Athiests try this on for size...

---

Originally Posted By: animefreak135There are quite a few others, but it is important to remember he does not represent the majority in the slightest...thankfully. I agree he isnt one of them......he just has his views centered on religion. And I dont mind it or the way believes things are......only problem is he should not be picking on others just cos some are a bit different than him.

Of course you make mistakes, everyone does. Whats great about you is that you own up to them! When you get something wrong, you accept it and admit it. Thor on the other hand...

You arent only one who made mistakes........I made a few too.......lost my cool as well.

Well as the saying goes......"To err is human" :grin:

We are humans after all.

Originally Posted By: IneligibleAs far as you are concerned, you cannot be convinced because you have so totally shut your brain that no glimpse of any truth that doesn't fit with your mindset can enter itThat's a great description for yourself...and timely, as it seems you've run out of your pontificatory and pointless arguements. They had no substance and failed to address the very core of the issue: life. You have shown nothing that proves anything of value...except that we've invented asphalt. But that's not the subject of this thread.You, and those like you, are so deeply brainwashed that you fail to even grasp the simple paragraph above. You can't even (or simply refuse to) fathom the possibility that the "organic soup" hypothesis remains not only unproven, but unsubstantiated as well. In order to be honest, you would have to admit this...you can't, and you won't. You've already backed yourself too far into a corner, with your reputation on this board being more important to you than the truth of the matter. That's too bad...but I'm afraid the world is full of folks like you. A lot of them brought us the hoax of mankind-induced global-warming as well. (It's even worse than this "organic soup" idea as it's easily disproved.) Quote:Most Christians value honest enquiry.You obviously do not...but based on some things you said here and on another thread, you have much to learn about Christianity anyway. You will take what you are fed, without question, and build your world around it. I will not...I will question it before accepting it.It's difficult to willingly take your own world down...most will lie to themselves to avoid it. I should know...20 years ago I was just like you.

Originally Posted By: SayaThey dont rub their religious views on others faces like thor does or irritate other people with different views.To be honest, this was never about religion...unless you believe (as I do) that athiesm is a religion. What it was all about was a lie told to us as children in school...one of several lies, actually. And how athiests have taken that lie for the truth in an effort to dispel the idea of intelligent design.

Pete.........I think its much better for us to just leave thor with his ideals........and keep our ideals with us.........he is really annoying everybody around and doesnt accept that there could be any changes beyond his belief or his thinking.

Atheism is not a religion cos it doesnt follow any rules and regulations or any sort of "revelations" as you do. Its a freedom one choses on his or her own accord. Atheists dont follow the tail of a guy and think of him as their saviour or leader. Atheists apply their creativity to areas that can useful.......not imaginary stuff like you do.And you dont seem to get it.......do you?If the text books teach lies then why dont you join "Flat earth society" you will fit in well with them.There was a time when such thoughts were there........but today the earth is an oblate spheroid and not flat. Neither does it rest on the back of a turtle or on the horn of a cow/bull. And it was proved as well.Nor is the sky a square piece held by four angels as told in holy books.........nor did anyone eat the pieces of sky as food in olden days when they felt hungry.It takes years to do research and thousands of years for the evolution to take place.........but it can be accelerated in a lab.I already gave you the offers.............choose one or shut up.

Originally Posted By: thorThat's a great description for yourself...That's quite the rebuttal there Thor. If I'm not mistaken, its a modification of the classic "I know you are, but what am I?" manoeuvre, correct?(Oh, and don't worry. I'm not expecting to actually get a response from you. I know that when you see my posts you simply put your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes really tight and scream "LALALALALALALA" at the top of your voice. Its an effective display of your emotional maturity.)

Quote:except that we've invented asphalt.Oh thor, you great lunk, I said that asphalt occurs naturally. We didn't invent it. Quote:You can't even (or simply refuse to) fathom the possibility that the "organic soup" hypothesis remains not only unproven, but unsubstantiated as well. Quote:I should start by saying that chemical evolution (the evolution of biochemical systems) is a much less well-attested area than biological evolution. We can observe biological evolution, we know much about mechanisms, and it explains a wealth of observations. Chemical evolution, on the other hand, is still mainly hypothesis and speculation. It is a promising area, with some interesting hints in cellular biochemistry, but still very much in its infancy. Quote:An acceptance of current hypotheses of molecular evolution is not essential for anyone. They are largely speculation, and may prove to be quite wrong.

First off, you said that atheists say that nothing had a part in the creation of life. This is a falsehood. If I am to go by the definition that I believe bob gave, then I am an agnostic atheist, and by no means do I believe that nothing had a part in the creation of life. It could be some sort of God, or just some really advanced race. Who knows? I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it was any of these three.Second, expecting it to be simple to create life in a lab if the same thing happened before on earth is simply ignorant. Compare the size of the lab and the size of the earth. The earth is huge, so certain unlikely events are trillions or more times likely to happen in that situation than in a lab, especially since these processes were going on for much longer than they can go on for in a lab.However, I do not see the relevance of asking thor where heaven is. I can see asking him to show who/what/where/whatever God is as a comparison between his request (though I think his request would be easier to accomplish, though it's still an amazingly hard thing to do), but not the point of asking him where heaven is.Also, thor is right when he says it's debatable whether or not a virus is alive. One of the commonly accepted criteria for life is that it must be able to reproduce on its own, which is not something that a virus can do. But still, being able to essentially create a virus is a huge step in the right direction.As far as atheism being a religion, it really depends on your definition of religion. With the way of defining it that I think you have in mind, I'd have to say that gnostic atheism is religious while agnostic atheism is not (or not very much so). To go so far as to call what was taught in school a lie (well, what is taught now) is going too far in my opinion. Yes, it is definitely an oversimplification, but that is because at younger ages, the finer points can't be grasped very easily; you don't see third graders being taught about axioms. Later on in education, these finer points are shown more carefully, though, unfortunately (mainly for science at least), it seems that they can't always be shown until college level courses are reached. Still, I think that a lot of these fine points can be taught with more frequency than they currently are.As far as intelligent design goes, if it is true, I would personally think that it is far more subtle than it is portrayed as. So subtle that it would be possible to do in the lab one day (when we can do very large scale experiments). Because of this, I think it is far more beneficial to teach the most plausible explanation(s) that have scientific backing (and yes, natural does have scientific backing, but maybe it's not as much as you would like) and note that there is always some doubt. I think that the educational system does an ok job of this now, but it could be much better.

Yep its isnt right to ask him to show where heaven is cos it doesnt exist..........and he is denying everything anyone is posting on evolution.........it is rather annoying to see so many posters posting stuff and he is just sitting there shaking his head.I would have rather preferred he never started such a thread......cos these topics always cause an uproar or a heated debate.A simple and peaceful discussion would have been better.

Well, with Thor its impossible to have a rational debate because of his unwillingness to accept anything outside of his... wait... do you hear that? It... it sounds like a very distant "lalalalala" noise...

'zactly. Which is why the constant battle against his 'always correct' attitude is one dead horse I ain't beating. Or is it, he's a troll I ain't feeding? The world may never know.

Originally Posted By: Ineligible Quote:except that we've invented asphalt.Oh thor, you great lunk, I said that asphalt occurs naturally. We didn't invent it.It certainly didn't get up, hold a conference, and decide to migrate to portions of the land to create long, winding paths around mountains and through valleys, did it? No. I'd say us humans had something to do with what Hienze would have seen had he looked out his window. It isn't asphalt until it is collected together (or synthesized) as necessary before use. Quote:You can't even (or simply refuse to) fathom the possibility that the "organic soup" hypothesis remains not only unproven, but unsubstantiated as well. Quote:I should start by saying that chemical evolution (the evolution of biochemical systems) is a much less well-attested area than biological evolution. We can observe biological evolution, we know much about mechanisms, and it explains a wealth of observations. Chemical evolution, on the other hand, is still mainly hypothesis and speculation. It is a promising area, with some interesting hints in cellular biochemistry, but still very much in its infancy.I already thanked you for admitting this in the beginning of your posts. I guess you missed it. Hienze may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but his position on this matter is correct. So why is it you attack Hienze's position instead of the position of those who accept this "organic soup" as a fact (as most athiests do) when there exists no substantiation for it? Why do you skip over the obvious falacies in such a claim? (Who are you trying to impress, and why?)

Originally Posted By: CiderFirst off, you said that atheists say that nothing had a part in the creation of life. This is a falsehood. If I am to go by the definition that I believe bob gave, then I am an agnostic atheist, and by no means do I believe that nothing had a part in the creation of life. It could be some sort of God, or just some really advanced race. Who knows? I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it was any of these three.I don't remember if I used the word "nothing"...however, my meaning was "nothing outside of natural processes". The point really isn't what athiests do or don't believe...that's kind of a side-bar to the whole thing. It's the widespread acceptance that life began naturally by a process that has never been proven or duplicated. It just so happens many an athiest bases their disbelief in a creator, based on this fallacy. Quote:Second, expecting it to be simple to create life in a lab if the same thing happened before on earth is simply ignorant. Compare the size of the lab and the size of the earth. The earth is huge, so certain unlikely events are trillions or more times likely to happen in that situation than in a lab, especially since these processes were going on for much longer than they can go on for in a lab.If we were trying to create a whale, I would tend to agree. But that's not the case here. Quote:To go so far as to call what was taught in school a lie (well, what is taught now) is going too far in my opinion. It is a lie in that it is an untruth that is not only allowed to fester by the school system, but, as it is taught, is couched in such a way as to make students believe that we will very soon be able to create life of our own because we understand the processes so well. In spite of Saya's claims, we are not there yet...and in my opinion, are nowhere near there yet. In fact, we may well never get there.

Wow...how did I miss this one. Originally Posted By: SayaAtheism is not a religion cos it doesnt follow any rules and regulations or any sort of "revelations" as you do. Who made you the definer of religion for all? Quote:Atheists dont follow the tail of a guy and think of him as their saviour or leader. They follow many things...mostly works of other men. Almost with a reverence. Quote:Atheists apply their creativity to areas that can useful.......not imaginary stuff like you do.What you call "imaginary stuff" can be more useful than anything mankind has ever created (or ever will)...depending on what you are trying to accomplish. If you want to accomplish the goal of making a longer-lasting automobile tire, then, yes, the Bible will not help you. However, if you're trying to dupe the world into believing mankind is responsible for the current rise in temperature the planet has been experiencing for the last hundred years or so (currently referred to as "Global Warming), then athiestic creativity might actually be quite useful...just as it was in getting a generation of kids to believe in the very subject of this thread. Quote:If the text books teach lies then why dont you join "Flat earth society" you will fit in well with them.Ah...I see...never question a text book? Quote:I already gave you the offers.............choose one or shut up. I reject your offers as unrealistic...from both sides of the deal. I also reject your options. Do you really expect me to let you tell me what to do after insisting you won't do what you erringly believe I'm telling you to do?

Thor, you are an intersting character. You frustrate me but I like you. I often find myself wondering what you really believe. I've asked you some fairly simple and straight-forward questions that you will not answer (please forgive me if you did and I wasn't online for a while and missed them)
I don't know why you keep poo-pooing science then offer up christian based pop-science web sites as some type of proof of something. You have many beliefs, political, social and religious. It would do you well to admitt to your self that those beliefs are yours and yours alone... as are everyones'

The simplest forms of life are more complex than anything that we have created, so it is definitely not a simple task. It is completely the case here.Neither me nor any of my friends nor anyone I know has ever been led on to believe that we could create life easily as our time as students. I have no idea where you're getting this from.

Don't you see it? It's that string of words...reaches up and grabs it;squirming to be free in my hand floating up in the sky.Either way, I need outta here. I've made the decision, it's having a negative impact on my health. Bob, Pete, Saya, I wish you the best luck in this endeavor. I could keep pointing out flaws in logic, and where he avoided "this" and "that" because he didn't like what we said, or he had no argument against it. But I won't.

Quote:I already thanked you for admitting this in the beginning of your posts.And yet you attacked me for not saying it. thor, some of your thinking is quite disordered. Quote:So why is it you attack Hienze's position instead of the position of those who accept this "organic soup" as a fact (as most athiests do) when there exists no substantiation for it?I've already explained that - it's the lies. I don't like lying. Quote:Who are you trying to impress, and why?Do you only say things to impress someone?