer can't change God's mind.
3.) Prayer doesn't change anything.
(Prayer may make you feel better emotionally, but it doesn`t change God`s mind.)

42. Some say Jesus was the all-knowing God. Jesus would have known then that when he died he'd be in heaven in less than 3 days to rule. If Jesus is alive and ruling today, what did he sacrifice? -- Cyndy Hammond

43. God knows that men are sinners, untrustworthy and evil, why does God leave it up to fallible man (clergy..etc) to teach others about his word? Why would he put our eternal souls at risk if he loves us so much? - The Infidel Guy and Danno778

44. Did Adam have nipples? If so, how did he acquire them? In fact, why would God give "later man" nipples at all? They serve no purpose other than lactation. Some say pleasure. Where is that in Genesis exactly? All mammals have nipples as well, are theirs pleasureful for them too? Many men don't find their nipples pleasurable at all. - IG

45. How did Adam and Eve know it was wrong to disobey God if they hadn't eaten of the tree of knowledge (of good and evil) yet? You can't blame them if they didn't know. - IG

46. If God has such a tremendous problem with uncircumcised penises, why did he make man with foreskin in the first place? - IG [Note: Some say, "So God can recognize his chosen people." Recognize? Is God so stupid that he has to physically look at men's penises? If not God, do other men need to? lol.]

47. Did Noah have fish onboard? Salt or Fresh? Since fresh water fish would die in salt, and salt water fish would die in fresh, only one type of fish would survive. Yet....?" - Frank Monaco

48. Why does the omnipotent, omnipresent God need help from man or angels to spread his word or do acts? - IG [Note: Some say God doesn't need help. But apparently he does.] - IG

49. How did Jesus ascend to Heaven in the Flesh when Paul says that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of Heaven? (1 Cor.15:50) - IG [Note: Some say, well Paul said that and not Jesus. Yet they quote Paul when it suits there purposes.]

50. If God wants us to live right and choose "the good," why did he create evil? (Isaiah 45:6,7) Not to mention he already knows which people are not going to choose "the good" so why create those people in the first place? It seems that many people are born to go to Hell. - IG ON HELL
1.) God is all-knowing.
2.) Before I was born God knew I wouldn?t believe in him.
3.) I was born to go to Hell.
(Sure you may say I have a choice, but I think I`ve proven already that I really don`t. I`m simply fulfilling the will of God by being an atheist aren`t I? If I`m not, I shouldn`t exist: For God would have known that before I was created that I wouldn`t believe in him.)

51. I hear Christians all the time speaking of a spiritual war between Heaven and Hell, if this is true does God have limitations of power? Man only conducts wars because of our limitations of power and foresight. God has both all-power and all-knowledge, no reason for war of any kind. - IG

52. The Bible is full of phrases beginning with, "and the lord saw". Didn't he know before hand? - IG

53. How can a psychologist condone belief in something not proven to exist, when people are put into mental institutions on a daily basis for the same thing? i.e. aliens, fairies, imaginary people (Multiple Personality Disorders..)? - Dan Denton [Note: I'm sure that some of the pious believe that they are improperly placed there as well Dan. Smiling]

54. If Christians say they know God exists and that he will work miracles, what do they need faith for? Faith is not knowing. - IG

55. Brain, or shall I say, body transplants, will eventually be possible, where would the soul be then? Where is the soul? - IG

56. If God really wants us to know him, why doesn't he place the knowledge of him in our minds at birth? The same way many theists believe that God implants our sense of right and wrong in us a right birth. - IG

57. If God was Jesus' father (not Joseph), then why is Jesus' family tree traced through Joseph? -- Cyndy Hammond

58. What image of God was man made from? Couldn't have been a moral one or physical one. - IG [Note: One would suspect that an image of God would be perfect and cannot sin. Oops.]

59. Why can't God appear before everyone at the same time? Everyone in the world would then "know" he exists and not have solely "believe". And please, don't say he already tried that. Surely a God knows exactly what to do to convince a measly human of his existence. - IG

60. According to the New Testament Matthew 5:17 says "Do not suppose that I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to complete. I tell you this: so long as heaven and earth endure, not a letter, not a stroke, will disappear from the Law until all that must happen has Happened." So since Jesus has not returned the "Law" is still in effect, so why aren't we still burning witches, stoning adulterers and disobedient children, killing homosexuals, ostracizing people that work on the Sabbath (nurses, doctors etc.), flinging blood onto the horns of the alter, pulling off the heads of small birds, and don't forget human sacrifice to God (Leviticus 27 P.28 )? -- Sheila L. Chambers

61. If there is freewill in Heaven yet everyone has chosen good and is happy, isn't that proof that God could have made us with freewill, choosing good ( God ) and still being happy on Earth? - Dennis Hendrix [Note: In other words, evil didn't have to exist after all. Hey wait, even in Heaven apparently, evil can exist. At least for a short while. Satan became evil and was in heaven. Apparently he even had enough time to form an Army against God. Wow. Maybe Heaven won't be as peaceful as many believe.]

62. Why does God have a plan? Man is limited in power so we make plans because we are not all-knowing nor all-powerful. If God has a plan, isn't he reduced to a mere finite being? - IG

63. How could the all-merciful/loving God watch billions of his children burn over and over again for eternity? - IG [Note: Of course this is geared to those that believe in a fiery hell. I am well aware that not all Christians believe in a fiery Hell.]

64. Before reading and writing were invented (5000BC), on what basis did God use to judge the people who died before the Hebrew and Greek text (BIBLE) were written? -- [Note: They are all roasting in Hell. Smiling]

65. Many Christians tell me that I will "burn in hell". If I have a soul, how can a soul burn? Aren't souls non-physical entities? - IG [Note: Some Christians groups believe that you will be given new bodies after judgement. However, if true, what's the significance of a spirit in the first place?]

66. How can one hold to the barbaric belief that something has to DIE in order to appease a god for a bad deed? -- Nickolaus Wing [Note: Because an old book says so Nick.]

67. Why does SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) occur? Why would God allow a baby to live for such a short period of time? Why not just let them not be born in the first place? -- Terry Clark [Note: This actually happened to a friend of mine. Not even God himself could console her.]

68. If Jesus was nailed and died on Friday evening, and walked out of the tomb on Sunday morning, where's the 3rd NIGHT he predicted? Per Matthew 12:40: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. -

69. Many Christians claim that hell is merely existence outside of God ?s presence (C.S. Lewis among others). If this is the case, then Jesus could not have descended into hell (being God Himself). As a result, are you sure your sins are forgiven? - Byron Bultsma

70. Ten to twenty percent of all women who discover they are pregnant suffer a miscarriage. Also, it is estimated that anywhere from 14 to 50 percent of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. Seeing this is all part of God 's plan, does this make God the world's number one abortion provider? - Jim

71. What if, when you get to Heaven, you saw God causing pain and suffering out of anger or for the purpose of entertaining himself. What if he required people in heaven to praise and worship him non-stop even to the point of causing his worshipers discomfort, pain and boredom. What if, when he was bored, angry, or jealous, he would create natural disasters to make himself feel better. Would you still follow him? - Fernando [Note: Of course they would Fernando, many people followed Hitler out of fear as well.]

72. In Leviticus, the bible condemns homosexuality as an "abomination", giving some Christians a reason to hate, harass, torture and kill gays and even picket their funderals with " God hates fags" signs. In the same book of the bible the eating of shellfish is equally an "abomination". Are these Christians planning to go after the patrons of Red Lobster next? - [Note: hee-hee, that's all I can say. Jewish Law states that eating Fish without scales is an abomination and thus the Shark is one among the list. However, sharks do have scales, Placoid scales, one of the many reasons why a shark is called a Fish .]

73. Christians will tell you that if a baby dies it goes to heaven. Why then are they so against abortion? All the child is being deprived of is the opportunity to go to hell. Either that or god expects unborn fetuses to accept Jesus. -

74. If one could prove to you incontrovertibly that Jesus and God were all human fabrications would still believe? And why? - LOGICnREASON [Note: If you say yes. Then you are not concerned with the truth, you simply WANT to believe; and if you WANT to believe, indeed, there is nothing anyone can tell you..]

75. It is often said that God allows evil because one could not meaningfully appreciate good without experiencing its opposite. Why is it necessary to experience the opposite of something in order to appreciate it? Must I experience death in order to meaningfully appreciate life? -excidius

76. Bible literalists want you to believe that God's Word in the Bible is meant to be taken literally. If this is the case, why was Jesus fond of explaining things in parable and metaphor? Was Jesus literally discussing the biology of mustard seeds, or was the mustard seed parable meant to be interpreted figuratively as faith? -excidius

77. Liberal Christians say some parts of the Bible are literally true, but much else is to be interpreted figuratively as allegory. How do you know which is which? What distinguishing criteria are used? How can you be certain "God" is a literal and not a figurative concept? -excidius

78. Consciousness is the result of a physical brain, how could God being metaphysical be said to be conscious or sentient without having a brain? - Mindless

79. Considering how Leviticus is considered old law, and that Christians do not obey it anymore, why do they always use it to defend homosexuality being an "abomination"? -Bohorquez

80. If God is omnipotent and he has a plan ... then why did he not create the universe as it will be one second after the plan has succeeded? Who or what prevented him from doing that? - Timothy Campbell (http://www.tc123.com)

81. The large majority of people who have ever existed could not have learned of the Bible or Jesus Christ. And many people afterwards have found other religions or no religion at all to be more convincing, sometimes while being very virtuous. Do all these people really deserve eternal torment because of that? -- lpetrich

82. The above arguments also apply among different sects of Christianity, many of which state that most others are not True Christianity. -- lpetrich

83. Is it reasonable for the Creator and Ruler of such a vast Universe to be preoccupied with the sexuality of a species living on a tiny little planet? -- lpetrich

84. If the Christian god was all loving and all knowing why did he let religious figures such as Mohammed or Gautama Budda be born, knowing that they would mislead people from the 'true' faith and trick the majority of the world's population into burning forever in hell (in fact, if Islam didn't start, most of the middle east would probably be Christian). It would simple to use the Holy Spirit to guide them to Jesus and spread the 'true' faith. If the Holy Spirit exits, it certainly isn't doing it's job!

85. If one is obliged to follow all the teachings of the bible then why is engaging in homosexuality or adultery any worse than "suffering a witch to live", "muzzling the ox that treadeth the corn", "reaping the corners of thy field", "marring the corners of they beard", "plowing with an oxen and an ass", "hating thy brother in thy heart" or "eating frogs, shellfish and eels" ?

86. Exactly how did the alleged worldwide flood kill off all the world's sea creatures? How does one go about drowning a fish? -- Steever

87. Why did this alleged god create humans as an animal form of life that gets sick and dies and experiences pain and has a limited mind when 'it' could have created humans as a form of pure energy or of some indestructible material or whatever, and was totally ?sinless? and had ?pure? thought? If a god was omnipotent 'it' could have easily have done this. --AI

88. If a god is omnipotent how did 'it' fail to foresee that Satan would turn against 'it'? --AI

89. What is a god supposedly made of? --AI

This list was compiled by the Infidel Guy with submissions from many members of the atheist community.

PICK THE QUESTION YOU WANT TO ANSWER, AND POST IT HERE...

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Well, lemme see.

Vastet wrote:
What if the omnipotent superbeing you believe in really does exist, but its creation of the universe was an accident it is oblivious to? We would be as bacteria to such a being, if even that much. Why would we expect it to comprehend us anymore than we can comprehend it? Meaning is something we seek or give to feel comfortable, but it doesn't necessarily even have a basis in reality. And there is no way to test meaning, insofar as I'm aware. The meaning of life is different for different beliefs, and there is no way to judge which, if any, is accurate. The only meaning one can have is the meaning one embraces. If you feel embracing the meaning religion gives that's fine. But you don't need religion to embrace a meaning to life. Anything that comforts you or feels right is legitimate. Science may explain why we desire meaning, but it is unlikely to provide an absolute meaning to everything. It may not be possible.

Physics shows that there is really nothing that is super. Super is a term used to express something unknown and seen to be far more then then it is. It's normally used when a mistake has been made on something which goes beyond expectation ( I also have a terrible keyboard) There isn't anything "super'. That's like saying nature can go beyond itself. IE A pound of feathers weighs as much as a pound of lead. But if one doesn''t know the compositions of the matter involved they could say lead is super heavy. That also goes for the spiritual elements. There's no super anything there either. This "god " their,s isn't understood by them and they deem it greater then themselves so anything greater gets the super label. 

The meaning of life (as far as we've discussed here) is really kind of moot. There, doesn't have to be any meaning attached to it. My meaning of life is ---hanging out on the planet.

Absolutely, --the meaning one embraces. That's a given. Even though I can't state what my meaning is I"m sure I have one. It may be that it can be different at different times.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote: Physics

Old Seer wrote:
Physics shows that there is really nothing that is super.

You attempts at personally redefining the English language and Scientific terminology was amusing, till the level you're willing to go to pull things straight out of your ass became apparent, and now it's become 'disturbing'.

Been to the doctor lately?

In any event, you are wrong once again...

Why do you think they put the 'super' in 'Superconductors'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductivity

 

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
tune in tomorrow night

I was wondering where in cyberspace you were lurking? Do you vampires only come out at night or what? That’s not directed at all atheists. I respect your right to hold such religious beliefs and am sure that there are many well meaning but nonetheless deluded atheists out there. It’s the God hating, evidence twisting, Christian hating ones I want. Those are the ones who have the demons in them and the ones who I’m very eager to make a public display of. We’ll see how you defend your position in full view of everybody watching. We might even be able to get you to give up your poisonous little creep routine and have a proper debate. Tomorrow evening we will be debating the historicity and authenticity of the Biblical account and the evidence that it is indeed eyewitness documentation. Just remember, we will be quoting much Scripture in our quest to bring the truth and shine a light into that deluded and demon tormented soul of yours. Look, I’m just having a little fun with ya. Jesus Christ loves you and would instantly forgive you for all the times you have left those demons curse Him. So, I too must find a way in my Christian heart to pity and love you. I’ll have to admit, It’s not always easy to love that which is unlovable. But I sure will try out of love for my savior who shed His precious blood on a cross, so even you could be forgiven by a holy but merciful God. In fact, I will be more than happy to see you clock up a few points and will gladly award them if you do indeed deserve them. So, tune in tomorrow night y’all and we’ll see if the claims of atheists truly are as ridiculous as Christians say they are. Who knows rednuts! We might have you singing coomba - yah and praising the grace and mercy of a forgiving and merciful God at the end of it. I truly will be delighted to achieve such a result. You see, the atheist nonsense can’t hold up under scrutiny. I’m 100% certain of that. And I’m going to prove it.So for every atheist out there why don't you have a look in at how ol' rednuts valiantly defends his religious beliefs in atheism.

CliffD 1 Rednuts 0


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
CliffD wrote: I was

CliffD wrote:
I was wondering where in cyberspace you were lurking?

I wasn't in cyberspace, son. Some royalty cheques came in late last week and I decided to surprise my wife by flying us to Manhattan (her favorite city) so she could buy some things she wants, go to her favorite spa, and restaurants, while I took a client to a strip joint and paid for some smokin' hot 20 something yr old to slide her honeypot all up and down him in the VIP lounge.

That's how I roll, Son.

You were probably jerking off on your bible fantasizing of being 'one' with a man named Jesus for eternity and boning up on some Kent Hovind or William Lame Craig lunacy that you think is airtight and actually intellectually justifies beliefs in Santa and your invisible Sky Daddy.

If there is a 'God', Son, he made my wife and the 20 something yr old peeler just the way they were meant to be; smokin' hot and completely willing...

CliffD wrote:
It’s the God hating, evidence twisting, Christian hating ones I want.

1- Can't possibly hate something I don't believe exists and could possibly know about, Son.

2- Twisting evidence is the stock and trade of Christianity, and I'm not a Christian.

3- I only hate lying, malevolant Christians.

CliffD wrote:
Those are the ones who have the demons in them and the ones who I’m very eager to make a public display of.

What demons?

CliffD wrote:
We’ll see how you defend your position in full view of everybody watching.

Lemme guess...

You're one of those presuppers who'll have trouble with making a cogent argument, let alone establish a sound and valid premises?

CliffD wrote:
Tomorrow evening we will be debating the historicity and authenticity of the Biblical account and the evidence that it is indeed eyewitness documentation.

So, you've got some stories to talk about?

Who cares?

CliffD wrote:
Jesus Christ loves you and would instantly forgive you for all the times you have left those demons curse Him.

Not interested.

CliffD wrote:
So, I too must find a way in my Christian heart to pity and love you.

That's your problem. I can't help you with that. I actually have more people that love me than I have time for.

CliffD wrote:
You see, the atheist nonsense can’t hold up under scrutiny.

Atheism isn't a 'thing'. It's a lack of a 'thing'.

CliffD wrote:
I’m 100% certain of that.

I don't believe you are.

CliffD wrote:
And I’m going to prove it.

You think you can.

I really hope you're a presupper. They're the funniest bunch of quasi intellectual thiests.

 

Bring it on, Son. I gotta get back to unpacking from the weekend, and downloading the stripper pics from my IPhone.

My wife wants to see them...lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Because a material

conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term. Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass. There is no super. How do you know there isn't a God. It could be something that is "super" that hasn't been found yet, according to your thinking.  Nature cannot be better then itself. The biggest boiler on the planet isn't super because it's bigger, it's just bigger. You're breaking the rules of the forum. The rules demand that you act as a human being. 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
 Nice post red.

 Nice post red.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Physics shows that

Quote:
Physics shows that there is really nothing that is super.

Actually it's the English language, not physics, which has defined super as a mostly incomprehensible term.

Quote:
A pound of feathers weighs as much as a pound of lead. But if one doesn''t know the compositions of the matter involved they could say lead is super heavy.

Density, not weight, is why feathers weigh less per square metre than lead. Even in prehistoric times, the brain recognises the density difference instinctively, though it may have a difficult time communicating the concept.

Quote:
That also goes for the spiritual elements.

"Spiritual" is even more incomprehensible a term than super. At least super can have practical meaning, as anything which exceeds the common limits of an event. Superluminal has suddenly gained scientific veracity as a term which reflects the apparent ability of a neutrino to travel faster than light, for example. But spiritual describes and/or explains nothing.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
-1 for equating atheism with

-1 for equating atheism with religion, which it is the opposite of.

-1 for proposing there is any historical validity to the bible, which wasn't even compiled for centuries.

-1 for assuming any authority in a text with no contemporary sources to validate it and ignoring the fact that the bible today bears only similarities to the bible upon it's first printing.

atheists 1
Cliff -6

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
More

density= more weight. I expressed "composition" which would include all. More atoms- more weight. I know density is not weight. Speed is not velocity. I was speaking in general terms. I'm merely trying to show how the word super has only a comparative value. Super is used to express that the most recent development is more super then the last super. The more recent super proves that the previous super was not super. One would have to consider--super as compared to what. Velocity does not create a super. Is a sr-71 blackbird super compared to a regular passenger plane. If so, then is a rocket that is faster then the Blackbird  mean the blackbird suddenly is no longer super. The blackbird didn't have super velocity to begin with. There can't be a new super. There's no super form the git-go.

I, you, and everyone else has a spiritual. It is that which isn't physical. 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Because a

Old Seer wrote:

Because a material conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term.

Just typical for a complete idjit.

Not only do you not know what superconductivity is, you're too fucking lazy to click on a link that explains that it's a quantum 'freak' of nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductivity

"The electrical resistivity of a metallic conductor decreases gradually as temperature is lowered. In ordinary conductors, such as copper or silver, this decrease is limited by impurities and other defects. Even near absolute zero, a real sample of a normal conductor shows some resistance. In a superconductor, the resistance drops abruptly to zero when the material is cooled below its critical temperature. An electric current flowing in a loop of superconducting wire can persist indefinitely with no power source."

Old Seer wrote:
There is no super.

Wrong again.

Supersonic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic_speed

Old Seer wrote:
How do you know there isn't a God.

Never said I did.

There could be many.

What makes you think they exist?

Old Seer wrote:
You're breaking the rules of the forum.

Tell it to the judge.

That would be Brian Sapient.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Question. Provide scientific

Question. Provide scientific answer of how first cell came to be? Describe how evolution gets passed the problem of irreducible complexity with thousands of encyclopedia’s full of pre programmed information. Show evidence.
Rational answer- That's why you freaks got bitchslapped down in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and why so many of the Discovery Institute's 'witnesses backed down when they faced prison sentences for trying to claim 'non science' as science.

I already told you. I believe by faith that a highly intelligent being is the only logical answer for the creation of such a complex structure that because of irreducible complexity must have come fully functional. So the burden of proof is on the atheist side, who are so sure how it happened and apparently must have the evidence. So you either believe by faith or you have the scientific answer. Let’s look at your scientific answer. The evidence supports the theory of Evolution, and the theory of Abiogenesis is extremely well justified, and we are getting closer and closer to being able to actually replicate it, without any supernatural 'incantations' like the biblical myth and legend. That’s it. That’s your scientific answer for how the first cell came to be. You call that science? I particularly like the statement “we are getting closer to be being able to replicate it.” In other words you don’t know! We’re not any closer than we were when Darwin speculated that a cell was basically a glob of goo that gelled together with other cells. In fact, we are getting further away from it with every discovery of how extremely complex a cell is. The more we discover, the more we are sure it definitely wasn’t by way of evolution. This is also in line with what God (there’s that word you hate so much) says about the last days “but they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water” .I mean don’t insult our intelligence. Without even mentioning God we can come up with an intelligent design theory that better fits the evidence because evolution doesn’t work. Find another theory. They might have backed out in Kitzmiller Vs Dover. You don’t see me backing out, do ya? I’m made of a bit rougher stuff than you’d think. I was no angel before I got saved. I’d have eaten punks like you for breakfast. We have an admission that it’s by faith you believe how the first cell came to be. That’s why I chalked the 1 up on the right,

An ignorant Christian who’s going to show you how weak your atheist argument is! I see now the way the rational response unit deal with everything that’s put to them. Insults, distort the argument and edit everything that people ask of ye so ye can’t be seen by others how weak ye really are. It’s ok. Buddy. I understand ye have a lot of faith in ye’re religion as proved by the request for scientific proof and you’re complete inability to provide it. So, since faith covers a gap in knowledge, you believe by faith that the first cell of complex life spontaneously developed into a living thing. What a magical event. Life from non - life. At least God’s description in the very first 10 lines of Genesis provide is a more believable account. In the beginning, (time), God (a highly intelligent and personable being) created (came fully formed) the Heavens (space) and the earth (matter). So, in the very first 10 Words of Genesis you have your time, space continuum set out. We can study using science if His design has any signs of intelligent design and we can see is there evidence that life had to come fully formed or is it possible that it magically grew from non - life.
Look I understand that people like you, who spend a lot of time huddled over their computers get up to some very freaky things. (I’m not being judgmental. You just strike me as such a person. Just saying it like it is brother so we can go about getting you set free).Don’t let that discourage you before a holy God. He loves you. That’s why His sinless, spotless son had to take your judgment. The blood of Jesus Christ will wash all that sin away. It’s going to be a tough process but your admission of faith in your religion has been a monumental first step. Hang in there buddy. I understand the demons in you are tormenting you in your bed at night. Jesus Christ came to save that which was lost. He is the way, the truth and the life. Sorry, for the sermon there brother. I just have to get those demons in you agitated so they know who’s boss. We don’t want them thinking we’re afraid of their petty insults and attempts to ridicule us. They flee and hide from the blood. We’re looking for rational responses from the rational response squad not petty insults and ridiculous statements of faith in their religion. So, for our next lesson we’ll deal with the historicity of the Biblical account, the forensic science methods we can use to seek out truth and authenticity of historical documents and the evidence that the apostles were telling the truth. There’s that word the followers of evolutionism hate so much, evidence. I will keep that one chalked up. I think, rightfully earned it. I’m going to rightfully earn another few in the next lesson. You take care, now, brother. Let's hope you don't get another one of them royalty cheques before this evening and disappear again.

CliffD 1 Rednuts 0


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Question. Provide scientific

Question. Provide scientific answer of how first cell came to be? Describe how evolution gets passed the problem of irreducible complexity with thousands of encyclopedia’s full of pre programmed information. Show evidence.
Rational answer- That's why you freaks got bitchslapped down in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and why so many of the Discovery Institute's 'witnesses backed down when they faced prison sentences for trying to claim 'non science' as science.

I already told you. I believe by faith that a highly intelligent being is the only logical answer for the creation of such a complex structure that because of irreducible complexity must have come fully functional. So the burden of proof is on the atheist side, who are so sure how it happened and apparently must have the evidence. So you either believe by faith or you have the scientific answer. Let’s look at your scientific answer. The evidence supports the theory of Evolution, and the theory of Abiogenesis is extremely well justified, and we are getting closer and closer to being able to actually replicate it, without any supernatural 'incantations' like the biblical myth and legend. That’s it. That’s your scientific answer for how the first cell came to be. You call that science? I particularly like the statement “we are getting closer to be being able to replicate it.” In other words you don’t know! We’re not any closer than we were when Darwin speculated that a cell was basically a glob of goo that gelled together with other cells. In fact, we are getting further away from it with every discovery of how extremely complex a cell is. The more we discover, the more we are sure it definitely wasn’t by way of evolution. This is also in line with what God (there’s that word you hate so much) says about the last days “but they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water” .I mean don’t insult our intelligence. Without even mentioning God we can come up with an intelligent design theory that better fits the evidence because evolution doesn’t work. Find another theory. They might have backed out in Kitzmiller Vs Dover. You don’t see me backing out, do ya? I’m made of a bit rougher stuff than you’d think. I was no angel before I got saved. I’d have eaten punks like you for breakfast. We have an admission that it’s by faith you believe how the first cell came to be. That’s why I chalked the 1 up on the right,

An ignorant Christian who’s going to show you how weak your atheist argument is! I see now the way the rational response unit deal with everything that’s put to them. Insults, distort the argument and edit everything that people ask of ye so ye can’t be seen by others how weak ye really are. It’s ok. Buddy. I understand ye have a lot of faith in ye’re religion as proved by the request for scientific proof and you’re complete inability to provide it. So, since faith covers a gap in knowledge, you believe by faith that the first cell of complex life spontaneously developed into a living thing. What a magical event. Life from non - life. At least God’s description in the very first 10 lines of Genesis provide is a more believable account. In the beginning, (time), God (a highly intelligent and personable being) created (came fully formed) the Heavens (space) and the earth (matter). So, in the very first 10 Words of Genesis you have your time, space continuum set out. We can study using science if His design has any signs of intelligent design and we can see is there evidence that life had to come fully formed or is it possible that it magically grew from non - life.
Look I understand that people like you, who spend a lot of time huddled over their computers get up to some very freaky things. (I’m not being judgmental. You just strike me as such a person. Just saying it like it is brother so we can go about getting you set free).Don’t let that discourage you before a holy God. He loves you. That’s why His sinless, spotless son had to take your judgment. The blood of Jesus Christ will wash all that sin away. It’s going to be a tough process but your admission of faith in your religion has been a monumental first step. Hang in there buddy. I understand the demons in you are tormenting you in your bed at night. Jesus Christ came to save that which was lost. He is the way, the truth and the life. Sorry, for the sermon there brother. I just have to get those demons in you agitated so they know who’s boss. We don’t want them thinking we’re afraid of their petty insults and attempts to ridicule us. They flee and hide from the blood. We’re looking for rational responses from the rational response squad not petty insults and ridiculous statements of faith in their religion. So, for our next lesson we’ll deal with the historicity of the Biblical account, the forensic science methods we can use to seek out truth and authenticity of historical documents and the evidence that the apostles were telling the truth. There’s that word the followers of evolutionism hate so much, evidence. I will keep that one chalked up. I think, rightfully earned it. I’m going to rightfully earn another few in the next lesson. You take care, now, brother. Let's hope you don't get another one of them royalty cheques before this evening and disappear again.

CliffD 1 Rednuts 0


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
They simply

redneF wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Because a material conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term.

Just typical for a complete idjit.

Not only do you not know what superconductivity is, you're too fucking lazy to click on a link that explains that it's a quantum 'freak' of nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductivity

"The electrical resistivity of a metallic conductor decreases gradually as temperature is lowered. In ordinary conductors, such as copper or silver, this decrease is limited by impurities and other defects. Even near absolute zero, a real sample of a normal conductor shows some resistance. In a superconductor, the resistance drops abruptly to zero when the material is cooled below its critical temperature. An electric current flowing in a loop of superconducting wire can persist indefinitely with no power source."

Old Seer wrote:
There is no super.

Wrong again.

Supersonic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic_speed

Old Seer wrote:
How do you know there isn't a God.

Never said I did.------>Never

There could be many.

What makes you think they exist?

Old Seer wrote:
You're breaking the rules of the forum.

Tell it to the judge.

That would be Brian Sapient.

Adapted the term/word to describe something to be better then the last better. Top scientists know there is no super. they just use it. Next is hyper conductivity, Hyper may very well apply.

There is no supersonic. It's descriptive of a device/object moving through atmosphere faster then sound. The speed of sound is not super. Sonic/sound. The same speed in space is not sonic. There's no air in space, it is just speed and/or velocity.

If you would do some study on those bible things you say are stupid and instead cease proceeding with claims from self inflicted blindness you'd probably find some useful information. I'm saying that there are no proper Christians on the planet, that includes me. Prove me wrong. You'll need the bible for that. start reading and studying, or, keep making claims from blind contempt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Cliffd drops another 3

Cliffd drops another 3 points for reasserting the same bullshit yet again.

atheist 1
Cliffd -9

Old Seer fails to refute or address anything I said, and reasserts the same bs which has been refuted by myself and red. But he's not trying to keep score, so points are irrelevant.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Sorry about that

Vastet wrote:
Cliffd drops another 3 points for reasserting the same bullshit yet again. atheist 1 Cliffd -9 Old Seer fails to refute or address anything I said, and reasserts the same bs which has been refuted by myself and red. But he's not trying to keep score, so points are irrelevant.

I didn't realize you were addressing anything to me. Whoa horse, one thing at time. Also I have a problem with the posting levers. I'll look back and see if you let Snidley Whiplash loose to tie someone to the railroad tracks.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Lol, no worries. Post #1007.

Lol, no worries. Post #1007.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Can't find it, what ever it was.

Vastet wrote:
Cliffd drops another 3 points for reasserting the same bullshit yet again. atheist 1 Cliffd -9 Old Seer fails to refute or address anything I said, and reasserts the same bs which has been refuted by myself and red. But he's not trying to keep score, so points are irrelevant.

I did reply on something,

I came up with your incomprehensibility problem. So you can't comprehend something. That's common for anybody. I could go with that, but I'm not like you.

You guys got this plan of pleading ignorance at the right time.

Run this--- You guys whimper and bawl, rant and rave,  about all the evil that been done by religions. All that evil was done by the very state of mind portrayed here. There is no doubt from what is seen here that you are no different then the one's you hold in critical contempt. Are you ensinuating by all this running off at the brain that if the world were all Atheist things would be different. It would be worse. The very mentality exhibited here is what the problem is/was/. All that evil in the past created the pathways for you parents to meet. Had it not been for all that evil you wouldn't exist. If you had the power to change the past---would you. Instead of sitting around and glorifying your selves with brainiacal ventures for no result put all that brain power to solving problems rather then running character assasination plots. Can you produce a plain straight forward definition of "Human". If you say it's your bod, then listen to it and see what it tells you.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
If I say something is

If I say something is incomprehensible, then I'm saying it is beyond comprehension for anybody. Ie: A meaningless, broken term.

The "evil" found in religion (supression of free speech, encouragement for mass murder up to and including genocide, the supression of science and critical thinking, and the oppression of any who disagree in the slightest) is incomparable to a few insults.

If I had the power to change the past I wouldn't, because it served the purpose of arriving at the present (and I have 0 interest in being stuck in a temporal paradox of my own making). But changing the present based on the observed mistakes of the past is logical and rational. Slapping religion aside today because of it's past "evils" is necessary for the future of our species.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Outstanding and

Vastet wrote:
If I say something is incomprehensible, then I'm saying it is beyond comprehension for anybody. Ie: A meaningless, broken term. The "evil" found in religion (suppression of free speech, encouragement for mass murder up to and including genocide, the suppression of science and critical thinking, and the oppression of any who disagree in the slightest) is incomparable to a few insults. If I had the power to change the past I wouldn't, because it served the purpose of arriving at the present (and I have 0 interest in being stuck in a temporal paradox of my own making). But changing the present based on the observed mistakes of the past is logical and rational. Slapping religion aside today because of it's past "evils" is necessary for the future of our species.

and very well put. Now we're  getting somewhere. If you are on a quest for the preservation of species it cannot be done within you present mode of mind as it is precisely what the problem already is. Then, your quest and ours are the same. We are on the same road with disagreements--heading to the same place. From our research we see the problem cannot be solved out of the material sciences. We,vie left the material sciences behind in these things from the understanding that they are not the solution. Material science only solves material problems.

We've began a science that we refer to as "The spiritual sciences. That is the study of personage, similar or attached to psychology. We don't expect others to accept that, it is intended for our use.

We are just as interested in getting rid of religions (and government) as you. But you have to do it from their turf. The Pope is not a Christian and we can prove it. What comes about when that happens. We have a "guy" presently working on the Pope. From what I understand it's a tuff deal to get in there. They guard themselves against any intrusion that finds them wrong (what's new). You need to understand the religion cannot be gotten rid of without including civil government. The religions have got to go first. If government goes religions remain, that starts the whole thing over again. If religion goes so does governments. I've got placed to go, things to do and people to see for now. Be back later.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Without government there is

Without government there is anarchy, the opposite of my goals. That government can accomplish all the "good" and all the "bad" that religion can accomplish is certainly true. But government has a capacity for change that religion doesn't mirror. Government can do a 180 in the span of a day, while religions take centuries to change.

I don't fight the idea of gods (which is why you don't see me arguing against deism or panentheism), I fight the organisation of such ideas into ideologies that presume absolute nonsense en masse, with ritual and law that have no basis in reality, and often cause harm to outsiders.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Understood.

Vastet wrote:
Without government there is anarchy, the opposite of my goals. That government can accomplish all the "good" and all the "bad" that religion can accomplish is certainly true. But government has a capacity for change that religion doesn't mirror. Government can do a 180 in the span of a day, while religions take centuries to change. I don't fight the idea of gods (which is why you don't see me arguing against deism or panentheism), I fight the organisation of such ideas into ideologies that presume absolute nonsense en masse, with ritual and law that have no basis in reality, and often cause harm to outsiders.

I'll introduce the idea that-to get rid of religion also removes civil government. The two are based on the same concepts, a few rule the many. The masses become as the government dictates. People become what they are governed by. If government is flawed  the people become flawed also. The US government is supposed to operate under the countries constitution, but that is being slowly eroded over time. It's more and more apparent that the constitution will be meaningless. What this means is---who is in charge of keeping the electeds under the constitution. Checks and balances have failed. Checks and balanced have been relegated between two parties , rather then government bodies. The US is now governed by two parties not the branches of government. History has it that no government lasts very long, the few that run it are worse then the one's that started it. We can find no lasting mechanism that will keep the operators in line.

Grandson arrived---have to fix his computor.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:conducts

Old Seer wrote:

conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term. Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass. There is no super. How do you know there isn't a God. It could be something that is "super" that hasn't been found yet, according to your thinking.  Nature cannot be better then itself. The biggest boiler on the planet isn't super because it's bigger, it's just bigger. You're breaking the rules of the forum. The rules demand that you act as a human being. 

That is not how a 'super-conductor' is defined.

The term 'super' is reserved for materials where the electrical resistance has fallen to ZERO. This requires some fundamentally different structure or state in the material.

It is not simply a comparative term, when used scientifically. It implies something fundamentally different about the mechanics involved, or at the very least, a difference in value of several orders of magnitude.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Seer,"Density" is NOT

Seer,

"Density" is NOT weight. Or "more weight".  It is weight per unit volume. More properly, mass per unit volume.

It is a measure of how concentrated the weight is.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
OK

Got it. At this stage in my life I use physics as an everyday life kind of thing. IE- building a boiler etc. I'm not into Quantum mechanics because it doesn't solve an immediate problem. I'm 2nd fiddle to the other guy and probably 3rd with no one in between. It's been years since I've been into exactitude's. I shouldn't get into debates on higher fizziks as much of that is long gone. The basics are still ok for me.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Adapted the

Old Seer wrote:

Adapted the term/word to describe something to be better then the last better.

'Better' is a personal subjective value judgment in a particular instance.

That's not what scientists are measuring when they measure for electrical resistance. There are instances when higher and higher resistance is exactly what they're looking for.

Old Seer wrote:
Top scientists know there is no super.

They're the ones who set the term.

I don't know why you're in such denial...

Old Seer wrote:
There is no supersonic.

Ya, there is. There is a characteristic sound that always signals it, called a Sonic Boom.

Old Seer wrote:
The speed of sound is not super.

That's why scientists don't say that.

Old Seer wrote:
If you would do some study on those bible things you say are stupid ....you'd probably find some useful information.

Really?

Would I learn that ambient temperature superconductors exist? Or about cold fusion? Or about the Higgs particle? Or about Lithium Air batteries?

Coz that would be awesome. That would really be helpful to science and technology.

List 3 pieces of useful information I'd find.

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Understood

BobSpence wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term. Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass. There is no super. How do you know there isn't a God. It could be something that is "super" that hasn't been found yet, according to your thinking.  Nature cannot be better then itself. The biggest boiler on the planet isn't super because it's bigger, it's just bigger. You're breaking the rules of the forum. The rules demand that you act as a human being. 

That is not how a 'super-conductor' is defined.

The term 'super' is reserved for materials where the electrical resistance has fallen to ZERO. This requires some fundamentally different structure or state in the material.

It is not simply a comparative term, when used scientifically. It implies something fundamentally different about the mechanics involved, or at the very least, a difference in value of several orders of magnitude.

In my day of physics super was regarded as I posted. But those were the days before "super conductors"and those types of material were a matter of thought or prediction. . There's a lot of new things since that I'm not familiar with. I understand zero resistance. I was not aware that there was anything found that had zero resistance. In my 'Old" fizziks it was understood that there could be no material with zero resistance. It was seen that there would always be something (impurities etc) that would impede the flow of electrons. I picture it as a road with road blocks that don't block the entire road. An electron has to bounce around and eventually find it's way around the road blocks, the more block removed the less resistance. I've looked over physics articles from time to time and things are quite a bit further along then my day. The same things I wasm familiaer with may even have a different name or a finding has made an addition or subtraction. If I see this correctly- when super is applied to a material that has no resistance and cannot be improved or changed, or is not needed to be changed then it can be considered super. On those terms I can accept it. But it has to have zero resistance.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:I'll

Old Seer wrote:
I'll introduce the idea that-to get rid of religion also removes civil government. The two are based on the same concepts, a few rule the many.

That's not an accurate portrayal. The few can rule the many, but the introduction of democracy has shaken that role of government. As democracy evolves, the power will be spread even further than it has been. I hope, anyway.
Religion is largely immune to the concept because the artifacts religions are based on make it impossible for a leader to contravent those artifacts (including, but not limited to, "holy" books). Their choices are exceptionally limited. The bigger a religion is, the more limited the choices become. This is why cults tend to be far more dangerous in the short term than religions. It's easier to get full compliance from a few dozen people than a few thousand, let alone millions.
That changes only when religion is synonymous with state (it is the government), and has direct authority over the population.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:The masses

Old Seer wrote:
The masses become as the government dictates. People become what they are governed by.

That is the opposite of what happens in democracy. As the people change their views, so must the politicians in order to be elected.

Quote:
The US government is supposed to operate under the countries constitution, but that is being slowly eroded over time.

Proof that people change. A static constitution can no more survive the rigors of time than a holy book.
And yet, it's taken 200 odd years to start falling apart. 200 years of societal and technological and economic and political revolutions. It was clearly the right idea, it just wasn't perfect enough to last forever. Nothing is.
If, however, it were a living document, that had a more comprehensive view of rights and freedoms, it wouldn't necessarily be in as bad of shape as it is.
I must say that the constitution is one of the greatest accomplishments of the US. It just needs revision every now and then.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
As we see it

Democracy is on the way out. It looks to me that fascism is on the way in.

I am highly impressed--- You got that right. Everyone of us will agree with you this post.

The founders didn't define "freedom", or state enough ways on how they intended freedom to be applied. They needed to be more specific.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
"Supersonic" is using 'super

"Supersonic" is using 'super in the basic sense of 'beyond' or 'above'.

It simply refers to an object having a velocity faster than the speed of sound in whatever medium it is travelling through.

A super-conductor is one having absolutely zero resistance. Nothing at all to do with "cannot be improved or changed, or is not needed to be changed". Those phrases would be implied by the word "perfect", not "super".

All superconductivity so far discovered is temperature dependent. It is not so much a property of a particular material, it is a state that many materials can get into if cooled to a sufficiently low temperature. Modern work has found and developed materials that display super-conductivity at higher temperatures which are easier to maintain, so making them useful for practical applications.

The main application currently is to achieve very intense magnetic fields, by allowing very high currents to flow in electromagnets used in MRI scanners and particle accelerators.

It was first discovered in 1911, so I think it was around as a FACT before you were born, unless you are indeed very old.

Super-conductivity does seem to involve Quantum Mechanics in some form, where the electrons move in an entirely different way, perhaps more as waves than particles.

 

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
OK got it

Vastet wrote:
Old Seer wrote:
I'll introduce the idea that-to get rid of religion also removes civil government. The two are based on the same concepts, a few rule the many.
That's not an accurate portrayal. The few can rule the many, but the introduction of democracy has shaken that role of government. As democracy evolves, the power will be spread even further than it has been. I hope, anyway. Religion is largely immune to the concept because the artifacts religions are based on make it impossible for a leader to contravent those artifacts (including, but not limited to, "holy" books). Their choices are exceptionally limited. The bigger a religion is, the more limited the choices become. This is why cults tend to be far more dangerous in the short term than religions. It's easier to get full compliance from a few dozen people than a few thousand, let alone millions. That changes only when religion is synonymous with state (it is the government), and has direct authority over the population.

You last sentence is the one that worries me when it comes to civil government. The problem we see is--if leaders are elected that are religious their religion has an effect on their policies. IE-Bush and Cheney's war. I'm neither Demo or Repub. ( we got all these red and blue States-where are the green guys) so I'm don't intend submitting this on a party basis. Here we have Bush going out on his horse with a banner of righteousness (mostly self) with a claim that (or simular) he was chosen by God for these times etc blah blah and so on, when what we can see is nearly total failure of any reasonable result, except what may be a temporary control of the oil fields, and 6000 Americans dead, up to 500,000 Iraqis dead. How are these types to be kept out of government. So, if religion is eliminated would it make any difference if government keeps going.

 

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I think that the attempt to

I think that the attempt to push democracy out is doomed to not only fail, but to inspire revolt. With every year that passes more and more of the population becomes apathetic to the current scenario, until this year, when the first glimmering of revolution appeared in mass protests centred around economic institutions.
Not every democracy is being circumvented by abuse of power at the top, and even in those nation's where it is there are enough examples elsewhere to prevent and/or reverse the trend once the population has had enough.
And it's getting close to having had enough. Voter apathy has grown to such an extreme that should the right people come and inspire the apathetic, a political revolution will occur practically overnight.
If they don't, then civil war will break out when apathy turns to anger.
Either way, humanity has a history of low tolerance for oppressive regimes and fascism. You can convince people to accept it, but once under it, things begin to unravel. And eventually it ends.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I can accept

that Bob.

The developments in 1911 weren't dealt with in my day to any great extent when it came to super conductivity. I don't remember anything on the subject at the time. I'm sure it was there but it probably wasn't enough to remain in the old beanery. Today it is much more dealt with and no doubt todays physics covers it well. On the physics of electricity I wasn't tops, with me it was mechanics. In my day physics was more for personal practical use then to get a job in a corporation. Thanks for the info.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Jesus didn't exist.

When looking to confirm the validity of historical accounts we have to see if there are other sources. This helps to validate a written account. You see rednuts, the logic works like this. If an account can be verified by another source, there’s a good chance it’s true. You see different people in different places giving a similar account would be a good way to validate a historical account. Why is this rednuts? I’ll tell you why. They had no internet or mass communication in the days of Jesus. That’s only a recent development in the world. So historians use this as a way to decide if there is truth in an unearthed document. Now we do indeed have non –Christian sources who mention Jesus. We have also enemy attestation. This means that others wrote about him and even enemies at the time did. Enemies of Christianity were Celsus, Tacitus, the Jewish Talmud and the world famous Jewish historian Josephus (Writer of the antiquities of the Jews ). I would recommend you acquire the literature to confirm this statement. We have 10 known non – Christian and enemy accounts of Jesus. We have 9 who mention the Roman emperor of the time. 10 is bigger than 9 rednuts. So Jesus was mentioned more times in uncovered historical accounts than the Roman emperor. That was the leader of Rome Rednuts. Including Christian sources He is mentioned 43 to 10. I know Rednuts. Your going to say the Bible sources were telling big big fibs. I’ll just add it in for when I prove to you they were actually telling the truth. This is where you go to work with your poisoned edit and show them all how clever you are. Now Rednuts here is a list of what is written about that figment of people’s imagination Jesus. (remember this came from other sources which you can verify for yourself and enemies of Christianity) An enemy is somebody who doesn’t like you rednuts.

1. Jesus lived during reign of Tiberius Ceasar
2. He lived a virtuous life( That means holy rednuts)
3. He was a wonder worker
4. He had a brother James.
5. He was said to be the Messiah.
6. He was crucified under Pontious Pilate
7. He was crucified on the eve of the Passover.
8. Darkness and an earthquake occurred.
9. His disciples believed He rose from the dead.
10. They were willing to die for their belief.
11. Christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome.
12. His followers started to deny the Roman pagan Gods and worshipped Jesus as God.

Now Rednuts this is in no way the end of the evidence I’m going to provide over the next few weeks to show you the depth of your delusion. It is however fascinating to piece together a historical account from other sources that is actually congruent with the Gospels. Maybe, Rednuts there’s a chance that bad man you hate, who died on a cross for your sins against a holy God did in fact exist. Now we are long way from proving Him the son of God who was butchered and put on a cross to atone for the sins of the world and whose blood today has the power to set people free. But it’s starting to look dodgy for you who hates the holy blood of Jesus Christ and has cursed Him. Don't you let that worry you Rednuts, He shed his blood for you also. He loves you and wants you to look at the picture of HIm on that cross and know it was for you. Now here is my question for you. Is it possible that a man named Jesus existed? Please provide an intelligent answer and not one coloured by the amazing stoic faith in atheism you have. I will give you a couple of days to seek out the literature needed and provide a rational response.

When looking to confirm the validity of historical accounts we have to see if there are other sources. This helps to validate a written account. You see rednuts, the logic works like this. If an account can be verified by another source, there’s a good chance it’s true. You see different people in different places giving a similar account would be a good way to validate a historical account. Why is this rednuts? I’ll tell you why. They had no internet or mass communication in the days of Jesus. That’s only a recent development in the world. So historians use this as a way to decide if there is truth in an unearthed document. Now we do indeed have non –Christian sources who mention Jesus. We have also enemy attestation. This means that others wrote about him and even enemies at the time did. Enemies of Christianity were Celsus, Tacitus, the Jewish Talmud and the world famous Jewish historian Josephus (Writer of the antiquities of the Jews ). I would recommend you acquire the literature to confirm this statement. We have 10 known non – Christian and enemy accounts of Jesus. We have 9 who mention the Roman emperor of the time. 10 is bigger than 9 rednuts. So Jesus was mentioned more times in uncovered historical accounts than the Roman emperor. That was the leader of Rome Rednuts. Including Christian sources He is mentioned 43 to 10. I know Rednuts. Your going to say the Bible sources were telling big big fibs. I’ll just add it in for when I prove to you they were actually telling the truth. This is where you go to work with your poisoned edit and show them all how clever you are. Now Rednuts here is a list of what is written about that figment of people’s imagination Jesus. (remember this came from other sources which you can verify for yourself and enemies of Christianity) An enemy is somebody who doesn’t like you rednuts. Enjoy editing twice.

1. Jesus lived during reign of Tiberius Ceasar
2. He lived a virtuous life( That means holy rednuts)
3. He was a wonder worker
4. He had a brother James.
5. He was said to be the Messiah.
6. He was crucified under Pontious Pilate
7. He was crucified on the eve of the Passover.
8. Darkness and an earthquake occurred.
9. His disciples believed He rose from the dead.
10. They were willing to die for their belief.
11. Christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome.
12. His followers started to deny the Roman pagan Gods and worshipped Jesus as God.

Now Rednuts this is in no way the end of the evidence I’m going to provide over the next few weeks to show you the depth of your delusion. It is however fascinating to piece together a historical account from other sources that is actually congruent with the Gospels. Maybe, Rednuts there’s a chance that bad man you hate, who died on a cross for your sins against a holy God did in fact exist. Now we are long way from proving Him the son of God who was butchered and put on a cross to atone for the sins of the world and whose blood today has the power to set people free. But it’s starting to look dodgy for you who hates the holy blood of Jesus Christ and has cursed Him many many times. Don't you let that worry you Rednuts, He shed his blood for you also. He loves you and wants you to look at the picture of Him on that cross and know it was for you. Now here is my question for you. Is it possible that a man named Jesus existed? Please provide an intelligent answer and not one coloured by the amazing stoic faith in atheism you have. I will give you a couple of days to seek out the literature needed and provide a rational response. Enjoy editing twice


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
I apologize to everyone for

I apologize to everyone for missing these nuggets...lol

Old Seer wrote:
conducts current better than other materials does not make it super.

Ya, it does. When (x) is exponentially better than y (virtually everything else we know of), we call x 'Super'.

Old Seer wrote:
The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term.

That's a genetic fallacy.

Old Seer wrote:
Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass.

No.

Fiber Optics achieves a much lower rate of attenuation than the purest copper; let alone iron.

Old Seer wrote:
Nature cannot be better then itself.

Patently false

It can evolve, or devolve.

 

It's clear to me that what you consider a high level of intellect is merely what your personal limits are, when it should be about the personal limits that exist outside of you.

As such, you are severly underqualified and your level of intellectual contributions are barely at a Junior High level.

Instead of trying to write a book, maybe read a few.

You are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind...

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
CliffD wrote:  You see

CliffD wrote:
  You see rednuts, the logic works like this.

This oughta be good...

CliffD wrote:
 If an account can be verified by another source, there’s a good chance it’s true.

That's a logical fallacy, Son.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Yes

redneF wrote:

I apologize to everyone for missing these nuggets...lol

Old Seer wrote:
conducts current better than other materials does not make it super.

Ya, it does. When (x) is exponentially better than y (virtually everything else we know of), we call x 'Super'.

Old Seer wrote:
The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term.

That's a genetic fallacy.

Old Seer wrote:
Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass.

No.

Fiber Optics achieves a much lower rate of attenuation than the purest copper; let alone iron.

Old Seer wrote:
Nature cannot be better then itself.

Patently false

It can evolve, or devolve.

 

It's clear to me that what you consider a high level of intellect is merely what your personal limits are, when it should be about the personal limits that exist outside of you.

As such, you are severly underqualified and your level of intellectual contributions are barely at a Junior High level.

Instead of trying to write a book, maybe read a few.

You are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind...

 

 

I am under qualified. thanks for the challenge.

I haven't kept up with recent developments in physics. It's been a while . Many new things have been found. But consider-in the 9th grade I predicted Einstein to be wrong on some things. Not bad tho, eh. A year ago I stopped in to see my high school physics teacher. I didn't think he would recognize me so I introduced my self by name and said I was in his physics class. He said, I know you, you're the only physics student I ever had. Not bad again eh.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer

Old Seer wrote:

...consider-in the 9th grade I predicted Einstein to be wrong on some things. Not bad tho, eh.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
The questions then are

Vastet wrote:
I think that the attempt to push democracy out is doomed to not only fail, but to inspire revolt. With every year that passes more and more of the population becomes apathetic to the current scenario, until this year, when the first glimmering of revolution appeared in mass protests centred around economic institutions. Not every democracy is being circumvented by abuse of power at the top, and even in those nation's where it is there are enough examples elsewhere to prevent and/or reverse the trend once the population has had enough. And it's getting close to having had enough. Voter apathy has grown to such an extreme that should the right people come and inspire the apathetic, a political revolution will occur practically overnight. If they don't, then civil war will break out when apathy turns to anger. Either way, humanity has a history of low tolerance for oppressive regimes and fascism. You can convince people to accept it, but once under it, things begin to unravel. And eventually it ends.

Will the people have "libyan" rights

Will the US gov contact NATO to interfere and help the rebels win.

 

 

 

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
US pride is too high to ask

US pride is too high to ask for help in domestic situations. Even to accept it if they have a choice.
Besides, it isn't just an American problem. The protests and problems are multinational. Some nation's have it better than others, but the gap between the rich and poor, the content and the malcontent, is practically global.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I don't know

redneF wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

...consider-in the 9th grade I predicted Einstein to be wrong on some things. Not bad tho, eh.

the exact drift of your post but I'll let it be. There's other fish to fry.


 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:redneF

Old Seer wrote:

redneF wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

...consider-in the 9th grade I predicted Einstein to be wrong on some things. Not bad tho, eh.

 

I don't get the exact drift of your post...

That's little surprise.

Someone predicting anyone could be wrong on some things is no more impressive a prediction than someone saying any blind squirrel could find a nut one day.

That's about the safest bet possible; that a human could be wrong on some things.

That's what makes us 'human'. We are always wrong on 'somethings'. Duhhh....

You and CliffD continually fail to impress on any topic, or in general knowledge.

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 769
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
To find a few things wrong

in Einsteins material by a 9th grader has to show some schmarts' Nobody else in class did. Nobody in the whole school did.

I disagree with you concept of human, If you review the forum rules you might find that you are being asked to be human. Opposite that is animal. Each is a state of mind and member of your spiritual attributes.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:conducts

Old Seer wrote:

conducts current better than other materials does not make it super. The term is applied because the lesser  materials were used or found first. If what is considered a super conductor was found first it wouldn't rate the term. Would iron be a super conductor compared to glass. There is no super. How do you know there isn't a God. It could be something that is "super" that hasn't been found yet, according to your thinking.  Nature cannot be better then itself. The biggest boiler on the planet isn't super because it's bigger, it's just bigger. You're breaking the rules of the forum. The rules demand that you act as a human being. 

I just have to address this misunderstanding.

"Super" is NOT applied simply because something "conducts current better than other materials", but see my more detailed response to this. As used in science, it is well-defined.

We don't know there is or isn't a God, but that is not a useful comment, apart from being completely irrelevant to the subject at hand. There is no evidence pointing specifically to a God, and since the God concept encompasses ideas totally beyond our possibility of experiencing or detecting with physical instruments (infinity, omnipotence, etc), it is just one idea among a virtual infinity of such ideas which are 'possible' once you are prepared to go so far beyond what has been currently observed/detected/measured or even hinted at. Therefore it is pure speculation or wishful-thinking to propose such an entity.

If such a being exists, and has significant power and responsibility for our reality, there is much evidence that he is either incompetent or downright evil.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:in Einsteins

Old Seer wrote:

in Einsteins material by a 9th grader has to show some schmarts' Nobody else in class did. Nobody in the whole school did.

I disagree with you concept of human, If you review the forum rules you might find that you are being asked to be human. Opposite that is animal. Each is a state of mind and member of your spiritual attributes.

Could you elaborate on what things you considered Einstein to have been wrong on?

You might be in line for a Nobel Prize....

His theories are still holding up remarkably well.

Considering the gross lack of understanding of Physics you have so far displayed, I would be very surprised if you really did such a thing.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote: To find a

Old Seer wrote:
To find a few things wrong in Einsteins material by a 9th grader has to show some schmarts'

I would agree if they found something that overturned Einstein's theories.

But...

Where's your evidence that you did that?

Old Seer wrote:
Nobody else in class did.

Where's your evidence of that?

Old Seer wrote:
Nobody in the whole school did.

Where's your evidence of that?

 

If it never happened, there would be no evidence.

Ipso Facto, what you say about you personally finding things wrong with Einstein's material.... never happened as you are suggesting it did.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
rational responses

Question. Provide scientific answer of how first cell came to be? Describe how evolution gets passed the problem of irreducible complexity with thousands of encyclopedia’s full of pre programmed information. Show evidence. Rational answer- That's why you freaks got bitchslapped down in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and why so many of the Discovery Institute's 'witnesses backed down when they faced prison sentences for trying to claim 'non science' as science Question: We have enemy attestation and non - Christian sources that give an account of the life of Jesus as being congruent with the New Testament. This is always a good historical check by historians that an event actually happened. In fact Jesus is mentioned by non - christian and sometimes enemy sources more than the Roman Emperor of the time in uncovered historical documents.Does it seem reasonable to suggest that Jesus was not a myth. Rational response from the rational response squad. That’s a logical fallacy son. Someone predicting anyone could be wrong on some things is no more impressive a prediction than someone saying any blind squirrel could find a nut one day. I keep asking myself. Is he just plain stupid or is he plain stupid. He’s definitely plain stupid. I think I rightfully earned another point CliffD 2 Rednuts 0


CliffD
CliffD's picture
Posts: 23
Joined: 2011-11-15
User is offlineOffline
Question. Provide scientific

Question. Provide scientific answer of how first cell came to be? Describe how evolution gets passed the problem of irreducible complexity with thousands of encyclopedia’s full of pre programmed information. Show evidence.

Rational answer- That's why you freaks got bitchslapped down in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and why so many of the Discovery Institute's 'witnesses backed down when they faced prison sentences for trying to claim 'non science' as science

Question: We have enemy attestation and non - Christian sources that give an account of the life of Jesus as being congruent with the New Testament. This is always a good historical check by historians that an event actually happened. In fact Jesus is mentioned by non - christian and sometimes enemy sources more than the Roman Emperor of the time in uncovered historical documents.Does it seem reasonable to suggest that Jesus was not a myth.

Rational response from the rational response squad. That’s a logical fallacy son. Someone predicting anyone could be wrong on some things is no more impressive a prediction than someone saying any blind squirrel could find a nut one day.

I keep asking myself. Is he just plain stupid or is he plain stupid. He’s definitely plain stupid. I think I rightfully earned another point

CliffD 2 Rednuts 0


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
CliffD wrote:I keep asking

CliffD wrote:
I keep asking myself. Is he just plain stupid or is he plain stupid. He’s definitely plain stupid.

Wha??

Go in circles much?...

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10610
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
-6 points to CliffD for

-6 points to CliffD for AGAIN repeating the same refuted bs twice in a row.

atheist 1
CliffD -12

I must say, Epic fail is certainly a good description of what's happening here.

Thank you Old Seer, for not repeating yourself ad absurdum like CliffD here. It's nice to be able to have an actual discussion instead of a headbanging competition.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.