Why do the God-haters persist?

[Boss]

Most mentally ill people don't realize that they've lost their minds. So don't worry, you aren't alone.

Does that have anything to do with the thread topic? Have you not read the rules of Level 2 forum posting yet? I suggest you go do that before you end up getting banned like some of your fellow antagonists. Some of us are trying to have a serious discussion, and some are trying their best to derail the thread and turn it into a flame war.

If I am "mentally ill" and you've spent the last 6 months in perpetual arguments with me, what does that say about your mental state? If I am dumb and stupid, why don't people just put me on ignore and forget about what I have to say? Reason is, I am making valid points that are nailing your asses to the wall in every possible way. I'm refuting your baseless arguments, destroying them at their weak foundations, and making you look like drooling idiots. So the only recourse you have left is the personal attacks and insults. Weaker and less confident people in the past, may have responded to this tactic by leaving or declining to comment further. I'm not one of those people. There is no insult you can hurl at me that hasn't been chucked my way before. I'm impervious to them. They only serve to reassure me that I am making my point and you are feeling it.

I started this thread to explain the psychology behind why certain people lie about their supposed "Atheism" in order to attack those who believe in God. I think the responses have more than proven my point. Your little flaming and harassing off-topic retorts add an exclamation point. I think the mods have done a great job of trying to keep the peace here, cleaning up the posts like yours which have nothing to do with the topic and are just flaming harassment, but my god, they have to be getting tired of this.

 

[Hollie]

Scientists have never invested in the unknowable, dimwit! That was the point of my comment in red. You're about as stupid as a fucking turnip, to be honest. No wonder you need to resort to lying and manipulating to make it look like you're winning an argument.

Science cannot test, observe or falsify the unknowable... so it sure as hell isn't invested in it! No scientist has EVER invested in the unknowable, so where you get this "fewer and fewer" crap is beyond me. Science only invests in what is observable, testable and falsifiable, which makes it very much KNOWABLE and the opposite of unknowable.

And what the living hell does "unknowable" have to do with GOD? Do you think God is unknowable? I hate to tell you this and break your little God-hating heart, but BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of human beings totally disagree with you! God may be "unknowable" to YOU, but Newsflash: YOU AIN'T EVERYBODY!

LOL!!!
I just love it when you lose your mind. It's like telling a 5 year old they can't have ice cream.
When the early scientists were still holding onto the purse strings of the church, they invested in the unknowable.
Now, not so much.
Even you find the "Spiritual Nature" unknowable, otherwise no faith would be required, right? You would simply "know" it.
You really are one of the most childlike people I have ever encountered on the internet.
Entertaining as hell, though.
It's fun to watch someone that really isn't very bright but is absolutely convinced they are.

But I haven't lost my mind.

Early scientists or modern scientists... doesn't matter, they can be both scientists and believers in God, and I proved this with two lists of some of our greatest scientific minds. One thing they've never done is invest in the unknowable, that is the antithesis of science. They explore the unknown, that's virtually all science does. You are the one constructing a crutch of "unknowable" out of your sheer ignorance of the unknown.

Even you find the "Spiritual Nature" unknowable, otherwise no faith would be required, right? You would simply "know" it.

But you see, I DO know it! I feel it around me and communicate with it daily. I've felt its blessings in my life. I see its presence in the beauty all around me. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it's real, no faith is needed for me to believe it. You will not ever change my mind about it.

I don’t see anyone necessarily trying to change your mind about your “feelings”. The issue is your insistence that some supernatural force is extant and real.

Further, I think you’re making a break from “reasoning” with the more “feelings” based tenets of Religion and superstition. Feelings are the least reliable way to make a solid decision. I would hope that you do not make decisions that affect you or your family based upon “feelings” but with comparative analysis, risk/reward and probable outcome. If something feels good, investigate it objectively. See if the good feelings are substantiated. You function with your critical faculties on an ongoing basis, and while you can misinterpret some sensory input, rationality adheres to parameters that are testable.


Here’s a little experiment you can try at home. In your diatribe above, try substituting spiritual nature™ with “The Easter Bunny”. See if your comment still makes sense.
Here, I’ve some you homework for you:

But you see, I DO know [(The Easter Bunny –ed.)]! I feel [(The Easter Bunny –ed.)] around me and communicate with [(The Easter Bunny –ed.)] daily.

 

[orogenicman]

Most mentally ill people don't realize that they've lost their minds. So don't worry, you aren't alone.

Does that have anything to do with the thread topic? Have you not read the rules of Level 2 forum posting yet? I suggest you go do that before you end up getting banned like some of your fellow antagonists. Some of us are trying to have a serious discussion, and some are trying their best to derail the thread and turn it into a flame war.

If I am "mentally ill" and you've spent the last 6 months in perpetual arguments with me, what does that say about your mental state? If I am dumb and stupid, why don't people just put me on ignore and forget about what I have to say? Reason is, I am making valid points that are nailing your asses to the wall in every possible way. I'm refuting your baseless arguments, destroying them at their weak foundations, and making you look like drooling idiots. So the only recourse you have left is the personal attacks and insults. Weaker and less confident people in the past, may have responded to this tactic by leaving or declining to comment further. I'm not one of those people. There is no insult you can hurl at me that hasn't been chucked my way before. I'm impervious to them. They only serve to reassure me that I am making my point and you are feeling it.

I started this thread to explain the psychology behind why certain people lie about their supposed "Atheism" in order to attack those who believe in God. I think the responses have more than proven my point. Your little flaming and harassing off-topic retorts add an exclamation point. I think the mods have done a great job of trying to keep the peace here, cleaning up the posts like yours which have nothing to do with the topic and are just flaming harassment, but my god, they have to be getting tired of this.

Yes, it is quite clear to us that your head is composed of zoisite, a ruby-containing rock which is so tough it can shatter a hard rock hammer. Unfortunately for you, being tough as zoisite doesn't help you to learn because all you have left is your own delusions. Poor dear.

 

[Dr Grump]

Does that have anything to do with the thread topic? Have you not read the rules of Level 2 forum posting yet? I suggest you go do that before you end up getting banned like some of your fellow antagonists. Some of us are trying to have a serious discussion, and some are trying their best to derail the thread and turn it into a flame war.

If I am "mentally ill" and you've spent the last 6 months in perpetual arguments with me, what does that say about your mental state? If I am dumb and stupid, why don't people just put me on ignore and forget about what I have to say? Reason is, I am making valid points that are nailing your asses to the wall in every possible way. I'm refuting your baseless arguments, destroying them at their weak foundations, and making you look like drooling idiots. So the only recourse you have left is the personal attacks and insults. Weaker and less confident people in the past, may have responded to this tactic by leaving or declining to comment further. I'm not one of those people. There is no insult you can hurl at me that hasn't been chucked my way before. I'm impervious to them. They only serve to reassure me that I am making my point and you are feeling it.

I started this thread to explain the psychology behind why certain people lie about their supposed "Atheism" in order to attack those who believe in God. I think the responses have more than proven my point. Your little flaming and harassing off-topic retorts add an exclamation point. I think the mods have done a great job of trying to keep the peace here, cleaning up the posts like yours which have nothing to do with the topic and are just flaming harassment, but my god, they have to be getting tired of this.

what was that about this being a Level 2 discussion again?

 

[Dr Grump]

fewer and fewer scientists invest in the unknowable.

Scientists have never invested in the unknowable, dimwit! That was the point of my comment in red. You're about as stupid as a fucking turnip, to be honest. No wonder you need to resort to lying and manipulating to make it look like you're winning an argument.

Science cannot test, observe or falsify the unknowable... so it sure as hell isn't invested in it! No scientist has EVER invested in the unknowable, so where you get this "fewer and fewer" crap is beyond me. Science only invests in what is observable, testable and falsifiable, which makes it very much KNOWABLE and the opposite of unknowable.

And what the living hell does "unknowable" have to do with GOD? Do you think God is unknowable? I hate to tell you this and break your little God-hating heart, but BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of human beings totally disagree with you! God may be "unknowable" to YOU, but Newsflash: YOU AIN'T EVERYBODY!

And again (the bolded part)..

As for you last para about God being unknowable, of course god is unknowable. There is absolutely no evidence of a god existing....zilch, nada, nothing. Just belief. As for billions believing, they are getting less and less everyday. Almost every human being thought that the sun revolved around the earth. How did that work out? They also thought thunder was caused by angry gods. Again, how did that work out? Your argument is both asinine and superfluous at best...

 

[thebrucebeat]

Scientists have never invested in the unknowable, dimwit! That was the point of my comment in red. You're about as stupid as a fucking turnip, to be honest. No wonder you need to resort to lying and manipulating to make it look like you're winning an argument.

Science cannot test, observe or falsify the unknowable... so it sure as hell isn't invested in it! No scientist has EVER invested in the unknowable, so where you get this "fewer and fewer" crap is beyond me. Science only invests in what is observable, testable and falsifiable, which makes it very much KNOWABLE and the opposite of unknowable.

And what the living hell does "unknowable" have to do with GOD? Do you think God is unknowable? I hate to tell you this and break your little God-hating heart, but BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of human beings totally disagree with you! God may be "unknowable" to YOU, but Newsflash: YOU AIN'T EVERYBODY!

LOL!!!
I just love it when you lose your mind. It's like telling a 5 year old they can't have ice cream.
When the early scientists were still holding onto the purse strings of the church, they invested in the unknowable.
Now, not so much.
Even you find the "Spiritual Nature" unknowable, otherwise no faith would be required, right? You would simply "know" it.
You really are one of the most childlike people I have ever encountered on the internet.
Entertaining as hell, though.
It's fun to watch someone that really isn't very bright but is absolutely convinced they are.

But I haven't lost my mind.

Early scientists or modern scientists... doesn't matter, they can be both scientists and believers in God, and I proved this with two lists of some of our greatest scientific minds. One thing they've never done is invest in the unknowable, that is the antithesis of science. They explore the unknown, that's virtually all science does. You are the one constructing a crutch of "unknowable" out of your sheer ignorance of the unknown.

Even you find the "Spiritual Nature" unknowable, otherwise no faith would be required, right? You would simply "know" it.

But you see, I DO know it! I feel it around me and communicate with it daily. I've felt its blessings in my life. I see its presence in the beauty all around me. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it's real, no faith is needed for me to believe it. You will not ever change my mind about it.

It is certainly possible to have cognitive dissonance, but fewer and fewer scientists invest in it in regard to belief in a deity. A steady, inexorable decline in scientist believers is history's trajectory. The proof is how far back you have to go for your samples. You use George Washington Carver as an example of a recent believer.
LOL!
I do believe that this is the great unknowable. You present your FEELINGS as evidence, and science would find that a laughable argument. You have felt the blessings from a god you have consistently stated doesn't care a bit about you.
Your belief it is absolutely true is not the same as knowing.

 

[DriftingSand]

It is interesting to note the persistence and insistence and energy posited by non-believers concerning matters of faith, spirit, and divinity in general. What draws them to the subject of God day after day after day after day after day after day after day? Is it that they want desperately to believe but are searching for that convincing (albeit elusive) evidence that they desperately crave? Does the OP's conclusion have a certain amount of veracity and weight? Is it true that so-called "atheists/agnostics" actually do believe but are simply angry at God for something that happened in their life or because they didn't get that new cell phone they prayed for? Or perhaps they know God's moral standard but are so engulfed a particular sin that they feel a dire need to eliminate God and His standards as a means to legitimize their sinful desires and actions.

Whatever the case may be, we can bank on the fact that certain "atheists" will be drawn to the religious discussion forums like ducks to water.

 

[MrMax]

It is interesting to note the persistence and insistence and energy posited by non-believers concerning matters of faith, spirit, and divinity in general. What draws them to the subject of God day after day after day after day after day after day after day? Is it that they want desperately to believe but are searching for that convincing (albeit elusive) evidence that they desperately crave? Does the OP's conclusion have a certain amount of veracity and weight? Is it true that so-called "atheists/agnostics" actually do believe but are simply angry at God for something that happened in their life or because they didn't get that new cell phone they prayed for? Or perhaps they know God's moral standard but are so engulfed a particular sin that they feel a dire need to eliminate God and His standards as a means to legitimize their sinful desires and actions.

Whatever the case may be, we can bank on the fact that certain "atheists" will be drawn to the religious discussion forums like ducks to water.

As an agnostic, what initially drew me to a forum like this was to see WHY believers believe. Do they have some sort of irrefutable proof? Turns out it's all based on nothing, like, "look how complicated DNA is, god must have made it", kind of arguments. Or "the bible is the word of god", but just because, not for any real reason. It's fascinating actually. And funny.

 

[DriftingSand]

It is interesting to note the persistence and insistence and energy posited by non-believers concerning matters of faith, spirit, and divinity in general. What draws them to the subject of God day after day after day after day after day after day after day? Is it that they want desperately to believe but are searching for that convincing (albeit elusive) evidence that they desperately crave? Does the OP's conclusion have a certain amount of veracity and weight? Is it true that so-called "atheists/agnostics" actually do believe but are simply angry at God for something that happened in their life or because they didn't get that new cell phone they prayed for? Or perhaps they know God's moral standard but are so engulfed a particular sin that they feel a dire need to eliminate God and His standards as a means to legitimize their sinful desires and actions.

Whatever the case may be, we can bank on the fact that certain "atheists" will be drawn to the religious discussion forums like ducks to water.

As an agnostic, what initially drew me to a forum like this was to see WHY believers believe. Do they have some sort of irrefutable proof? Turns out it's all based on nothing, like, "look how complicated DNA is, god must have made it", kind of arguments. Or "the bible is the word of god", but just because, not for any real reason. It's fascinating actually. And funny.

And yet ... here you are after your "initial" purpose for coming here was satisfied.

 

[DriftingSand]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

 

[MrMax]

It is interesting to note the persistence and insistence and energy posited by non-believers concerning matters of faith, spirit, and divinity in general. What draws them to the subject of God day after day after day after day after day after day after day? Is it that they want desperately to believe but are searching for that convincing (albeit elusive) evidence that they desperately crave? Does the OP's conclusion have a certain amount of veracity and weight? Is it true that so-called "atheists/agnostics" actually do believe but are simply angry at God for something that happened in their life or because they didn't get that new cell phone they prayed for? Or perhaps they know God's moral standard but are so engulfed a particular sin that they feel a dire need to eliminate God and His standards as a means to legitimize their sinful desires and actions.

Whatever the case may be, we can bank on the fact that certain "atheists" will be drawn to the religious discussion forums like ducks to water.

As an agnostic, what initially drew me to a forum like this was to see WHY believers believe. Do they have some sort of irrefutable proof? Turns out it's all based on nothing, like, "look how complicated DNA is, god must have made it", kind of arguments. Or "the bible is the word of god", but just because, not for any real reason. It's fascinating actually. And funny.

And yet ... here you are after your "initial" purpose for coming here was satisfied.

I did say "And funny". A classic would be Boss who said that we're all born with the ability to do magic tricks!
And I'm still trying to get an answer for how Noah got polar bears to his ark and back again. And did he really have millions of species on his boat with food for everyone for 40 days? With only 6 people to shovel all the shit?

 

[MrMax]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

That's only because there aren't any Buddhists... here. I'd be very interested to hear their views. And there are a few moo slims and mor(m)ons who we get to set their pants on fire every now and then.

 

[DriftingSand]

As an agnostic, what initially drew me to a forum like this was to see WHY believers believe. Do they have some sort of irrefutable proof? Turns out it's all based on nothing, like, "look how complicated DNA is, god must have made it", kind of arguments. Or "the bible is the word of god", but just because, not for any real reason. It's fascinating actually. And funny.

And yet ... here you are after your "initial" purpose for coming here was satisfied.

I did say "And funny". A classic would be Boss who said that we're all born with the ability to do magic tricks!
And I'm still trying to get an answer for how Noah got polar bears to his ark and back again. And did he really have millions of species on his boat with food for everyone for 40 days? With only 6 people to shovel all the shit?

I'm certain that you've quoted Boss in context -- right? You couldn't possibility one of those individuals that twists the words of others as a means to ridicule.

I think there is already a thread concerning Noah and his ark. But I'll bite.

a) Many creation scientists believe that prior to the flood there was water canopy or cloud that surrounded the entire earth keeping the temperatures mild worldwide. The canopy filtered the sun's rays while equalizing temperatures. There was no particular region that was more suited to one animal over another. Mammoths have been found in today's arctic regions with buttercups in their mouths. That indicates two things: 1) They died quickly while they were chewing food and 2) the arctic regions were warm enough to sustain the buttercup which requires a warmer climate. The canopy of water held in the clouds above the earth were released and caused the flood.

b) It is quite possible that all the animals that entered the arc were within a fairly close proximity to the arc. Most were probably brought onto the arc in a state of infancy or at least very young requiring less food. Also, we know that many animals are able to hibernate. It's quite plausible to believe that the animals on the arc went into hibernation or semi-hibernation thus requiring less food.

c) I happen to believe in micro-evolution. That is to say that I believe a particular species can adapt to a particular climate or environment. It's quite possible that only one particular type of bear was brought onto the arc. After the flood, they reproduced and spread across the landscape. Each subsequent generation of bear adapted to it's particular environment as a means of survival. Polar bears are white because they live in an environment that requires them to be white so as to not be seen by potential prey.

 

[DriftingSand]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

That's only because there aren't any Buddhists... here. I'd be very interested to hear their views. And there are a few moo slims and mor(m)ons who we get to set their pants on fire every now and then.

And yet there are likely numerous forums in Internet-Land that have plenty of Buddhist or Hindu members and yet here you are -- badgering, belittling, and taunting Christians. I've been a member of lots and lots of forums and the pattern is always the same. Christian forums draw (by far) the most naysayers and trolls.

 

[orogenicman]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

Probably because none of those religions are here proselytizing and telling atheists that they are evil and will go to hell for their beliefs. If they were, I can almost guarantee that they would not be left out of the discussion.

 

[orogenicman]

And yet ... here you are after your "initial" purpose for coming here was satisfied.

I did say "And funny". A classic would be Boss who said that we're all born with the ability to do magic tricks!
And I'm still trying to get an answer for how Noah got polar bears to his ark and back again. And did he really have millions of species on his boat with food for everyone for 40 days? With only 6 people to shovel all the shit?

I'm certain that you've quoted Boss in context -- right? You couldn't possibility one of those individuals that twists the words of others as a means to ridicule.

I think there is already a thread concerning Noah and his ark. But I'll bite.

a) Many creation scientists believe that prior to the flood there was water canopy or cloud that surrounded the entire earth keeping the temperatures mild worldwide. The canopy filtered the sun's rays while equalizing temperatures. There was no particular region that was more suited to one animal over another. Mammoths have been found in today's arctic regions with buttercups in their mouths. That indicates two things: 1) They died quickly while they were chewing food and 2) the arctic regions were warm enough to sustain the buttercup which requires a warmer climate. The canopy of water held in the clouds above the earth were released and caused the flood.

b) It is quite possible that all the animals that entered the arc were within a fairly close proximity to the arc. Most were probably brought onto the arc in a state of infancy or at least very young requiring less food. Also, we know that many animals are able to hibernate. It's quite plausible to believe that the animals on the arc went into hibernation or semi-hibernation thus requiring less food.

c) I happen to believe in micro-evolution. That is to say that I believe a particular species can adapt to a particular climate or environment. It's quite possible that only one particular type of bear was brought onto the arc. After the flood, they reproduced and spread across the landscape. Each subsequent generation of bear adapted to it's particular environment as a means of survival. Polar bears are white because they live in an environment that requires them to be white so as to not be seen by potential prey.

As a geologist, I've read or heard just about every variation and explanation for Noah's ark coming from creationists and other Christians, and I find it rather satisfying that the majority of Christians don't actually take it literally like you evangelicals do. But hey, I enjoy a good laugh every now and then, and I'm sure the Christians who don't take it literally do as well.

Cheers,

 

[MrMax]

And yet ... here you are after your "initial" purpose for coming here was satisfied.

I did say "And funny". A classic would be Boss who said that we're all born with the ability to do magic tricks!
And I'm still trying to get an answer for how Noah got polar bears to his ark and back again. And did he really have millions of species on his boat with food for everyone for 40 days? With only 6 people to shovel all the shit?

I'm certain that you've quoted Boss in context -- right? You couldn't possibility one of those individuals that twists the words of others as a means to ridicule.

I think there is already a thread concerning Noah and his ark. But I'll bite.

a) Many creation scientists believe that prior to the flood there was water canopy or cloud that surrounded the entire earth keeping the temperatures mild worldwide. The canopy filtered the sun's rays while equalizing temperatures. There was no particular region that was more suited to one animal over another. Mammoths have been found in today's arctic regions with buttercups in their mouths. That indicates two things: 1) They died quickly while they were chewing food and 2) the arctic regions were warm enough to sustain the buttercup which requires a warmer climate. The canopy of water held in the clouds above the earth were released and caused the flood.

b) It is quite possible that all the animals that entered the arc were within a fairly close proximity to the arc. Most were probably brought onto the arc in a state of infancy or at least very young requiring less food. Also, we know that many animals are able to hibernate. It's quite plausible to believe that the animals on the arc went into hibernation or semi-hibernation thus requiring less food.

c) I happen to believe in micro-evolution. That is to say that I believe a particular species can adapt to a particular climate or environment. It's quite possible that only one particular type of bear was brought onto the arc. After the flood, they reproduced and spread across the landscape. Each subsequent generation of bear adapted to it's particular environment as a means of survival. Polar bears are white because they live in an environment that requires them to be white so as to not be seen by potential prey.

a) No proof whatsoever. Completely made up.
b) So no animals came from say, Australia? And how did animals get to Australia afterwards? And how come there are animals in Australia that we find nowhere else?
c) You're a heretic and could be excommunicated for believing in evolution. And you're already bordering on not even being a Christian to start with for holding such views.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

None of those other faith traditions are trying to influence American policy. None of them are a threat to the people who live in this country and come on these boards that do not share this dominant faith tradition.
It has nothing to do with the "power in the name of Jesus Christ", but rather the defense of liberty of the people who find that concept unsupportable. Hindus don't threaten that in any way.

 

[DriftingSand]

a) Many creation scientists believe that prior to the flood there was water canopy or cloud that surrounded the entire earth keeping the temperatures mild worldwide. The canopy filtered the sun's rays while equalizing temperatures. There was no particular region that was more suited to one animal over another. Mammoths have been found in today's arctic regions with buttercups in their mouths. That indicates two things: 1) They died quickly while they were chewing food and 2) the arctic regions were warm enough to sustain the buttercup which requires a warmer climate. The canopy of water held in the clouds above the earth were released and caused the flood.

b) It is quite possible that all the animals that entered the arc were within a fairly close proximity to the arc. Most were probably brought onto the arc in a state of infancy or at least very young requiring less food. Also, we know that many animals are able to hibernate. It's quite plausible to believe that the animals on the arc went into hibernation or semi-hibernation thus requiring less food.

c) I happen to believe in micro-evolution. That is to say that I believe a particular species can adapt to a particular climate or environment. It's quite possible that only one particular type of bear was brought onto the arc. After the flood, they reproduced and spread across the landscape. Each subsequent generation of bear adapted to it's particular environment as a means of survival. Polar bears are white because they live in an environment that requires them to be white so as to not be seen by potential prey.

a) No proof whatsoever. Completely made up.
b) So no animals came from say, Australia? And how did animals get to Australia afterwards? And how come there are animals in Australia that we find nowhere else?
c) You're a heretic and could be excommunicated for believing in evolution. And you're already bordering on not even being a Christian to start with for holding such views.

a) Really? You were there?
b) Not necessarily. Australia is where post-flood animals eventually went to. Prior to the flood there likely wasn't enough water to separate the world's land mass so there likely was no Australia.
c) I don't belong to an organized religion so excommunication from any particular organized church likely occurred a long, long time ago. Remember, there is a different between "micro" evolution and "macro" evolution. I totally reject the latter.

 

[DriftingSand]

Also interesting is the fact that atheists/agnostics rail against Christians and Christianity almost exclusively but have almost nothing to say about Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, or Judaism. I conclude that there must be a lot of power in the name of Jesus Christ. He must be seen as a greater threat to their worldview than all other religions combined. It certainly make ya wonder.

None of those other faith traditions are trying to influence American policy. None of them are a threat to the people who live in this country and come on these boards that do not share this dominant faith tradition.
It has nothing to do with the "power in the name of Jesus Christ", but rather the defense of liberty of the people who find that concept unsupportable. Hindus don't threaten that in any way.

It's somehow wrong for Christians to want to influence their surroundings and liberties but it's okay for atheists/agnostics to exercise influence? Can you produce a logical avenue that led you to that conclusion? It sounds like you have something against moral standards and would like to see them eliminated. Care to share anything with us?

But Eastern, religious philosophy does attempt to affect the public psyche here in the states. Everywhere we see the yin/yang symbol. It's hidden on packaging or, in some cases, not so hidden. I'm guessing that you know what the yin/yang represents.