Iranian Ex-Muslim ESCAPES Islamic Law & Discovers the SHOCKING Truth About Jesus

[QUOTE=SATAN;14895717]Anyway, OP is going to Hell when he dies.[/QUOTE]
:lebronamazed:

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;14895751]You are not Agnostic. At least not by the definition of what it means to be Agnostic. You cannot say you don't believe and then say you don't not believe. Those two stances cannot exist in reality, nor are they the definition of what it means to be Agnostic. It's one or the other, not both. Agnostics always striked me as people who were too lazy to follow a religious belief and connect with God, but too cowardly to come out and admit that they were non-believers, thus Atheist. It's one or the other. It cannot be both.

And your argument can be dismantled easily. You don't need to see things in physical nature to know they exist. Does a bear shit in the woods? Do I exist? You've never seen me. Do you exist? How can I prove you exist? I can't. I have to believe that I am communicating with another sentient being. How do you know the pyramids exist? Have you ever seen them in person? Have you ever touched them? God is not about faith alone. But about Science too. Because Science cannot explain everything to the contrary either. Science is always changing. We are less certain today of the Big Bang Theory and less certain of Human Evolution than we were 50 years ago. Science is always wrong. We somehow "trust the Science" which is another way of saying we have "faith" in Science. But if you cannot faith in a omnipotent creator, then you also cannot have faith in Science since Science is never 100%. Thus, you cannot say that God doesn't exist because someone hasn't proved to you that he exists either.[/QUOTE]

Science is not about faith but rather about the search for facts, which build knowledge. It's a never ending process. For every question we answer, 10 more questions are waiting to be asked. It's absolutely nothing like religion where you think you have all the answers and there is nowhere further to go.

Science cannot prove the non-existence of something. It's rationally impossible. Burden of proof is not on science to disprove the non-existence of say the spaghetti monster. If someone says the spaghetti monster is out there traveling through the universe, I can't prove the spaghetti monster doesn't exist, nor is it my burden. That someone made the claim - it is on them to prove it.

Also, evolution is one of the strongest scientific Theories out there, up there with the heliocentric model of our solar system and the laws of gravity. Many many people have tried to argue against it, but never been able to contradict the evidence or explain it away with a better one. It has nothing to do with faith. It's always about evidence, evidence, evidence. If you can't provide evidence then there is always mathematics proofs that can prove the logic behind it until you have the tech/capability to prove it.

That's what happened with Einstein's relativity. He could not initially prove it outside of the solid mathematical proofs and logic of where to find what is being sought. The mathematics we have known was rock solid and observations/evidence substantiated it piece by piece over decades after he presented it. There was no faith involved. Other mathematicians tried to dispute relativity, but they failed to reason out the mathematics. Obviously we now know relativity is incomplete Theory because it breaks down in the quantum world and also the black holes. It doesn'tmmean Einstein was wrong but rather that he was missing pieces of the Neverending puzzle that keeps growing each time a new piece is attached. It's a work in progress. One possible way out is the string theory, but it's just one possibility proposed.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;14895750]The bigger mystery to me is why is every shithead Liberal like you and blade are anti-God? What is this connection between Liberalism and Atheism? You say that a "creator" remains a mystery, but then you stupidly say that your friends became intellectually lazy and started becoming interested in conspiracy theories. If you yourself cannot ascertain for a fact that God does not exist, then how can you call your friends intellectually lazy?

You sit there and think you're better and smarter than those who follow God. Why is that? What is the difference between you and someone who is devout and believes in a creator? What makes you intellectually superior to them? I'll tell you what.....not a goddamn thing. But yet here you are mocking and slandering those who believe in a creator.

And if your friends and all of us are intellectually lazy, then what is the opposite of that? You? What do you know that we don't? There is more evidence for creationism than there is not.[/QUOTE]

Stopped reading after the first sentence. I'm anti you, not anti God. Funny how me explaining something seemed to have trigger you though. I wonder why. :oldlol:

Kill yaself.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;14895751]You are not Agnostic. At least not by the definition of what it means to be Agnostic. You cannot say you don't believe and then say you don't not believe. Those two stances cannot exist in reality, nor are they the definition of what it means to be Agnostic. It's one or the other, not both. Agnostics always striked me as people who were too lazy to follow a religious belief and connect with God, but too cowardly to come out and admit that they were non-believers, thus Atheist. It's one or the other. It cannot be both.

And your argument can be dismantled easily. You don't need to see things in physical nature to know they exist. [B]Does a bear shit in the woods? Do I exist? You've never seen me. Do you exist? How can I prove you exist? I can't.[/B] I have to believe that I am communicating with another sentient being. How do you know the pyramids exist? Have you ever seen them in person? Have you ever touched them? God is not about faith alone. But about Science too. Because Science cannot explain everything to the contrary either. Science is always changing. We are less certain today of the Big Bang Theory and less certain of Human Evolution than we were 50 years ago. Science is always wrong. We somehow "trust the Science" which is another way of saying we have "faith" in Science. But if you cannot faith in a omnipotent creator, then you also cannot have faith in Science since Science is never 100%. Thus, you cannot say that God doesn't exist because someone hasn't proved to you that he exists either.[/QUOTE]

I did read this though. What are you 10? Cool logic bro. :roll::roll::roll:

:facepalm

[QUOTE=bladefd;14895770]Science is not about faith but rather about the search for facts, which build knowledge. It's a never ending process. For every question we answer, 10 more questions are waiting to be asked. It's absolutely nothing like religion where you think you have all the answers and there is nowhere further to go.

Science cannot prove the non-existence of something. It's rationally impossible. Burden of proof is not on science to disprove the non-existence of say the spaghetti monster. If someone says the spaghetti monster is out there traveling through the universe, I can't prove the spaghetti monster doesn't exist, nor is it my burden. That someone made the claim - it is on them to prove it.

Also, evolution is one of the strongest scientific Theories out there, up there with the heliocentric model of our solar system and the laws of gravity. Many many people have tried to argue against it, but never been able to contradict the evidence or explain it away with a better one. It has nothing to do with faith. It's always about evidence, evidence, evidence. If you can't provide evidence then there is always mathematics proofs that can prove the logic behind it until you have the tech/capability to prove it.

That's what happened with Einstein's relativity. He could not initially prove it outside of the solid mathematical proofs and logic of where to find what is being sought. The mathematics we have known was rock solid and observations/evidence substantiated it piece by piece over decades after he presented it. There was no faith involved. Other mathematicians tried to dispute relativity, but they failed to reason out the mathematics. Obviously we now know relativity is incomplete Theory because it breaks down in the quantum world and also the black holes. It doesn'tmmean Einstein was wrong but rather that he was missing pieces of the Neverending puzzle that keeps growing each time a new piece is attached. It's a work in progress. One possible way out is the string theory, but it's just one possibility proposed.[/QUOTE]

What science or data points to or proves human evolution? What evidence is out there that we evolved from simpler organisms?

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;14895975]What science or data points to or proves human evolution? What evidence is out there that we evolved from simpler organisms?[/QUOTE]

Fossils for one. And we can actually see evolution in single celled organisms like bacteria because they go through so many generations in a short time so you can see evolution happening.

Like I said, evolution is one of the strongest scientific Theories we have as far as evidence goes. And one of the longest standing ones that many have tried to dispute the evidence, but they have no other compelling arguments for the fossil records outside of evolution. And that was before we had detailed microscopes to study evolution in bacteria over time.

Trying to argue against evolution is equivalent to arguing against the heliocentric model, laws of gravity, and round earth Theories.