Atheists Unite!

last SG · 2006-11-27T11:43:47+00:00

is this about christians again? i read about them until v du lan liao. can change topic to what atheists actually believe?

dumbdumb! SG

why wtf? my friend once told me money can be found anywhere, if u know where to look? Neutral

Cystaire SG

WTF because you were thinking that because something grows fast and has lots of adherents it must be divine.

Let's all bow down to Chad Hurley and Steve Chen! Laughing

Herzog_Zwei SG

Interesting view, but then again, you are going against the Penal Code.

JansenX SG

Nehru:

"The spectacle of what is called religion, or at any rate organised religion, in India and elsewhere, has filled me with horror and I have frequently condemned it and wished to make a clean sweep of it. Almost always it seemed to stand for blind belief and reaction, dogma and bigotry, superstition, exploitation and the preservation of vested interested."

JansenX SG

You can say the same of Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and even Taoism. Almost all religions follow the same model.

banzie SG

Sorry for my late reply....

Doesn't matter if I quote or not... important thing is Truth should be shared and to prove you wrong.... I'm sure you got your knowledge else where too right? YOu don't learn how to walk the first day you are borned...

Secondly.... The difference between the murder case is...

I know the result and the suspect is capable to kill the person... But did he?

For evolution its:
I don't know the result if he is capable to kill the person.... is he able to?

For the second test if it is true that the person is capable... he is able to be test to do so... It can be tested a thousand times and it turn positive....

You really don't test something by looking at two things... When you see the a dagger and a man beside a dead man... you think just think he is the murderer..... That's what you are doing now.... What you had said are observation but not tests.... Test are things that can be replicate again and again under the same conditions... Why not start creating some life for a start from nothing if you can I believe you. So for the last time.... EVOLUTION CANNOT BE TESTED....

I read your website.... it stated..."evolutionary theory had predicted." You mean.... its not yet concluded?

And finally not of what you said on the above.... can concrete tell me evolution is true... since it can't be tested... whatever findings you have is still an observation... And observation can always be interpreted in different ways.... which is true coz there isn't just one theory out there in the world.

You haven't tell me are your bacteria able to grow an arms or fingers after so many generations of reproduction? The grow stronger towards other bacterias right? Because their life model is capable to work within this.... For so many years you work have you seen a bacteria grow into something else?

The return SG

Indeed, Jesus said that the gate is narrow.

kheldorin SG

What do you mean evolution cannot be tested and replicated? We have been doing artificial selection for a long time and it obvious that the cattle that we breed and the crops that we grow are substantially different than those in the wild. The only difference between natural selection and artificial selection is that natural selection is done in a natural environment in a larger scale. The species that gets to spread its gene's best survives. It's a fact that sometimes the genes mutate and this mutation causes a change in that particular living thing. If that change helps that living thing to better survive than it could lead to a new 'species' as more of that living thing with that particular gene is reproduced.

That is why I don't believe in Intelligent Design. Because there is no such things as a perfect design for ALL environments. It is only perfect given a certain range of environment variables. If the environment changes, it is no longer perfectly suited for that new environment. Evolution shows how species evolve to suit their environment so it seems as if that species is perfectly designed to that environment.

"So many generations?" It took a billion years for simple-cell organisms to form the complex-cell organisms we see today. What is a billion years compared to 2006? Evolutions is about extremely SMALL incremental changes occuring over a HUGE amount of time. You won't see a bacteria going straight to creating a finger in "so many generations". And if the environment is not conducive, you would never see a finger. If you really want to see the effect of evolution, just look at artificial selection.

kheldorin SG

Good marketing strategy. Look at Scientology now, so many people ridiculing them yet they are still surviving. Christianity is not the main religion before but it is now. Same with Islam. Scientology of course cannot conquer countries like the Christian nations before so it might take them longer to gain recruits.

Cystaire SG

Originally posted by banzie:

Doesn't matter if I quote or not... important thing is Truth should be shared and to prove you wrong.... I'm sure you got your knowledge else where too right?

Secondly.... The difference between the murder case is...

I know the result and the suspect is capable to kill the person... But did he?

For evolution its:
I don't know the result if he is capable to kill the person.... is he able to?

For the second test if it is true that the person is capable... he is able to be test to do so... It can be tested a thousand times and it turn positive....

You really don't test something by looking at two things... When you see the a dagger and a man beside a dead man... you think just think he is the murderer..... That's what you are doing now.... What you had said are observation but not tests.... Test are things that can be replicate again and again under the same conditions... Why not start creating some life for a start from nothing if you can I believe you. So for the last time.... EVOLUTION CANNOT BE TESTED....

I have no idea what you trying to say. I work so hard to address your criticisms clearly and directly, and in response you simply throw some incomprehensible word salads at me.

I completely give up.

I ask you this: if creationism the which truth can yet so FALSE, which not is be consider other sort around like? Which questions so?

banzie SG

I'm not yet talking anything with regards to creation science.... but rather to the point still debating about the credibility of Evolution....

I think most people understand what I'm trying to put there.... really how test are conducted for evolution... you can't because there is unable to do such a test...

JansenX SG

I fully agree with you Cool

Ito_^ SG

i have no bloody idea what on earth are you talking about! Rolling Eyes

JansenX SG

Sam Harris:

We have names for people who have many beliefs for which there is no rational justification. When their beliefs are extremely common we call them 'religious'; otherwise, they are likely to be called 'mad', 'psychotic' or 'delusional' ... Clearly there is sanity in numbers. And yet, it is merely an accident in history that it is considered normal in our society to believe that the Creator of the universe can hear your thoughts, while it is demonstrative of mental illness to believe that he is communicating with you by having the rain tap in Morse code on your bedroom window. And so, while religious people are not generally mad, their core beliefs absolutely are.

http://www.atheistalliance.org/

JansenX SG

Paul Bell (Mensa Magazine 2002):

'Of 43 studies carried out since 1927 on the relationship between religious belief and one's intelligence and/or educational level, all but four found an inverse connection. That is, the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold "beliefs" of any kind.'

Now I know why the president of a certain country looks like a white chimpanzee Laughing

Sekundes SG

You guys are still going ?!

weeie SG

lol you are so naive to have said this.

you really study nus? hope it's just a nick out of fun haha

TYING SG

Laughing

stupidissmart SG

First I need to say is,

I didn't read through all the replies in the thread Mr. Green It is just too much

Secondly, the most simplest definition of atheist is tat they do not believe in the supernatural. Tat is if it is not seen, felt, tested, verified, then it is not believed. As such do not require faith like some religion where u have to believe in everything tat is written even if it contradicts, never experienced, hearsay, unverifiable, logically flawed, insensible, outdated etc. U have to believe something is true even though there is no single shred of evidence for u to believe it is true other than hearsay

About evolution and creationism, sad to say I have probably debated more than 10 times with each thread spanning more than 10 pages and I am really tired of the whole thing and the same old flawed arguments made by creationists. If evolution is wrong, then the whole knowledge of biology is wrong because it depends on evolution to make it sensible. There r many species of living things such as virus like SARS or nylon digesting bug (nylon is manmade) tat could only occur with evolution. Otherwise do u expect these living being to feed on nothing for many thousands of years ? Fossils r a good sign tat show the gradual change of being over time... or u prefer to believe in animals tat suddenly created then suddenly extinct, then they gradually change to the animals we see now ? Creationism only got to show the fossil of a modern chicken/dog/cow/cat/human to exist in the past to prove the whole evolution wrong. Did they manage to ? No ! WHY CAN"T THEY FIND THE FOSSILS OF MODERN ANIMALS IN THE PAST ? (tat evolution claim it is evolved)

I can present a few hundred evidence on evolution etc (trust me... if not u can ask the more older people here like laurence or icemoon in eternal hope)

Lastly, I present a challenge to creationists who claim creationism is a science. Show me a reputable sceintific community tat support creationism as science. (not those church funded organisation) If u can't show a reputable scientific organisation tat support creationism, then the conclusion is creationism is not scientific.

SumOne SG

In general, atheists are generally just people who do not believe in a God or any spiritual force. And they are really not too concerned with discussion regarding religion and spirituality.

But it is just in this forum that certain individuals see people who adopt agressive and antagonistic stands against religion. The more appropriate word for such people would be anti-religionists.

Being an atheist doesn't mean you have to be anti-religion. There are less aggressive ways to not believe in any religion.

But if you want to persistantly be against religions or a particular religion, then you really are more than just an atheist.

« Previous Page Next Page »