What really ticks me off is when atheists keep saying that we have to prove God exists (yet only they can convince themselves), but we that have faith God exists, are not liable to provide anything for them. If we say "God exists", then and only then are we under scrutiny and the burden of proof is on us. Yet atheists consistently call the Bible a fairy tale, or compare God to invisible pink unicorns, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, and the flying spaghetti monster without substantiating it. When they say they have no evidence for those things just the same as they have no evidence for God, then it becomes a straw man argument because it is a highly exaggerated misrepresentation in comparison used as an argument. It is also an illicit substitution of identities (masked man fallacy) because they see in one perspective that they don't have evidence for one thing and therefore believe the perspective is true in every other situation. This leads to an over all denying the antecedent fallacy. Just because they don't have evidence for something, they refuse to believe it. Which turns into their claim that they can't believe in anything without any evidence, which is a lie because everyone does it every day when we confide in inconsistencies. By making plans ahead of time or acting on a premeditated idea, it is by faith. Faith is a natural part of our thinking processes. We have faith on a daily basis in something that we do not have empirical evidence that it will happen the way we plan it to. Another example of faith is when we are traveling to a destination in hope by faith that we will reach that destination on time. So the whole anti-faith garbage is a cult of logophobic bigots that are too sophophobic and too arrogant to listen and learn how they are wrong but they have faith they are right. These people have some serious denial issues.
Atheism - to be blunt - is a stupid concept. Here's why:
Free Thought: Atheists pride themselves in claiming that Atheism is all about free thought. However, I began to question this for the mere fact that Atheists do not give time to the God concept. They are quick to dismiss it as a "sky fairy" superstition. As a critical rational thinker, I am all about investigating, questioning and theorizing. I could not
simply state, "There is no God, it is superstition." This would be intellectually dishonest and a cop out. Atheism is NOT a haven for free thought.
By quickly dismissing God as a "Sky fairie" or comparing to a ficticious myth, is a hasty generalization. Just another fallacious concept in atheism.
Topic: Health and Religion - page 131. (Read 211013 times)
Here's something that the world should know about atheism. Don't let it poison your mind.
Atheism is dying from it's own failure to reason, to be honest and because of the bigotry that is embedded in its cultivation of new nonbelievers.
5 years now talking to atheists.
Not every atheist is this way but a majority of them (especially in groups) have this egotistical presuppositional concept that God isn't real (without substantiating it) and basing all arguments on that opinion alone. Yet they tell people that they just don't know to avoid saying God isn't real.
Atheism is a poison to the human intellect.
It promotes itself as rational thinking but
reasons fallaciously.
It declines morals because it loses accountability for its actions.
It tells you that you're smarter than religious people but it is intellectually dishonest when it generalizes.
It plays on the emotions and hope is soon lost.
It cons you into presumptuously believing you're right and encourages you to mock who you think is wrong.
It plays vicious games and promotes a mob mentality.
It strong arms religious people with ridicule and mockery.
It creates bullies.
It claims to be critical but only ensues deception.
It creates stereotypes, bigotry, and a delusion.
It gives you no reason to live. It takes for granted the rest of your life and in your death it leaves you in oblivion.
Atheism is a delusion of grandeur that promotes nothing and dumbs down God out of arrogance and ignorance.
It is a cult of arrogance, fallacious reasoning, intellectual dishonesty, and bigotry.
It whines about mentioning God in an oath to protect our freedom.
It whines about God being printed on its money that will pass briefly through its life.
It deceptively creates itself as powerful yet its cause of popularity is just proof of its inner corruption.
It even deceives its own kind and betrays them.
It tells you it has no faith yet it has no proof to substantiate its opinion.
It projects.
It tells you that you are sane but it controls your voice tricking you into believing you are a free thinker.
It runs from questioning and refuses to learn beyond the brainwashed propaganda it invokes.
Atheism is dying from it's own failure to reason, to be honest and because of the bigotry that is embedded in its cultivation of new nonbelievers.
5 years now talking to atheists.
Not every atheist is this way but a majority of them (especially in groups) have this egotistical presuppositional concept that God isn't real (without substantiating it) and basing all arguments on that opinion alone. Yet they tell people that they just don't know to avoid saying God isn't real.
Atheism is a poison to the human intellect.
It promotes itself as rational thinking but
reasons fallaciously.
It declines morals because it loses accountability for its actions.
It tells you that you're smarter than religious people but it is intellectually dishonest when it generalizes.
It plays on the emotions and hope is soon lost.
It cons you into presumptuously believing you're right and encourages you to mock who you think is wrong.
It plays vicious games and promotes a mob mentality.
It strong arms religious people with ridicule and mockery.
It creates bullies.
It claims to be critical but only ensues deception.
It creates stereotypes, bigotry, and a delusion.
It gives you no reason to live. It takes for granted the rest of your life and in your death it leaves you in oblivion.
Atheism is a delusion of grandeur that promotes nothing and dumbs down God out of arrogance and ignorance.
It is a cult of arrogance, fallacious reasoning, intellectual dishonesty, and bigotry.
It whines about mentioning God in an oath to protect our freedom.
It whines about God being printed on its money that will pass briefly through its life.
It deceptively creates itself as powerful yet its cause of popularity is just proof of its inner corruption.
It even deceives its own kind and betrays them.
It tells you it has no faith yet it has no proof to substantiate its opinion.
It projects.
It tells you that you are sane but it controls your voice tricking you into believing you are a free thinker.
It runs from questioning and refuses to learn beyond the brainwashed propaganda it invokes.
I think you wrote before in the Economic Devastation thread about how society is a balance between preventing people from doing actions that opt-out and harm the collective well-being balanced against the society becoming too totalitarian and imploding.
...
What high IQ people miss is apparently that God doesn't have to be a factual truth in order for religion to be an optimum strategy for society. Thus they aren't as high IQ as they think they are, haha.
...
What high IQ people miss is apparently that God doesn't have to be a factual truth in order for religion to be an optimum strategy for society. Thus they aren't as high IQ as they think they are, haha.
In Justification for New World Order: Part 1, 2, 3, 4 I argued the following.
In human interactions we often face a choice between cooperation (reaching a mutually beneficial exchange) and defection (advancement of ourselves to the detriment of our fellow man).
Collectivism exists because it limits defection especially those forms of defection linked to physical violence. Collectivism is expensive and inefficient. However, the inefficiencies associated with collectivism are less (at least historically) than the inefficiencies that come from the violence and defections that occur in an environment of unrestrained individualism.
...
There is no such thing as complete freedom except for the state of nature as described by Hobbs. In every other scenario the best we can achieve is a partial freedom. We agree to some limitations of our freedoms to maximize our ability to prosper and cooperate while minimizing individual freedom to coerce, and defect.
...
The evolution of the social contract appears to be a progressive climb to higher potential energy systems with increased degrees of freedom. The state of nature begat tribalism. Tribalism grew into despotism. Despotism advanced into monarchy. Monarchies were replaced by republics. I suspect that in the future republics will be consumed by world government, world government will evolve into decentralized government, and decentralized government will finally mature into a shared consensus among individuals with limited or no government.
Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increases the number of individuals able to engage in cooperative activity while lowering the number of individuals able to defect. To borrow from the links in the opening post each iteration increases the amount of entropy the system can sustainably support.
Collectivism exists because it limits defection especially those forms of defection linked to physical violence. Collectivism is expensive and inefficient. However, the inefficiencies associated with collectivism are less (at least historically) than the inefficiencies that come from the violence and defections that occur in an environment of unrestrained individualism.
...
There is no such thing as complete freedom except for the state of nature as described by Hobbs. In every other scenario the best we can achieve is a partial freedom. We agree to some limitations of our freedoms to maximize our ability to prosper and cooperate while minimizing individual freedom to coerce, and defect.
...
The evolution of the social contract appears to be a progressive climb to higher potential energy systems with increased degrees of freedom. The state of nature begat tribalism. Tribalism grew into despotism. Despotism advanced into monarchy. Monarchies were replaced by republics. I suspect that in the future republics will be consumed by world government, world government will evolve into decentralized government, and decentralized government will finally mature into a shared consensus among individuals with limited or no government.
Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increases the number of individuals able to engage in cooperative activity while lowering the number of individuals able to defect. To borrow from the links in the opening post each iteration increases the amount of entropy the system can sustainably support.
Charlton argues that religion is the proximate method of Group Selection in humans specifically he argues that religion enhances social cohesion enabling larger and more complex forms of social functioning.
Religion appears to be a primary driver of evolution facilitating our progressive climb to more complex social systems via the stimulation and enforcement of motivation, altruism, and long-termism.
If Individual humans are adapted to live in a context of religion. It is logical absent religion human behavior becomes maladaptive.
Could a shared consensus among individuals ever replace centralized government? Such a society would require a powerful and healthy moral code upheld and enforced by all with both belief and reverence.
Perhaps the very religious have more to teach us then we realize.
Hey! Some poison is good for you. Coffee has at least 119 toxins in it... in tiny amounts. But they cause your immune system to activate, so that you fight off a host of other things as well.
Untrue. "Toxins" in coffee do not cause your immune system to activate, so that you fight off a host of other things as well.
Hey! Some poison is good for you. Coffee has at least 119 toxins in it... in tiny amounts. But they cause your immune system to activate, so that you fight off a host of other things as well. The poison in the coffee isn't enough, itself, to hurt you... unless you drink just tons of it.
Atheism is different. It sends the atheist to eternal damnation, eternal death by eternal dying, in pain and agony. and the greatest agony of it is the absence of God.
Atheism is different. It sends the atheist to eternal damnation, eternal death by eternal dying, in pain and agony. and the greatest agony of it is the absence of God.
And if you worship the wrong God? Like you're Christian, what's up if the Muslims are right? :-/
So it seems that Neantherdal men have the biggest brain capacity. Now I understand why the Europeans are the most intelligent and the Niggers the least 
...
...I have heard it said that Einstein's brain was 25% smaller than average.
And so? What's up with that?
Hey! Some poison is good for you. Coffee has at least 119 toxins in it... in tiny amounts. But they cause your immune system to activate, so that you fight off a host of other things as well. The poison in the coffee isn't enough, itself, to hurt you... unless you drink just tons of it.
Atheism is different. It sends the atheist to eternal damnation, eternal death by eternal dying, in pain and agony. and the greatest agony of it is the absence of God.
Atheism is different. It sends the atheist to eternal damnation, eternal death by eternal dying, in pain and agony. and the greatest agony of it is the absence of God.
Mormons may also have some immunity the detrimental effect IQ on of fertility. In the general population increasing income (highly correlated with IQ) is associated with both declining fertility and declining religious commitment. In Mormons the reverse is true. Mormon fertility is positively correlated with income and Mormons with higher levels of formal education tend to be more religiously committed.
On multiple religious measures Mormons stand out for having exceptionally high levels of religious commitment. More than nine-in-ten Mormons report a belief in God and that the Bible is the word of God. Mormons are also very observant in their religious practices with more than eight-in-ten praying daily. Mormons strongly support a strict interpretation of their faith and the preservation of traditional beliefs and practices.
Are these demographic differences actually due to the Mormon religion? How can we be confident these are not just population level differences that happen to correlate with religion? To better answer that lets examine the Jews.
On multiple religious measures Mormons stand out for having exceptionally high levels of religious commitment. More than nine-in-ten Mormons report a belief in God and that the Bible is the word of God. Mormons are also very observant in their religious practices with more than eight-in-ten praying daily. Mormons strongly support a strict interpretation of their faith and the preservation of traditional beliefs and practices.
Are these demographic differences actually due to the Mormon religion? How can we be confident these are not just population level differences that happen to correlate with religion? To better answer that lets examine the Jews.
Didn't have a chance to digest it all yet, but what immediately pops out for me is that men may be (unconsciously) using religion to keep the women focus in child bearing which would not normally the case in a more liberated affluent society. I think you wrote before in the Economic Devastation thread about how society is a balance between preventing people from doing actions that opt-out and harm the collective well-being balanced against the society becoming too totalitarian and imploding.
So it seems religion forces all parties to subject their free-will such that the balance is maintained.
Religion also has failure modes though such as the Spanish Inquisition, although one might argue those are extreme cults that have not stabilized as the Jews apparently have over 1000s of years.
What high IQ people miss is apparently that God doesn't have to be a factual truth in order for religion to be an optimum strategy for society. Thus they aren't as high IQ as they think they are, haha.
Is the size of his brain important or the contributions that he made to science because if it?
So it seems that Neantherdal men have the biggest brain capacity. Now I understand why the Europeans are the most intelligent and the Niggers the least ...
...I have heard it said that Einstein's brain was 25% smaller than average.
But also consider that vehicles with 600 cmc engines go faster than vehicles with 5000 cmc engines. Bigger doesn't actually mean better.
+1
Exactly right. Homo sapiens were more social, formed larger groups that is what allowed them to displace (smash those large brains) the Neanderthals. With smaller brains Sapiens were able to dominate stronger, smarter, more muscular Neanderthals.
Scientists estimate Neanderthals formed small groups of 50-100 people vs Sapiens groups of 1000-5000 peoples. Neanderthals did not stand a chance.
Modern people get together because they are herded together to be plundered and raped by those who govern. Neanderthals, because of their greater thinking capacity, were above that.
DID YOU JUST TALK ABOUT NEANDERTHALS?
So it means you DO believe and consider evolution then BADecker! Or is Neanderthal also a creation of God? xD
You must have missed a lot of my conversation in these semi-religious threads.
According to the most fundamental laws of science, everything happens because something else caused it to happen. This goes for the causes, as well. Something caused the causes to happen. It goes all the way back to whatever beginning there was to the whole universe.
Because of this, Neanderthals were programmed to exist as they did, just the same as everything that exists right now was programmed to exist the way it does. Whoever or Whatever started the batch of causes and effects that gradually became our universe, is the thing that pre-programmed it all.
Whatever evolution is, it was pre-programmed to do exactly what it did, whatever that was. There is no known pure random. Nothing happens by chance. The reason we call something "random," is we are not able to see all the things that cause them to happen. This is the whole reason that Quantum Physics, the greatest probability scheme, was developed... to help us envision the causes that we cannot "see" because of our extremely limited abilities.
Not what I meant.
You're actually saying that humanity evolved from great apes to humans in 6 000 years then? Cause if Neanderthal exists it means it disappeared in less than 6 000 years too.
Don't you feel like it's really fast even for God program?
Regarding fast things, look at it like this... as an example. Think about your favorite drink. Maybe it's milk. Maybe it's wine. Maybe it's some kind of juice. Maybe it is simple water. Whatever it is, you like it partially because of its flavor, or how smooth it is, or whatever. How fast can you drink down an 8 ounce glass of it? Perhaps in 2 or 3 seconds. But it tastes so good that you make it last a good 10 seconds because of its flavor.
God could have built the whole universe faster than you can snap your fingers. But He took the time that He did - 6 days - because He was savoring the good "flavor" so to speak. He was enjoying it.
I don't see any place where I said that humanity evolved from apes. But, yes, Neanderthals disappeared in less than 6,000 years. I mean, how long will you last? The graves are full of people who last way less than 100 years.
So it seems that Neantherdal men have the biggest brain capacity. Now I understand why the Europeans are the most intelligent and the Niggers the least ...
... ...
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Neanderthal's brain capacity was around 1600 cm3 vs 1200-1400 cm3 brain capacity of homo sapiens.
I suppose that you are one of the big brains who has without proof determined that God doesn't exist, while many of the smaller brains have determined that we just don't know, and that there might be a possibility. Big brain in your case isn't working.
I don't need proof because I'm not making any claims.
You are making an extraordinary, existential claim and provide no proof.
If you mean regarding the scientific fact that God exists, I am not making the claim. I am simply pointing out to you how science makes that claim, even though few scientists acknowledge it.
And even though you still haven't proved why carbon datation is wrong...
Does anybody know why carbon dating is wrong? I don't know why it is wrong. I can guess why it might be wrong. But the reasons why it is wrong aren't important to anyone who is not trying to make it work right, right? The important knowledge for the rest of us is the statistical data that it IS wrong, not why it is wrong.
Oh ok, you mean it doesn't matter that NOBODY EVER PROVED IT WRONG? As you KNOW it is wrong?
I feel really convinced here. It's ok. You know it.
I'm not sure what you are saying here. You asked the question, "And even though you still haven't proved why carbon datation is wrong..." Well, I guess it isn't exactly in question form. But I am not into working with the carbon dating system at all. Maybe if I were into it, I could tell you why it is wrong.
The fact that carbon dating is wrong doesn't have anything to do with the reasons why it is wrong. You seemed to be asking for proof of why it is wrong. I don't know that. I'm not a carbon dating scientist or theorist. Shouldn't you ask someone who is qualified to answer that question? The thing that I have seen is evidence that it IS wrong. You can search the Internet to see the evidence for yourself.
Is that what you are asking about?
But also consider that vehicles with 600 cmc engines go faster than vehicles with 5000 cmc engines. Bigger doesn't actually mean better.
+1
Exactly right. Homo sapiens were more social, formed larger groups that is what allowed them to displace (smash those large brains) the Neanderthals. With smaller brains Sapiens were able to dominate stronger, smarter, more muscular Neanderthals.
Scientists estimate Neanderthals formed small groups of 50-100 people vs Sapiens groups of 1000-5000 peoples. Neanderthals did not stand a chance.
Modern people get together because they are herded together to be plundered and raped by those who govern. Neanderthals, because of their greater thinking capacity, were above that.
DID YOU JUST TALK ABOUT NEANDERTHALS?
So it means you DO believe and consider evolution then BADecker! Or is Neanderthal also a creation of God? xD
You must have missed a lot of my conversation in these semi-religious threads.
According to the most fundamental laws of science, everything happens because something else caused it to happen. This goes for the causes, as well. Something caused the causes to happen. It goes all the way back to whatever beginning there was to the whole universe.
Because of this, Neanderthals were programmed to exist as they did, just the same as everything that exists right now was programmed to exist the way it does. Whoever or Whatever started the batch of causes and effects that gradually became our universe, is the thing that pre-programmed it all.
Whatever evolution is, it was pre-programmed to do exactly what it did, whatever that was. There is no known pure random. Nothing happens by chance. The reason we call something "random," is we are not able to see all the things that cause them to happen. This is the whole reason that Quantum Physics, the greatest probability scheme, was developed... to help us envision the causes that we cannot "see" because of our extremely limited abilities.
Not what I meant.
You're actually saying that humanity evolved from great apes to humans in 6 000 years then? Cause if Neanderthal exists it means it disappeared in less than 6 000 years too.
Don't you feel like it's really fast even for God program?
But also consider that vehicles with 600 cmc engines go faster than vehicles with 5000 cmc engines. Bigger doesn't actually mean better.
+1
Exactly right. Homo sapiens were more social, formed larger groups that is what allowed them to displace (smash those large brains) the Neanderthals. With smaller brains Sapiens were able to dominate stronger, smarter, more muscular Neanderthals.
Scientists estimate Neanderthals formed small groups of 50-100 people vs Sapiens groups of 1000-5000 peoples. Neanderthals did not stand a chance.
Modern people get together because they are herded together to be plundered and raped by those who govern. Neanderthals, because of their greater thinking capacity, were above that.
DID YOU JUST TALK ABOUT NEANDERTHALS?
So it means you DO believe and consider evolution then BADecker! Or is Neanderthal also a creation of God? xD
You must have missed a lot of my conversation in these semi-religious threads.
According to the most fundamental laws of science, everything happens because something else caused it to happen. This goes for the causes, as well. Something caused the causes to happen. It goes all the way back to whatever beginning there was to the whole universe.
Because of this, Neanderthals were programmed to exist as they did, just the same as everything that exists right now was programmed to exist the way it does. Whoever or Whatever started the batch of causes and effects that gradually became our universe, is the thing that pre-programmed it all.
Whatever evolution is, it was pre-programmed to do exactly what it did, whatever that was. There is no known pure random. Nothing happens by chance. The reason we call something "random," is we are not able to see all the things that cause them to happen. This is the whole reason that Quantum Physics, the greatest probability scheme, was developed... to help us envision the causes that we cannot "see" because of our extremely limited abilities.
...
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Neanderthal's brain capacity was around 1600 cm3 vs 1200-1400 cm3 brain capacity of homo sapiens.
I suppose that you are one of the big brains who has without proof determined that God doesn't exist, while many of the smaller brains have determined that we just don't know, and that there might be a possibility. Big brain in your case isn't working.
I don't need proof because I'm not making any claims.
You are making an extraordinary, existential claim and provide no proof.
If you mean regarding the scientific fact that God exists, I am not making the claim. I am simply pointing out to you how science makes that claim, even though few scientists acknowledge it.
And even though you still haven't proved why carbon datation is wrong...
Does anybody know why carbon dating is wrong? I don't know why it is wrong. I can guess why it might be wrong. But the reasons why it is wrong aren't important to anyone who is not trying to make it work right, right? The important knowledge for the rest of us is the statistical data that it IS wrong, not why it is wrong.
Oh ok, you mean it doesn't matter that NOBODY EVER PROVED IT WRONG? As you KNOW it is wrong?
I feel really convinced here. It's ok. You know it.
...
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Consider. The average Neanderthal was smaller than we, but had almost half again the brain capacity... something like the Roswell aliens.
Neanderthal's brain capacity was around 1600 cm3 vs 1200-1400 cm3 brain capacity of homo sapiens.
I suppose that you are one of the big brains who has without proof determined that God doesn't exist, while many of the smaller brains have determined that we just don't know, and that there might be a possibility. Big brain in your case isn't working.
I don't need proof because I'm not making any claims.
You are making an extraordinary, existential claim and provide no proof.
If you mean regarding the scientific fact that God exists, I am not making the claim. I am simply pointing out to you how science makes that claim, even though few scientists acknowledge it.
And even though you still haven't proved why carbon datation is wrong...
Does anybody know why carbon dating is wrong? I don't know why it is wrong. I can guess why it might be wrong. But the reasons why it is wrong aren't important to anyone who is not trying to make it work right, right? The important knowledge for the rest of us is the statistical data that it IS wrong, not why it is wrong.
...
I am what I am. But if someone can prove to me that there is a god, I'll become a believer. And if someone can prove to me that invisible pink unicorns exist, I'll believe in them too.
I am what I am. But if someone can prove to me that there is a god, I'll become a believer. And if someone can prove to me that invisible pink unicorns exist, I'll believe in them too.
Instead of looking proof consider asking yourself a question.
Are you willing to embrace a worldview you cannot empirically prove i.e. requires faith if you can prove that adopting such a worldview improves both your wellbeing and fertility and likely the wellbeing of your children and grandchildren as well?
What is the point believing in anything without proof? That just makes a person look foolish... particularly when they claim to know it as fact, and they can't prove shit...
Why would I waste 1 second on religion?
Don't give me Pascal's Wager, because it's a bullshit argument... basically a fallacy... you could say the exact same thing about Hinduism, or Islam... what if they are right, and Christianity is wrong? What if the great Ju-Ju of the mountain is the real God?
Why waste time on speculation without a shred of evidence?
One reason people are attracted to religion is that it gives them confidence and assurance that everything will be ok. That the problems they are experiencing in this life are temporary and that they will be rewarded in afterlife. The psychopaths among us might find religion useful as it tells them directly which actions are moral and which are not. Some people lack this moral compass and religion fills that gap.
It helps them hide their psychopathic tendencies.
There are of course others with great imagination who imagine ghosts, angels, God, hell of fire, heaven with roads paved in gold etc. Those people don't care if their day dream is true or not. They find it useful and they stick to it.
Exactly why people live their lives in religion all the time. Nobody knows what the future holds, even in the next second. Part of every personal religion is to base the future on experiences of the past so that he has security, even if it is a false security.
Yet the factual science that I have shown you, which proves God exists, trumps all that theoretical science, that nobody knows exists the way the theories state. You would rather have the make-believe than the reality.
You haven't actually shown any factual science, just your own unprovable hypotheses and incomprehensible jargon. You still don't have a proof that god exists.
I've shown you the proof over and over.
No you haven't. I understand your ideas quite well, but they're not science and not factual.
But since you don't understand it, no wonder you don't understand that you haven't proven God to NOT exist.
So you set yourself up with god-strength by saying that God doesn't exist, when, even with your poor understanding of things, even you understand that He might exist. Then you shoot yourself in the foot (head) by saying god/you doesn't exist.
There is no need to prove God doesn't exist. What's the need? Bertrand russell illustrates why, but simply put the burden of proof lies with the claimant. Otherwise, why not start with the tooth fairy? Or invisible pink unicorns? Can you prove either don't exist?
Make atheism a fact by proving that God doesn't exist. After all, I have shown over and over how standard, fundamental science proves that God DOES exist.
If you had been only agnostic, you might have a sliver of an excuse. But no. You have to stick to the faith of your religion, atheism, even though you are contradicting yourself all the way through it.
I don't have faith in a religion. You call me atheist because I often argue against organised religion, but the truth is I just don't care about the supernatural. I do however care about logic and truth, so if you really need to label me with a religion, call it Truth or Logic, not Atheism.
I am what I am. But if someone can prove to me that there is a god, I'll become a believer. And if someone can prove to me that invisible pink unicorns exist, I'll believe in them too.
The fact that you adamantly state things that you believe, which are not necessarily backed up by proof, shows that you have a religion within yourself.
When you state that you don't care about something, you are essentially stating that you believe that the thing exists, and you just don't care about it. So, to you supernatural exists.
The kind of proof you are asking for can only be given to you by God, Himself. If you don't accept the simpler scientific proof that God exists, you will never find Him until He reveals Himself to you. But then it will be too late to change your acceptance of God in a way that will save you.
But also consider that vehicles with 600 cmc engines go faster than vehicles with 5000 cmc engines. Bigger doesn't actually mean better.
+1
Exactly right. Homo sapiens were more social, formed larger groups that is what allowed them to displace (smash those large brains) the Neanderthals. With smaller brains Sapiens were able to dominate stronger, smarter, more muscular Neanderthals.
Scientists estimate Neanderthals formed small groups of 50-100 people vs Sapiens groups of 1000-5000 peoples. Neanderthals did not stand a chance.
Modern people get together because they are herded together to be plundered and raped by those who govern. Neanderthals, because of their greater thinking capacity, were above that.
DID YOU JUST TALK ABOUT NEANDERTHALS?
So it means you DO believe and consider evolution then BADecker! Or is Neanderthal also a creation of God? xD
Jump to: