If God doesn't exist...

[Epitah]

As I have been saying all along, atheists are usually wrong. Here is another case. What you claim just goes to show you know very little about truth and the Bible. It's the most read and most famous book in the world selling over 5 BILLION copies. One of the reasons is science backs it up. Other reasons are for moral strength and guidance in times of need. It can help turnaround one's life. The atheist books cannot hold a candle to it. Probably Richard Dawkins writes his books so he can continue paying his ex-wife. Science has verified many things in the Bible. For one, atheist scientists believed in an eternal universe with no beginning and end. It was the Steady State Theory. Now, the Big Bang Theory has replaced it and SST became pseudoscience. The BBT backs up Genesis and the creation of the universe and world in six days. It's missing the part of God the Creator because science will not accept the supernatural and the God Theory.

This reads like a parody of what a Christian would say. You've got all the tropes, pseudoscience, overblowing the wisdom of the Bible, shitting on Richard Dawkins. It's so adorable, it's he's trying to be a real science man.

Christians fucking hate science, it contradicts what they've been taught in the Bible as fact and it looks like you're just trying to rationalize it to fit the Bible as hard as humanly possibly can because you know real science is far a better system. I guarantee you that that a vast majority of Bible sales are not because of scientific accuracy, even a 4th grade science textbook is a better source of scientific information. I don't suppose you'd know why we've dated the Earth to be several billion years old if it was true to the Bible? I'd love to know how you hard you can rationalize other stories in the Bible too.

It would appear your reading abilities and comprehension are on par with your knowledge of science and the scientific method...

When have I ever stated that I was a Christian? I haven't and I'm not.

Now knowing what my beliefs about God are should tell you that at no time have I been dishonest in how I've treated the information you and others have asked or provided.

I'd wish you better luck next time but I suspect that as with most progressive liberal atheists that you'll continue to make assumptions as you continue your bigotry and discrimination against people not of your mindset.

Assuming you were a Christian was a mistake, but with how hard you defend this you certainly do blend in with them just nicely. You still haven't gotten around to explaining exactly I'm ignorant of the scientific method, or do you just want to post more music videos?

Dem dayum liburul ateists, insulting em substitutes for a real argument, we wear. I don't even thinking you still understand the purpose or meaning of Russel's Teapot.

 

[hobelim]

This reads like a parody of what a Christian would say. You've got all the tropes, pseudoscience, overblowing the wisdom of the Bible, shitting on Richard Dawkins. It's so adorable, it's he's trying to be a real science man.

Christians fucking hate science, it contradicts what they've been taught in the Bible as fact and it looks like you're just trying to rationalize it to fit the Bible as hard as humanly possibly can because you know real science is far a better system. I guarantee you that that a vast majority of Bible sales are not because of scientific accuracy, even a 4th grade science textbook is a better source of scientific information. I don't suppose you'd know why we've dated the Earth to be several billion years old if it was true to the Bible? I'd love to know how you hard you can rationalize other stories in the Bible too.

for more laughs you should ask him to explain what a talking serpent is, ...scientifically speaking of course....


Watching someone squirming who teaches others that they can disregard divine law and worship a human being as if he was a god and they will not die as scripture clearly states but instead they will become like God and live forever (as they warn people about the danger of losing one's soul to an invisible devil) can be more fun than a barrel of monkeys...

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Science is a process, unlike faith or religion which are closer to an ends.

What ends would those be?

Science is about learning and discovery.

I've never said it wasn't.

Just because science can't answer the question does not prove the existence of God or a miracle.

On the other hand it doesn't prove God doesn't exist either.

Early civilizations prayed to Sun gods, rain gods, hunting gods, etc., because their science didn't explain the lack of rain or dearth of eatable animals.

And so.o..o...?????

Science is for those with patience,...

I have me lot's of patience... At least a 145 pages worth of patience at this time.

*****CHUCKLE*****

...faith is for those who don't work well with the unknown.

Isn't that also why people, who claim to be atheists, who hardly have a working knowledge of science and math fall back on the scientific consensus because they require faith in something?

Looks like that to me anyway.

View attachment 79781

Seems that the followers of God and the followers of science have a lot in common.

*****CHUCKLE*****

The ends is the answer to all your questions thru faith, whereas science often leads to more questions.

You can't prove that God doesn't exist........basic logic.

And so.......modern religion does use God to explain what they don't understand. Do you really not get it?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Assuming you were a Christian was a mistake, but with how hard you defend this you certainly do blend in with them just nicely.

They're not the ones attacking me... People like you are.

You still haven't gotten around to explaining exactly I'm ignorant of the scientific method, or do you just want to post more music videos?

It's been explained to you even by at least one other person here. This has to do with that reading comprehension thing and the lack of that you have going on.

Dem dayum liburul ateists, insulting em substitutes for a real argument, we wear.

When did I post that? Oh! I didn't you're embellishing.

Aren't you going to make some rude comment about my music videos or something like you have been for several pages now?

I don't even thinking you still understand the purpose or meaning of Russel's Teapot.

I understand it perfectly.

I believe there's a lot of things you don't understand about the question I posed about that teapot.

But then I've already covered your reading comprehension skills.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Damaged Eagle]

The ends is the answer to all your questions thru faith, whereas science often leads to more questions.

You can't prove that God doesn't exist........basic logic.

And so.......modern religion does use God to explain what they don't understand. Do you really not get it?

I use science to help comprehend my God all the time.

*****SMILE*****

 

[Epitah]

Assuming you were a Christian was a mistake, but with how hard you defend this you certainly do blend in with them just nicely.

They're not the ones attacking me... People like you are.

You still haven't gotten around to explaining exactly I'm ignorant of the scientific method, or do you just want to post more music videos?

It's been explained to you even by at least one other person here. This has to do with that reading comprehension thing and the lack of that you have going on.

Dem dayum liburul ateists, insulting em substitutes for a real argument, we wear.

When did I post that? Oh! I didn't you're embellishing.

Aren't you going to make some rude comment about my music videos or something like you have been for several pages now?

I don't even thinking you still understand the purpose or meaning of Russel's Teapot.

I understand it perfectly.

I believe there's a lot of things you don't understand about the question I posed about that teapot.

But then I've already covered your reading comprehension skills.

View attachment 79928

*****CHUCKLE*****

I'm beginning to notice a trend in your posts where you're basically just saying "I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I?" in place of actually saying something, it's impossible to have a conversation when you constantly fling irrelevant topics and deflecting everything back. How am I supposed to take you seriously on the topic of science when you need the difference between a theory and a hypothesis clarified, think the Big Bang is a faith and have a warped view on what the onus of proof is? You've said I'm ignorant on the Scientific theory like 3 times with nothing to back that up. Music videos ain't gonna help ya.

 

[BreezeWood]

The ends is the answer to all your questions thru faith, whereas science often leads to more questions.

You can't prove that God doesn't exist........basic logic.

And so.......modern religion does use God to explain what they don't understand. Do you really not get it?

I use science to help comprehend my God all the time.

*****SMILE*****

.

I use science to help comprehend my God all the time.

for what reason .... the Spirit needs science to reach the Everlasting ?

The BBT backs up Genesis and the creation of the universe and world in six days.

in six days ...

that must have been the BBCT - - big bang christian theory ....

.

 

[Epitah]

in six days ...

that must have been the BBCT - - big bang christian theory ....

nah man the math totally adds up. you just have to increase the span of a day in to like a few hundreds of billions of years. i know this is right, god told me himself. in my mind. and nobody else heard it. but it happened. totally.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Assuming you were a Christian was a mistake, but with how hard you defend this you certainly do blend in with them just nicely.

They're not the ones attacking me... People like you are.

You still haven't gotten around to explaining exactly I'm ignorant of the scientific method, or do you just want to post more music videos?

It's been explained to you even by at least one other person here. This has to do with that reading comprehension thing and the lack of that you have going on.

Dem dayum liburul ateists, insulting em substitutes for a real argument, we wear.

When did I post that? Oh! I didn't you're embellishing.

Aren't you going to make some rude comment about my music videos or something like you have been for several pages now?

I don't even thinking you still understand the purpose or meaning of Russel's Teapot.

I understand it perfectly.

I believe there's a lot of things you don't understand about the question I posed about that teapot.

But then I've already covered your reading comprehension skills.

View attachment 79928

*****CHUCKLE*****

I'm beginning to notice a trend in your posts where you're basically just saying "I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I?" in place of actually saying something, it's impossible to have a conversation when you constantly fling irrelevant topics and deflecting everything back. How am I supposed to take you seriously on the topic of science when you need the difference between a theory and a hypothesis clarified, think the Big Bang is a faith and have a warped view on what the onus of proof is? You've said I'm ignorant on the Scientific theory like 3 times with nothing to back that up. Music videos ain't gonna help ya.

I'm beginning to notice a trend also and it's probably because.... you're ignorant.

What is a Scientific Theory? | Definition of Theory

"Every scientific theory starts as a hypothesis. According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, a hypothesis is an idea that hasn't been proven yet. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step — known as a theory — in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon."

Note that in the above at no time does it call a 'theory' scientific fact. It calls it a 'valid explanation of a phenomenon'.

"A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypothesis. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time."

Oh my! A theory can be 'proven' or 'REJECTED'. I do believe I posted something to that effect earlier and you've kept repeating your ignorance over and over and over again like a scratched vinyl record. But then that's probably because you don't wish to read or comprehend what's being posted just like Breezewood.

I'm sure it couldn't possibly be because...

*****SARCASTIC CHUCKLE*****

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I use science to help comprehend my God all the time.

for what reason .... the Spirit needs science to reach the Everlasting ?

Sigh.h..h... What part of Pantheist don't you understand?

*****SMILE*****

 

[Epitah]

Oh my! A theory can be 'proven' or 'REJECTED'. I do believe I posted something to that effect earlier and you've kept repeating your ignorance over and over and over again like a scratched vinyl record. But then that's probably because you don't wish to read or comprehend what's being posted just like Breezewood.

You still need a good reason to reject a theory, and as far as you've said you don't have any good reason to deny it because whenever it gets brought up you lazily try to shift the burden of proof.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Oh my! A theory can be 'proven' or 'REJECTED'. I do believe I posted something to that effect earlier and you've kept repeating your ignorance over and over and over again like a scratched vinyl record. But then that's probably because you don't wish to read or comprehend what's being posted just like Breezewood.

You still need a good reason to reject a theory, and as far as you've said you don't have any good reason to deny it because whenever it gets brought up you lazily try to shift the burden of proof.

If the Big Bang is scientific 'fact' as you say it is then you'd know what kick started the universe. You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for you to tell me the answer to that one. With any luck by the time you figure out what exactly is happening here we'll all know if the cat is half-dead or half-alive. However those last two propositions appear to be the same and we may be peering into the looking glass as God roles the dice...

*****CHUCKLE*****





...Now I wonder what happened to yiostheoy and her little teapot.

 

[Epitah]

If the Big Bang is scientific 'fact' as you say it is then you'd know what kick started the universe. You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for you to tell me the answer to that one. With any luck by the time you figure out what exactly is happening here we'll all know if the cat is half-dead or half-alive. However those last two propositions appear to be the same and we may be peering into the looking glass as God roles the dice...

We don't know what caused the Big Bang, but we do in fact know it happened. You don't need to know the initial cause exactly to know something happened. If someone turns up dead and we don't know the cause of death that doesn't mean you can deny that person is dead.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

If the Big Bang is scientific 'fact' as you say it is then you'd know what kick started the universe. You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for you to tell me the answer to that one. With any luck by the time you figure out what exactly is happening here we'll all know if the cat is half-dead or half-alive. However those last two propositions appear to be the same and we may be peering into the looking glass as God roles the dice...

We don't know what caused the Big Bang, but we do in fact know it happened. You don't need to know the initial cause exactly to know something happened. If someone turns up dead and we don't know the cause of death that doesn't mean you can deny that person is dead.

Or perhaps the universe is not so short lived after all...

http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

"(Phys.org) —The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.?"

Now what was that you were saying about facts? Oh wait! If this is true then I'll have to come up with a new question to confusticate and be-bother all the atheists as they run towards their new scientific consensus that they think disproves the existence of God. Don't worry though I'm sure I will be able to think up something and still avoid that little teapot.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Epitah]

Now what was that you were saying about facts? Oh wait! If this is true then I'll have to come up with a new question to confusticate and be-bother all the atheists as they run towards their new scientific consensus that they think disproves the existence of God. Don't worry though I'm sure I will be able to think up something and still avoid that little teapot.

You can't disprove a creator because it's an untestable hypothesis that you can't contradict. It's on the person that actually believes to prove it is real. You still do not understand the onus of proof.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Now what was that you were saying about facts? Oh wait! If this is true then I'll have to come up with a new question to confusticate and be-bother all the atheists as they run towards their new scientific consensus that they think disproves the existence of God. Don't worry though I'm sure I will be able to think up something and still avoid that little teapot.

You can't disprove a creator because it's an untestable hypothesis that you can't contradict. It's on the person that actually believes to prove it is real. You still do not understand the onus of proof.

And you still haven't looked up the meaning of Pantheist.

My God is real even if we're all living in...

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Epitah]

And you still haven't looked up the meaning of Pantheist.

My God is real even if we're all living in...

You still can't disprove that everything encompasses a god. You can't disprove there isn't a tiny teapot floating in space. You can't disprove there isn't an invisible intangible monster in my closet. It's on you, the believer, to prove it.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

And you still haven't looked up the meaning of Pantheist.

My God is real even if we're all living in...

You still can't disprove that everything encompasses a god. You can't disprove there isn't a tiny teapot floating in space. You can't disprove there isn't an invisible intangible monster in my closet. It's on you, the believer, to prove it.

Why should have to disprove to you anything that I haven't claimed?

You on the other hand wish me to believe that there was a Big Bang and that someone smacked it with a magic teapot to get it all started up so that Newton's Laws Of Motion would not be violated.... Or did it just appear out of a magic teapot?

So now the question is where did this magic teapot of yours come from since you're the believer?

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Epitah]

Why should have to disprove to you anything that I haven't claimed?

You on the other hand wish me to believe that there was a Big Bang and that someone smacked it with a magic teapot to get it all started up so that Newton's Laws Of Motion would not be violated.... Or did it just appear out of a magic teapot?

So now the question is where did this magic teapot of yours come from since you're the believer?

You're the pantheist, its up to you to justify your position.

Do you actually do not understand the point of the teapot and are just stupid, or are you just fuckin with me? I'm beginning to think you really do not understand who the burden of proof lies on. Why do you keep bringing up the laws of motion when they're meant to be applied to small uses and not the origin of the universe?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

You're the pantheist, its up to you to justify your position.

I have a whole universe that I can show you to prove my position. How about you?

Do you actually do not understand the point of the teapot and are just stupid, or are you just fuckin with me?

A teapot created by a atheist philosopher who thought he could justify his position against all people who believe by saying the burden of proof belongs to the believer in God.

[I'm beginning to think you really do not understand who the burden of proof lies on.

I've shown you my proof just open your eyes and look around.

Now show me yours. What kick started the universe?

[Why do you keep bringing up the laws of motion when they're meant to be applied to small uses and not the origin of the universe?

Really????? How small of uses are they meant to be applied at? The atomic level? Anything under 10 grams? Anything under a ton? The planetary scale? Interstellar? Intergalactic? Bigger? Do you even understand Newton's Laws Of Motion?

*****CHUCKLE*****