Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.



View Active Topics       View Your Posts       Latest 100 Topics       FAQ Topics       Mobile Friendly Theme


The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Discuss religion and spirituality topics.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » May 31st, 2018, 2:39 am

Great new book exposing Atheism and its evils. What a provocative title too! I ordered the Kindle version for my Kindle device.

@Adama and @MrMan will love the title too. lol

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07BWTSNYQ/

Image

Atheism Kills: The Dangers of a World Without God – and Cause for Hope

In Atheism Kills, Barak Lurie exposes the horrors of a world without God. Contrary to the mantra we've heard time and time again that religion is responsible for more deaths than anything else, it is in fact the absence of God which has killed--in obscene numbers. Ever since atheism first assumed government control in the French Revolution, it has done nothing but kill.

Atheism has killed through its many deputies: progressivism, eugenics, fascism, and communism. Lurie shows that it was the godlessness in each of these ideologies that killed hundreds of millions.

But atheism doesn't just kill lives. It kills purpose, free will, beauty, compassion, a sense of the past and future, creativity, and freedom itself. Atheism offers only the horrors of chaos and totalitarianism.

The world misplaces its focus on Radical Islam as the greatest threat to civilization. As horrible as it is, it is doing nothing and having no sense of self which are the true enemies. It was our will to fight and sense of mission that overcame fascism and communism. We must have these to keep Radical Islam at bay, too.

This is why we must resist the growth of atheism. It was God that gave us our freedom. It was God who gave our sense of purpose that created civilization. Take those away, and there is nothing to fight for. In this way, Lurie shows that the lack of belief in God is our greatest danger. How does he know? Because like a hurricane, godlessness has only known how to destroy everything in its path. It has never created.

Like there will always be fires, there will always be enemies that seek to destroy our civilization. But if we don't have fire stations with crew, and protocol in each city to deal with fires, those fires will consume us. Likewise, how we prepare ourselves to deal with horrific ideologies will be what saves us.

That preparation can only come with our embrace of the centrality of God.

Foreword written by Dennis Prager.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne




Check out our Dating Sites and International Romance Tours!



User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » May 31st, 2018, 2:44 am

Another good book I just bought on my Kindle that totally refutes Atheism.

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Superstitio ... 00D40EGCQ/

Image

The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism

The central contention of the “New Atheism” of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens is that there has for several centuries been a war between science and religion, that religion has been steadily losing that war, and that at this point in human history a completely secular scientific account of the world has been worked out in such thorough and convincing detail that there is no longer any reason why a rational and educated person should find the claims of any religion the least bit worthy of attention.

But as Edward Feser argues in The Last Superstition, in fact there is not, and never has been, any war between science and religion at all. There has instead been a conflict between two entirely philosophical conceptions of the natural order: on the one hand, the classical “teleological” vision of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas, on which purpose or goal-directedness is as inherent a feature of the physical world as mass or electric charge; and the modern “mechanical” vision of Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, and Hume, according to which the physical world is comprised of nothing more than purposeless, meaningless particles in motion. As it happens, on the classical teleological picture, the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the natural-law conception of morality are rationally unavoidable. Modern atheism and secularism have thus always crucially depended for their rational credentials on the insinuation that the modern, mechanical picture of the world has somehow been established by science.

Yet this modern “mechanical” picture has never been established by science, and cannot be, for it is not a scientific theory in the first place but merely a philosophical interpretation of science. Moreover, as Feser shows, the philosophical arguments in its favor given by the early modern philosophers were notable only for being surprisingly weak.

However, not only is this modern philosophical picture rationally unfounded, it is demonstrably false. For the “mechanical” conception of the natural world, when worked out consistently, absurdly entails that rationality, and indeed the human mind itself, is illusory. The so-called “scientific worldview” championed by the New Atheists thus inevitably undermines its own rational foundations; and into the bargain (and contrary to the moralistic posturing of the New Atheists) it undermines the foundations of any possible morality as well. By contrast, and as The Last Superstition demonstrates, the classical teleological picture of nature can be seen to find powerful confirmation in developments from contemporary philosophy, biology, and physics; moreover, morality and reason itself cannot possibly be made sense of apart from it. The teleological vision of the ancients and medievals is thereby rationally vindicated – and with it the religious worldview they based upon it.

Winner of the 2008 Book of the Year in Religion from ForeWord Magazine and the only 2008 Editors’ Choice for Religion from the American Library Association’s Booklist, The Last Superstition remains the most cogent and powerful refutation of the New Atheism extent.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 6207
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 10:37 pm

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Adama » May 31st, 2018, 2:51 am

Winston wrote:
May 31st, 2018, 2:39 am
Great new book exposing Atheism and its evils. What a provocative title too! I ordered the Kindle version for my Kindle device.

@Adama and @MrMan will love the title too. lol
If society followed God there would be much more freedom. It is these ideologies that are putting us under bondage, by inventing rules that God never said, while ignoring God's rules. God's rules bring freedom, especially for men. Adam was a man and the whole world was made for him and his sons. Women were created to help men and to be our glory, not to compete. That's just one example. I could go further but, because society's teachings have slid so far down hill, that it wouldn't be believed, all the good things which men have lost in terms of glory.

Society's female liberation ultimately may destroy the souls of the women who buy into it and act on it. The exalted will be humbled.
A good man is above pettiness. He is better than that.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » June 15th, 2018, 1:17 am

Angry rant to an atheist friend in angeles city who likes to bully and ridicule me. You can see now fed up i am with their ignorance, fallacies, small mindedness and stupidiy.

[6/14, 3:54 PM] Winston: No one is perfect. You have tons of flaws too. Good friends bring out the best in you. Only assholes and insecure bullies try to bring others down.

[6/14, 3:55 PM] Winston: I have no control over life. Its just destiny. I wrote a long post in the forum about it already.

[6/14, 3:56 PM] Winston: U arent a credible source. Atheists are the stupidest and small minded people in the world. No offense. Their beliefs are the weakest and most useless. They cannot account for a ton of data. Such as astrology, numerology, tarot cards, intelligent design, etc.

[6/14, 3:58 PM] Winston: Sorry but u dont know shit about my life or the world or the nature of reality. You dont even believe in love. That means youre a sociopath. With no soul. When u die there wont even be a life after death for u. According to helena blavatsky. Founder of theosophy. My consciousness is way way way higher than yours. No joke. You can laugh but its true. I swear.

[6/14, 3:58 PM] Winston: No offense. Just speaking the truth.

[6/14, 4:00 PM] Winston: Even if some of my beliefs are wrong that doesnt mean im insane and crazy. Everyone has some false beliefs. Even atheists do.

But as long as i never lie, cheat or steal. and i live with integrity, courage and honor and strength. And stand up for what I believe and stand for something and have a purpose in life other than money, then i am a good person with honor and integrity. You cant fault me for that. I never betray my friends or lie or bs or cheat people. If u judge a man by character i pass with flying colors.

[6/14, 4:42 PM] Winston: Anyway if i need advice or sympathy or understanding i wouldnt go to you. Atheists understand me the least. You arent even spiritual. We arent on the same consciousness level either. No offense. Just the truth.

Id rather ask men who relate to me better. Like alex, michael, frank, etc. They understand me better and are more broad minded than you.

[6/14, 4:44 PM] Winston: I may have some character flaws. Sure. Who doesn't? But i definitely have more knowledge and wisdom than you in big topic areas. So it is u who should be asking me for advice.

At least i admit to my character flaws. But u and rock refuse to admit to any of your character flaws, even though u and him have many of them.

[6/14, 4:54 PM] Winston: Let me show u how ridiculous atheist logic is. Atheists believe that if they cant comprehend or experience something then no one can. So if they never experience God or higher consciousness then everyone who has is deluded. By that logic nothing exists then. Because to a cockroach, they cannot understand computers or car engines or even you. So does that mean they dont exist? If a cockroach doesnt understand you and your life does that mean you dont exist? According to stupid atheist logic it does. See how fallacious and false and ridiculous that is? So dumb.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » June 26th, 2018, 10:44 am

Miles Mathis, a fringe conspiracy author who believes that every historical event is staged and faked, and is considered nutty even by other truths, does make a lot of intelligent arguments in his articles and papers after all. And he seems to have an encyclopedia of knowledge on just about everything, from mainstream topics to the most fringe and esoteric topics.

Here he explains the illogic of atheism.

http://mileswmathis.com/atheism.html

Here he tears down the famous atheist author Christopher Hitchens.

http://mileswmathis.com/hitch.html
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » July 8th, 2018, 3:08 pm

To all Atheists: Two Ways you can prove to yourself the existence of a higher power right now! (if you want to)

If you want proof of a higher power or the existence of unseen forces, I can show you right now how you can get that proof yourself. Just follow my instructions below.

1. First, watch these films below that prove Darwinian Evolution to be totally wrong and impossible and has no basis behind it. Some are on YouTube still. The rest you will have to Google or get from torrent sites. They are irrefutable and destroy the theory completely and makes you realize you were lied to about evolution being a fact. They are Richard Dawkin's worst nightmare come to life.

1. Unlocking the Mystery of Life (by Illustra Media)
(Still on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzj8iXiVDT8)
2. Darwin's Dilemma (by Illustra Media)
(Still on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxh9o32m5c0)
3. The Case for a Creator (by Lee Strobel)
(Still on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajqH4y8G0MI)
4. Evolution's Achilles Heels (The best! Covers everything. Must see!)
(Not on YouTube. Trailer available only: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9TCtmoyBaI)
5. Dr. Kent Hovind's Creation Seminar Series and Public Debates - Dr. Hovind is THE MAN when it comes to defeating Atheists and Evolutionists in public debate. He tears everyone apart and leaves them with nothing. He was doing so much damage to belief in evolution, that the US government had to put him in jail to shut him up. Even Richard Dawkins was too scared to debate him because he knew he would have been totally whipped and made to look like a fool. But Dr. Hovind's seminars and debates are still on YouTube in many copies. Just search for "Kent Hovind seminar" and "Kent Hovind debates".

Once you see them all, you will realize that life MUST have been intelligently DESIGNED top down, NOT bottom up. There's no way around it. You cannot put a bunch of chemicals or all the compounds of life into a test tub and from that form complex living cells or biological machines. Not in a billion years, a trillion years or all eternity. It can NEVER happen. The films above explains why in detail. The DNA of humans and all life on Earth is a complex computer code that contains ERROR CORRECTING codes in it as well. Everyone knows that error correcting codes can only be made by a programmer, they cannot form by random or natural forces. No way. Even the co-discoverer of DNA, Francis Cricke, said that DNA could not have evolved from evolution and random mutation alone. And Bill Gates, Microsoft Founder, said the DNA code is far more complex than any program Microsoft has ever developed. Biological organisms and living cells are essentially complex biological machines that require organization and design. We all know that machines require design, especially complex machines such as engines or computer hardware. They do not form by natural forces. So the computer code in DNA and the biological machines in our bodies and cells MUST be designed TOP DOWN, not bottom up. As we all know, half a plane cannot fly, and half a car cannot run. The design needs to be complete from the get go, or else it doesn't work. There's no way around it.

Furthermore, random mutations cannot add information to the genome or DNA of a species. Usually mutations damage or kill an organism. They are never beneficial. Richard Dawkins was asked once to give an example of a beneficial mutation and he could not think of anything. He was stumped. That video went viral on YouTube. It speaks volumes. Without beneficial mutations the whole theory of evolution collapses. Mutations can sometimes multiply pre-existing information, or remove it, but it never creates NEW information. That's one of the main achilles heels in evolution theory. There's no way around it. Without beneficial mutations, natural selection is useless. All it does it weed out weaker organisms from passing on their genes. It does not create new information in the genome or create new species or cause any species to evolve.

Therefore, you Atheists must ABANDON your Atheistic paradigm and UPDATE or REVISE it. Because it doesn't work and doesn't fit the data/evidence. For sure there is intelligent design. I'm not saying this proves any religion or God. All it proves is that there is intelligent design, and that a creator or creators must exist in some way. Therefore, Atheism and Scientism has lost this debate with their scam of Evolution and attempt to prove that no intelligent creators are necessary to explain life.

2. Second, download this I-Ching app from Google Playstore called "Deepware Changes Iching" (or itunes store if you have an iphone). Here's the link to it.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... nges.trial

It's a divination tool using Chinese I-Ching, which has been used for thousands of years and tends to be very accurate. Then ask it deep questions about yourself that only you know. But you have to be sincere and take it seriously and treat it as sacred. Don't treat it as a joke or fun and games. If you do that and are sincere, it will give you amazingly ACCURATE answers to your questions in a way that coincidence or chance cannot. And even when you ask the same question twice you will get almost the SAME ANSWER! (and btw I mean by thinking the question or saying it out loud, not typing it in the app so that the app knows you are asking the same question) This will freak you out because there's NO WAY in hell coincidence can do that. It will prove to you that there is an unseen intelligence at work that is answering your questions through the I-Ching app.

This unseen force or intelligence answering the readings could be the universe, God or gods, your higher self, your guardian angels, invisible entities of some sort, or whatever. But either way, it's real and you can have proof if you do what I suggest. Now I know that Christians will say such things are demonic and attract demonic entities to do these readings to lure you in. But even if they are right, that is still evidence for the existence of unseen forces, which do not fit into the atheistic paradigm. So either way, the Atheist paradigm loses, and therefore must be revised and updated, not remain static. Also, if demons exist then the forces of light or goodness must exist as well, to counterbalance the duality.

You can do the same with a good tarot card app too. Or use real tarot cards or real I-Ching hexagrams (if you know how). However, I can only speak from my experience with that I-Ching app above and with using real tarot cards, that they are definitely real and astoundingly accurate. Some unseen power is definitely answering the questions and giving you readings. It's definitely not random at all. Many others will tell you the same too, if you do the research. But the best thing to do is try it yourself. That's the most convincing evidence there is, personal experience. Not just listening to others.

One of America's richest tycoons, JP Morgan, said: "Millionaires do not use astrology. Billionaires do." That's right. The elites and ruling class use this stuff too, and they aren't stupid. They are way smarter than you and have lots of secret knowledge that you don't, and are privy to a lot of secret info that you aren't aware of. They would not waste their time on something that isn't true or doesn't work. You can bet that. So if they use something, then you can bet your bottom that it is real and does work, at least for them. No atheist can explain that away. But the bottom line is, all this stuff does not fit into the atheist paradigm, so it must be changed and updated, not remain fixed and static.

Remember this quote from Shakespeare: "There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." It's true whether you like it or not. To remain static and refuse to update or revise your beliefs in accord with the evidence is dishonest and not the way of a truth seeker or scientific mind. A genuine truth seeker follows the data and evidence wherever it may lead. He doesn't try to force everything to fit into a small box, which is imbecilic and stupid.

Addendum:

In addition, there is a lot of unexplained phenomena out there that has proven to be real - such as compelling cases of reincarnation, near death experiences, astrology, numerology, the occult, etc that do NOT fit into the atheistic or materialistic paradigm. I could spend hours going over the evidence for all these phenomena that cannot be explained away or refuted by conventional explanations. (though Atheists can deny them) But we don't have time for that here. The point is, there is a lot of data out there that doesn't fit the Atheist paradigm (or Christian paradigm either) so both camps must UPDATE their beliefs and paradigms to fit the data. However, both Atheists and Christians refuse to update their paradigms and beliefs to fit the data. Because both camps are stubborn and closed minded and want to fit everything into an inflexible small box, instead of following the evidence like an open minded truth seeker does. They aren't interested in the truth, only in preserving their fixed beliefs, which all incoming data must be filtered through, and rejected if it doesn't fit their mental paradigms. In doing so, they falsely assume that the universe and all its mysteries fits squarely into their mental box.

Both camps are delusional and warped. One camp believes they have the infallible perfect literal word of God, and the other camp denies and despises all religion, divinity, spirituality, higher esoteric truth, metaphysical phenomena, etc with emotion, not logic, and doesn't care about any evidence to the contrary. Atheists will gladly admit when asked, that they hate God and religion and harbor a disdain for it, and refuse to acknowledge any truth or value in it. Thus revealing their heavy bias. Neither side is objective or neutral. Both have a strong bias that colors their perception. A true skeptic is skeptical of his own beliefs, and questions them too, not just of what he doesn't believe. Otherwise he cannot be a true skeptic. If you are only skeptical of what you don't believe in or agree with, then by that definition, everyone is a skeptic, because everyone is skeptical of what they don't believe in, hence the word loses its meaning. Thus neither side are true skeptics or truth seekers. Both are fundamentalists on opposite ends with heavily flawed circular beliefs and false assumptions. That's the problem with both camps.

Yet the media and academia seem to want us to choose between one of these two extreme camps. That's why universities hold many public debates between Christian fundamentalists and dogmatic Atheists, as though those are the only two belief systems to choose from, thus giving us a false dichotomy that tries to trick us into thinking that those are the only two belief systems to choose from. Only the most uneducated low IQ people will buy that. But sadly, that's what most people are, simple and gullible and unaware, because they've been bred to be simple and not think much and to believe whatever authority says and follow whatever is popular and to have a herd mentality. A highly conscious aware individual and truth seeker has got to move BEYOND such false dichotomies, since neither one fits all the data and evidence.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

Aron
Freshman Poster
Posts: 125
Joined: July 4th, 2018, 9:54 am

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Aron » July 31st, 2018, 10:53 pm

@Winston

All those films are 2 hours long but just seeing you mention Kent Hovind was a real shock. So i'm going to respond to that first. Kent Hovind is a con man. He believes in young earth creationism of all things which denies the fossil record, astronomy, and most of everything else.

The main argument you put in your post without linking to an external source that does the explaining for you, was that life must be designed to work:
Once you see them all, you will realize that life MUST have been intelligently DESIGNED top down, NOT bottom up. There's no way around it. You cannot put a bunch of chemicals or all the compounds of life into a test tub and from that form complex living cells or biological machines. Not in a billion years, a trillion years or all eternity. It can NEVER happen. The films above explains why in detail. The DNA of humans and all life on Earth is a complex computer code that contains ERROR CORRECTING codes in it as well. Everyone knows that error correcting codes can only be made by a programmer, they cannot form by random or natural forces. No way. Even the co-discoverer of DNA, Francis Cricke, said that DNA could not have evolved from evolution and random mutation alone. And Bill Gates, Microsoft Founder, said the DNA code is far more complex than any program Microsoft has ever developed. Biological organisms and living cells are essentially complex biological machines that require organization and design. We all know that machines require design, especially complex machines such as engines or computer hardware. They do not form by natural forces. So the computer code in DNA and the biological machines in our bodies and cells MUST be designed TOP DOWN, not bottom up. As we all know, half a plane cannot fly, and half a car cannot run. The design needs to be complete from the get go, or else it doesn't work. There's no way around it.
Life is complex and wasn't always as complex as it is now. A cell is much less complex than a human being. The growth in complexity can be totally explained by evolution. Obviously there are many failed evolutions and those species go extinct when they don't adapt. Most species in history went extinct. Error correction is a given, for life to adapt it has to fix its issues otherwise it would not survive. Computers are not life forms, they do not evolve or live naturally, they have to be created otherwise they wouldn't work. As for error correcting codes in DNA, it would make total sense for them to have evolved over time as well. Organisms with good adaptation survive and ones that don't, don't survive.
Furthermore, random mutations cannot add information to the genome or DNA of a species. Usually mutations damage or kill an organism. They are never beneficial. Richard Dawkins was asked once to give an example of a beneficial mutation and he could not think of anything. He was stumped. That video went viral on YouTube. It speaks volumes. Without beneficial mutations the whole theory of evolution collapses. Mutations can sometimes multiply pre-existing information, or remove it, but it never creates NEW information. That's one of the main achilles heels in evolution theory. There's no way around it. Without beneficial mutations, natural selection is useless. All it does it weed out weaker organisms from passing on their genes. It does not create new information in the genome or create new species or cause any species to evolve.
Since when can't new information be created with adaptation or mutation? Neuroplasticity has shown new information can occur even in someone's normal lifetime, they can make new neural connections obviously on having new ideas or simply becoming more intelligent through changes in their brain's connections as they learn more. it makes complete sense that DNA could change too. But what you conclude after this is the revealing part of your bias.
Therefore, you Atheists must ABANDON your Atheistic paradigm and UPDATE or REVISE it. Because it doesn't work and doesn't fit the data/evidence. For sure there is intelligent design. I'm not saying this proves any religion or God. All it proves is that there is intelligent design, and that a creator or creators must exist in some way. Therefore, Atheism and Scientism has lost this debate with their scam of Evolution and attempt to prove that no intelligent creators are necessary to explain life.
You are biased into believing there MUST be a God or gods responsible for the creation of life and the design of it from the top down. You can't just accept that maybe life in general AKA with the initial cells could have arisen out of non life. Just because you believe in paranormal events does not mean that all life must have been created by an omnipotent God somewhere. There could have been a state of the universe where maybe there were no organisms yet and consciousness/spiritual beings did not exist at that point, or consciousness needed organisms to exist to evolve into a state of processing anything. After all without independent existing beings there would be nobody who could do any thinking.

Religious people like Kent Hovind and others use the God of the Gaps fallacy where if science doesn't have a full explanation of something yet it MUST be that God did it. Where if scientists explain the full evolutionary history of earth, and the history of the universe, then God must have initiated the Big Bang according to religious people. The more science explains the more God of the Gaps fallacies are used, or in the case of Kent Hovind he just denies the evidence he doesn't like.

I am not saying there couldn't be anything 'supernatural' influencing evolution, but if there was it would ultimately just be a natural process we don't understand yet. The bottom line is you have said yourself that the idea of God would need to have an explanation of its origin anyways even if it was true, but even if they were created by others, somewhere along the line you have to explain the origin of life overall. Which just brings us back to the same issue, life had to arise independently at some point without a very complex being designing it, there's no way around it.

I watched some of one of the documentaries you linked, "Darwins Dillemma". They claim the Cambrian explosion is supposed to disprove evolution when its rapidity makes total sense. It might seem like a sudden acceleration for life to go from single celled bacteria for a very long time with very gradual evolution to an explosion of life but this is how evolution works, complexities build on each other and sometimes can explode exponentially like this when one change leads to a whole spur of other changes. Just like how scientific progress has increased exponentially over time as new innovations build the ground work for even more innovations with prior knowledge. They also have this idea that somehow all the 'body plans' of different species were preset at the cambrian explosion when this is simply untrue. Obviously the evolution from amphibians to land animals was a great change for many species, that certainly counts as macro evolution. But creationists ignore all the issues in their ideas.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » August 1st, 2018, 2:15 pm

@Aron
Some of those films are only one hour. Don't be lazy. Try to see all of them.

How is Kent Hovind a con man? He is not afraid to answer any question. He wins every debate. Richard Dawkins won't debate him because he will make him look like a fool. Every man that Hovind asks to produce evidence for evolution cannot find any. Even Michael Shermer could not produce any. See their debate on YouTube in front of a live audience. Hovind was at UC Berkely too. All the students lined up to debate him and lost and made fools out of themselves.

If you watch Hovind's seminar and debates, he debunks the fossil record. Also see the film "Is Genesis History" too.

http://www.isgenesishistory.com

The experts there explain a lot of things that the establishment hides from you that are obvious when you take the blinders off. And the experts explain why creation must be top down, NOT bottom up with clear easy to understand arguments.

How would error correcting codes be a result of evolution? Random chance does not produce error correcting codes.

If it did, then why would Bill Gates need to hire programmers to write code for windows? Why not let random forces or monkey typing randomly do it?

A cell is not simple. It contains hundreds of parts put together like a machine. It is top down design too. See the other documentaries please. Don't be lazy.

How many of Hovind's seminars or debates have you seen? He answers all your questions and points. He is the man. Don't be afraid to listen to him. Atheists may ridicule him. But that doesn't mean he is wrong. When you listen to him, you find out that he has answers to everything the atheists ask. He explains away the God of the gaps argument too. You sound like you've been brainwashed by Michael Shermer. Shermer was destroyed in debate. Go see it on YouTube and you will see.

Show me one scientific proof that mutations can add information to DNA genome. Just one please. Hovind is offering money if you can show it.

Btw, did you know that even bacteria has never been shown to evolve to other species of bacteria? So if bacteria cannot evolve through macroevolution, then how can entire organisms and species?

You are confusing theory with fact. There is zero proof for macroevolution. Show me an example of a transitional fossil that hasn't been debunked as a hoax.

Asking who made God doesn't change the fact that there has to be a first cause of the universe, since the universe had a beginning. The first cause argument is logically sound. Listen to William Lane Craig talk about it too. Also see the debates with Frank Turek. He also makes this first cause argument and has won many debates against Atheists.

I'm not an expert on this topic. Just watch the material I referred to you. No atheist can refute it.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » August 1st, 2018, 2:50 pm

@Aron,
Btw check out this interview with James Perloff on SGT Report about why evolution doesn't hold water. It's less than an hour so it won't take much time. It's very good and went viral. Perloff dismantles darwin evolution like a laser beam. Very razor sharp. He makes sense too and is super smart and super sharp. His research skills are superb and meticulous and accurate. He's definitely worth listening to. He has so much good info.



Also, if you don't want to pay to watch "Is Genesis History" then here is the torrent link to download it for free. It's very mind blowing and eye opening. The experts in it all sound very authentic, honest, intelligent and their points make a lot of sense. They take you to the Grand Canyon, out in the desert and in marine aquariums and marine habitats to show you why the archaeology and marine biology support creationism, and NOT evolution. It's really neat because they take you on a guided tour and show you everything in person almost. Don't dismiss it just because it's a Christian documentary. A good point and argument is still a good point and argument, regardless of who it comes from. The people in this documentary are very likable and personable too. And they sound very intelligent and aware. Not like fools or religious fanatics at all.

https://thepiratebay.org/torrent/179884 ... [[English]
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

Aron
Freshman Poster
Posts: 125
Joined: July 4th, 2018, 9:54 am

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Aron » August 2nd, 2018, 1:55 am

@Winston
Some of those films are only one hour. Don't be lazy. Try to see all of them.

How is Kent Hovind a con man? He is not afraid to answer any question. He wins every debate. Richard Dawkins won't debate him because he will make him look like a fool. Every man that Hovind asks to produce evidence for evolution cannot find any. Even Michael Shermer could not produce any. See their debate on YouTube in front of a live audience. Hovind was at UC Berkely too. All the students lined up to debate him and lost and made fools out of themselves.
I saw the Darwin's Dillemma documentary and you didn't respond to my point about it that the evolution from sea to land animals is obviously macro evolution and this film does nothing to deny this. The Cambrian Explosion happened in the sea with sea creatures. Obviously going from fish to amphibian to full blown land animal is macro evolution, that's undeniable. Same with going from the common ancestor of apes to bipedal humans. The film says the 'basic body plans' of all species appeared then but first of all that is wrong as i just showed you with fish to amphibians to land animals and the film ignores several key points. This 'Cambrian Explosion' is only an explosion in relative terms, of how rapid it was compared to the speed of evolution before. In real time, it took millions of years, and the 'basic body plans' would have taken many millions of years to emerge through Macro Evolution. For example the majority of those 'body plans' died out and went extinct. It is not the Christian God hitting a magic button and suddenly all the animals appear.

Kent Hovind is a convicted felon and obvious con man. No he does not win every debate. I do not believe some famous skeptics like Michael Shermer are 100% honest and truthful 100% of the time, as Michael Shermer has proven dishonest before with refusing to admit any evidence for anything paranormal. Or how Richard Wiseman admitted Psi is proven by any normal standard of evidence but insisted to have a higher one for Psi because of his bias. The fact is though that skeptics are more than accurate enough when it comes to seeing that the Young Earth Creationism Kent Hovind espouses is obviously wrong.

You're not giving me sources on Kent Hovind so i know which one to debunk. If you don't do that i will pick one at random I guess but then it may not be that one that convinced you, it'd be better if i found one of those so i can show you where you went wrong in believing him.

If you watch Hovind's seminar and debates, he debunks the fossil record. Also see the film "Is Genesis History" too.

http://www.isgenesishistory.com

The experts there explain a lot of things that the establishment hides from you that are obvious when you take the blinders off. And the experts explain why creation must be top down, NOT bottom up with clear easy to understand arguments.

How would error correcting codes be a result of evolution? Random chance does not produce error correcting codes.

If it did, then why would Bill Gates need to hire programmers to write code for windows? Why not let random forces or monkey typing randomly do it?

A cell is not simple. It contains hundreds of parts put together like a machine. It is top down design too. See the other documentaries please. Don't be lazy
Evolution is not just random chance. I personally am somewhat convinced by the Lamarckian view of evolution, that evolution is partly the inheritance of acquired characteristics, not just passing on of genes that were useful and adaptive. This would do much to explain how new information is acquired rather than saying it is just a 'random' mutation or the passing on of the most effective genes alone. Random mutation is the accepted evolutionary theory because the scientific paradigm denies that anything occurs for any reason but random chance, nothing can be directed because the mind is not supposed to exist.This also seems very consistent with what we know about paranormal phenomenon, the mind obviously exists and has influence on the world so it is very reasonable that it may have influence on the body and genetic structure too. It's definitely far better than the Christian view that just doesn't bother to explain anything other than saying God did it and not explaining the origins of God or how less complex things could ever grow more complex and more evolved over time. Or what God's power source is. Or a million other things.

In addition, I should mention that Rupert Sheldrake's theory of morphic resonance appears as if it may explain a good deal of evolution. For example, Recessive genes would seem rather difficult to have evolve in a populace with many dominant genes already that override this and even if it evolved in one animal or the mutation occcured with their offspring, that would quickly be gotten rid of through the dominant genes of the general species/race. As quite a few important genes in all sorts of animals everywhere are recessive, it would be very hard to explain how animals that required specific recessive traits to evolve did so without going back to the dominant gene immediately in the next generation due to the overall species all having the dominant genes. The Morphic Resonance theory of a broader mass mind connecting animals together could explain how changes in a few animals of a species/race are able to immediately affect many others and make it so many more offspring than normal could get the new gene. Also I do believe there is a known mechanism for how Morphic Resonance and the mass mind could work, specifically the magnetic field of the earth. The body's nervous system runs on bio-electric impulses, it makes sense that magnetic fields might connect different animals at long distance. This also fits the evidence produced by Michael Persinger's experiments that you have written about,where he proved that exposing two people to the same magnetic field can make them experience telepathy: viewtopic.php?t=12780

All the pieces seem to be there for this to be possible, as all animals in general are exposed to the magnetic field of the earth which may connect them, the only remaining piece is to discover if there is a mechanism through which bio-electric impulses in the nervous system may produce lasting changes to the genome. We already know that different thoughts can produce different brains through neuroplasticity but the missing link would be if the genome itself can be lastingly changed by magnetic fields or thoughts.

So in summary error correcting codes would just be the logical outcome of Lamarckian evolution as species try to fix issues that are making them less adaptive.
How many of Hovind's seminars or debates have you seen? He answers all your questions and points. He is the man. Don't be afraid to listen to him. Atheists may ridicule him. But that doesn't mean he is wrong. When you listen to him, you find out that he has answers to everything the atheists ask. He explains away the God of the gaps argument too. You sound like you've been brainwashed by Michael Shermer. Shermer was destroyed in debate. Go see it on YouTube and you will see.
I think i've seen a good number of them, but sure I will go watch the Michael Shermer debate which i don't think i've seen before. Since Hovind is a Young Earth Creationist I doubt Shermer will fall into most of the pitfalls he makes against actually honest advocates of paranormal proven phenomenon like NDES and so on
Show me one scientific proof that mutations can add information to DNA genome. Just one please. Hovind is offering money if you can show it.

Btw, did you know that even bacteria has never been shown to evolve to other species of bacteria? So if bacteria cannot evolve through macroevolution, then how can entire organisms and species?
Mutations can definitely add information to the genome. Although as I said the random mutations would usually not do that, it's still possible that a random mutation could occasionally do that, mutation changes the gene which by definition is adding new information into the genome.

I've never researched Bacterial Evolution before, I hope i don't have to know every facet of biology and evolutionary theory to convince you of the wrongness of Kent Hovind's ideas. You are not a Young Earth Creationist, or at least I hope so, so you should get that he is being biased and dishonest in saying 'Young Earth Creationism MUST be true no matter what!'.
You are confusing theory with fact. There is zero proof for macroevolution. Show me an example of a transitional fossil that hasn't been debunked as a hoax.

Asking who made God doesn't change the fact that there has to be a first cause of the universe, since the universe had a beginning. The first cause argument is logically sound. Listen to William Lane Craig talk about it too. Also see the debates with Frank Turek. He also makes this first cause argument and has won many debates against Atheists.

I'm not an expert on this topic. Just watch the material I referred to you. No atheist can refute it
You posted a video about the Cambrian explosion supposedly proving intelligent design, if it is true then by definition Macro Evolution is true as otherwise we would not have land animals, end of story, there is no other way we get them but macro evolution.
Edit:A Meme for you that shows this.
https://imgflip.com/i/2f8ux8

You probably are accepting the belief that God must have directed this Macro Evolution into land animals which i really do not agree with, evolution does not require a God to function.

The first cause argument doesn't mean that first cause has to be a God. That's the bias of Christians. Since with evolution we see that less complex things evolve into more complex it makes sense that the universe's beginning, if it had any, could have been rather uneventful, simply having spacetime begin to slowly expand.

I don't have infinite time to watch all the things you want at once. I will just start by watching that Michael Shermer vs Kent Hovind debate i guess.

As a side note, I do think Debates are a rather unproductive format of communicating ideas which is probably why they take so extraordinarily long, and have so many rules to prevent the 2 competitors stuck in an arguing mindset from interrupting each other and rejecting everything the other one says because they have determined from the beginning the other person is wrong. It's a flaw of the competitive culture in general thinking of everything as a fight someone must 'win' rather than taking communication more seriously as the open sharing of ideas to try to get to the truth. It also makes people in the audience think in an either/or way where one side must be 100% right and the other must be 100% wrong as they literally have to to vote on 'Who Won the Debate'. But i will obviously still watch the whole debate anyways and try to highlight the specific wrong things with what Kent Hovind says, since even though debates have flaws, he is still very very inaccurate and wrong in what he says.
Last edited by Aron on August 3rd, 2018, 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Aron
Freshman Poster
Posts: 125
Joined: July 4th, 2018, 9:54 am

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Aron » August 2nd, 2018, 9:15 am

@Winston

I've watched the debate and he goes back and forth between arguments. His first argument with the rebuttal is rather than focusing on the science focusing on the morality of atheism. The argument is that atheism cannot produce a morality and leads to issues. Which is partly true, but it doesn't change that plenty of atheists will be just fine morally, they do not need Religion which often produces far more issues than Atheism will. His main argument on science is that evolution cannot produce new information. What he doesn't understand is that the evidence Michael Shermer is presenting that evolution occured is solid even if he might doubt Michael Shermer's belief on what the mechanism might be for evolution. I do think that the materialist conception that evolution is only random mutations is not quite true as i explained in detail in the prior post to this one, but questioning the process doesn't make any of the evidence for evolution suddenly go away, or suddenly make Carbon Dating not exist anymore. Or suddenly change the speed of Light and make the endless evidence we have from astronomy go away, and show the universe to not be billions of years old.

Aron
Freshman Poster
Posts: 125
Joined: July 4th, 2018, 9:54 am

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Aron » August 3rd, 2018, 6:16 am

@Winston

I watched the SGTReport 'The Elite Don't Want You To Know God is Real' video you posted. 5 minutes in and this guy somehow does not realize that the Church and sunday school and so on is an obvious tool of state indoctrination of the public. What he does not get is that Christianity inculculates an obedient slave mentality where God is your master and you have to obey no matter what. Christians happen to sometimes be against the modern bullshit like Transgenderism that he mentions right at the start but he does not get that Christianity is all just compulsory indoctrination, as if kids getting brainwashed into obedience 5 days a week wasn't enough already.

These Christians believe in this False Dichotomy where everything is either a random accident or everything is all according to God's plan. Where Authoritarianism is associated with spirituality and independence is associated with materialism/nihilism. And despite being against 'The Elite' this guy just is still stuck in that same mentality of obedience, if not the Government then God, the society is set up so people always are believing that someone should be their master and they should be a slave in one way or another, never just true freedom.

Right after that he says that evolution is a problem because it goes against the Biblical account of creation. Well what do you expect from a book that teaches the earth is flat and everyone should offer human sacrifices to an omnipotent God....Obviously it's a contradiction because the Bible is not true...But he's still stuck in the dumb Christian sheep mentality, funny that conspiracy theorists are against people being sheep yet Christianity advocates just that. Maybe these people subconsciously realize Christianity is bullshit but can't break free of it and be honest with themselves.

The other guy then says that CERN is a modern day Tower of Babel. Well what is so wrong with the Tower of Babel? In the Bible people create the tower of babel to try to reach heaven. I do not see anything wrong with that, trying to make civilization better is a good thing. I'm pretty sure most conspiracy theorists who believe in the supernatural would agree that if we could reach 'heaven' by developing technology that allows us to observve and communicate with spirits in the afterlife planes, this would be a pretty good thing for society,allowing people to talk with their dead loved ones, or even plan out their reincarnations. God hates the Tower of Babel so he decides to f**k around and he makes them all speak separate languages. What an asshole. If CERN is used by the elite in some sort of conspiracies then it may be bad but this reference to the Tower of Babel just shows how indoctrinated the other guy on the show is.

He says the people trying to imitate the Tower of Babel are trying to 'be gods essentially'. Now if the Biblical story was true and the people constructing the tower wanted to be gods, what is so wrong with that? If the elite wants to be 'gods' by malevolent means like stealing from others or doing sacrifice rituals to take others energy then that is bad obviously, and parasitic, but the overall message that 'humans trying to be gods is bad' is just obviously showing the authoritarian indoctrination of the guy in the video. It's right there in the bible, it says that Adam and Eve are bad to learn good and evil and it would be very bad if they ate the fruit of life to become gods.

13 minutes in he makes a major error. He thinks that because people are convinced the bible is wrong with belief in evolution, suddenly they will now cheat lie steal or kill just because the 10 commandments say not to. This is a fallacy. These ideas are pretty obvious objectively, without having to listen to the Bible as an authority. All these things are just aggression on others that causes chaos and doesn't help anyone, often even the person doing the crimes.

15 minutes in they flash an image stating quantum physics proves an afterlife. What he probably does not realize is that the afterlife proven by quantum physics and NDEs is not compatible with the Christian one which debunks Christianity. He also seems to not know the scientific definition of a theory which is actually something well proven by evidence, hypotheses are more like a 'guess' but still testable.

17 minutes in is the long debunked Watchmaker argument. He just does what Christians always do in saying 'Godunit' as the explanation for everything which is simply not an explanation, not only does it not say where God comes from it does not even attempt to address the MECHANISM for how God is able to magically create life. Creationists simply cannot address this issue, never have, never will, they will never do so because to do so would be to realize how idiotic certain ideas are, like God being Omnipotent. Does he have infinite kinetic energy stored in his body? Where is it? And so on. These Creationists do not realize that first of all, the current state of a Cell wouldn't have been the original self replicating organism, for obvious reasons, it would have evolved from less complex things. For other obvious reasons we are not going to just locate the original organism/primordial version of DNA, it would be far too small and wouldn't have fossilized. Meanwhile the fallacy is always the same, 'If science hasn't answered it yet, 'GODDUNIT',' they NEVER try to produce evidence for a creator on their own. It's always the fallacy of 'I am always right unless you give zero scenarios where i could possibly be right, ever'. It's a double standard.

I already mentioned the issue of random mutations and how Lamarckian evolution seems like a far more coherent explanation of why evolution can create more ordered and efficient processes so i'll skip that.

27 minutes in he is just being willfully ignorant. First of all Amphibians themselves are an obvious intermediate species between land reptiles and fish but he is too biased to accept that possibility, he will not consider evidence here and takes as a dogma his statement that there are zero intermediate species. Fish becoming amphibians is a reality, we already have examples of fish with bones supporting the bottom fins that would allow them to develop into feet. He's being ignorant in not realizing that bacteria mutate all the time, he just assumes that evolution to a degree he calls Macro Evolution is not possible when evolution has been demonstrated countless times. Wolves evolution to all the different breeds of dogs is so obviously Macro Evolution to a degree that is a massive change, a Chihuaha is hugely different from a wild wolf, but he will not accept that because it would go against his bias.

Many variants of apes are good examples of being in between human and four legged animals. They can grab objects and walk on their front knuckles rather than using their front hands like feet. An obvious intermediate species compared to land mammals with feet that do not act like hands in any way with no opposable thumbs, no possible grabbing of objects.

At around 36 and a half minutes in he just assumes that blood clotting couldn't have evolved because you need every component of it. While just assuming that blood clotting could not have existed in a more primitive form that did not require as many steps and evolved over time to become more complicated.

38:30 "God endowed dogs with a rich gene pool"What was the MECHANISM through which God did this? Obviously he does not answer as he has no answers and does not plan to come up with any. He does not realize how obviously different many modern dogs are from wolves. It is macro-evolution, macro-evolution is not just changing how many legs an animal walks on. Chihahuas are midgets compared to wolves and while this may not be a very beneficial evolution if they existed in the wild it is nonetheless a very dramatic change.

42 minutes in he complains that evolution cannot be tested. But as Michael Shermer admitted in the debate with Kent Hovind, yes you can, if you found some ancient species fossilized right next to a human fossil in the same fossil layer then that would be good evidence against evolution, since it is supposed to be in a far lower level of sediment. But this does not happen.

Annnnd now that the whole video is over he NEVER tried to state any evidence proving God or showing exactly how God is supposed to influence the world. Of course he didn't. Since creationists and other religious people just do not have this evidence, even though sadly, they would find there is evidence for life after death if they did their research, just not their religious dogmas. Please do not miss this point when you respond Winston as it is really something that i have not seen any Creationist or other religious person do, they just do not believe in a mechanism for how an omnipotent God influences the world because deep down they know it is all bullshit and they are peddling lies. You seem to realize that a lot of religious people are just lying but you seem still convinced somehow that Evolution must be bullshit even if you don't think the 'Goddunit' line that Christians are indoctrinated into believing without going through a logical reasoning process.

Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 4757
Joined: April 28th, 2013, 3:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Moretorque » August 4th, 2018, 2:10 am

That is where the truth seekers such as Perloff hurt the movement, James is great until he starts his Christer stuff. Then he loses credibility as they all do.

Evolution is happening all around us, the Christers are just in denial about being an ape grafted with technology. No worry, all indicators as of late because of the mass extinction the dumb ape has triggered from being an overbearing bull in a fine China shop indicate the ape will be out of here shortly and evolution can then continue it's journey on the road too perfection!..... :D
Time to Hide!

Aron
Freshman Poster
Posts: 125
Joined: July 4th, 2018, 9:54 am

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Aron » August 4th, 2018, 5:07 am

@Moretorque
No worry, all indicators as of late because of the mass extinction the dumb ape has triggered from being an overbearing bull in a fine China shop indicate the ape will be out of here shortly and evolution can then continue it's journey on the road too perfection!..... :D
If humans get wiped out in a mass extinction, I doubt the planet would survive anyways. Enough species going extinct can destroy the whole biosphere like if all the plankton creating oxygen die. The lasting effects of humanity's actions don't magically disappear if humans die out, and with no humans left there would be nobody left to make any attempt to intervene in a runaway biosphere collapse. But so many 'truthers' are indoctrinated enough to believe that Socialism=Bad no matter what that they will not wake up and realize how idiotic modern really-existing capitalism is destroying the planet. Who is it that is really in power, giant corporations and the banks that rule them along with the masses via debt scams.It's obvious but the Capitalist-tards who are often also Christ-tards will not see it. This is what leads to Trump having many of his pretty ridiculous policies, like completely shutting down research on global warming and appointing the head of Exxon to be the secretary of state. Someone who obviously will not consider the environment much and instead promote drilling the arctic or something similarily stupid. But because of Capitalist logic we must continue drilling in all sorts of environmentally dangerous ways to maintain cyclical consumption of Gasoline so the oil companies stay in business, if consumers had efficient electric cars en masse all they would need is to get electricity from the grid. Then if you set up a renewable energy infrastructure including being renewable enough to power both the energy needs of the public and the mining of the materials needed for the solar panels/geothermal plants/etc, nobody has to pay for their energy anymore. You can also make this much better if you get efficient mass transport like mag rail but that would be bad for business so it doesn't happen in America, the public transportation remains as shitty as ever.

Also, if humans die out suddenly for whatever reason, or even if civilization is totally crippled for a few weeks and unable to get the water trucks moving to cool down the nuclear plants, it is pretty much guaranteed we get planetary extinction as nobody would be able to cool down the nuclear plants that would then melt down en masse and destroy literally all life on earth with no survivors. Fukushima was already bad and that was just 1. Imagine 100+.

I don't get why Christians think it is so bad that humans evolved. Big deal. It's an improvement from being an ape for sure. Their main reaction is against materialism which they do not realize is disproven but not because their religion is true. They're just too scared of being wrong because they think that would mean a meaningless universe. But even if it actually did it just means they would be too scared to face the truth anyways or examine evidence contrary to their beliefs. Christianity actually teaches them in the Bible that they will not exist after death unless resurrected from the grave a long time later by Jesus, which is why nowadays Christians have edited their religion to tell them that they can go to Heaven after death rather than just sticking with what the Bible says as certain fundamentalists like the Jehovah's Witnesses do.

User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
Posts: 27581
Joined: August 18th, 2007, 2:16 pm
Contact:

Re: The Problems With Atheists and Atheism

Post by Winston » August 5th, 2018, 5:59 pm

@Aron
The video "Darwin's Dilemma" did not acknowledge that macroevolution exists or that it happened. You misunderstood it. It merely presented the official Darwininan theory and then debunked it. Also it didn't just talk about the Cambrian Explosion. It talked about a lot of other stuff that debunks Darwinism. Are you sure you watched the whole video? You seem to not have understood it, even though it was all explained in layman's terms.

You keep stating that macroevolution happened, but you haven't offered any evidence for it at all. Dude, saying something doesn't make it so. You keep providing words, not evidence. Can you provide any proven examples of a transitional fossils or species? Not ones that have been debunked as hoaxes of course.

Yeah Kent Hovind was arrested for tax fraud. But what did you expect? He was killing evolutionists in debate and changing the minds of many Americans about evolution. Thus he was a threat to the establishment. When you are a threat to the system that wants to promote atheism and amorality, they usually find a reason to lock you up, such as look for problems on your tax returns, or even making up stuff, anything they can use against you. What do you expect? That's how government and power works.

Yes Hovind defeated everyone in debate. Show me one debate where he lost. Just one. He destroyed a lot of students at UC Berkeley for example. No one could provide any real evidence of macroevolution, only microevolution.

I'm glad you acknowledge that Michael Shermer is not honest. That's obvious. Anyone who sides with the establishment 100 percent of the time, even when they are obviously lying, is a propagandist with an agenda. He is probably paid to defend whatever the establishment wants or debunk whatever they want. He is definitely not a truth seeker or unbiased researcher. If you listen to him he sounds like a paid propagandist. He will defend a government lie even when it's obvious to everyone. He even denies the JFK assassination or 9/11 conspiracy.

If you don't have time to watch of all of Kent Hovind's debates and lectures, just watch the one entitled "100 reasons why evolution is stupid by Kent Hovind". That one covers pretty much all his points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM

You said you don't have infinite time to watch all the videos I suggested. Well dude, lol. I don't have infinite time to respond to so many points here either, especially in this hot sticky weather which makes it hard to think, type or concentrate. lol

There are some threads about evolution in the forum, where I posted a lot of info debunking evolution. See here:

viewtopic.php?t=9150

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25645

viewtopic.php?t=11549

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=22057

viewtopic.php?f=28&t=8625

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3913

Btw, you might like this new theory of evolution called Evolution 2.0.

Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!

Join my Ukrainian/Russian Women Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Religion and Spirituality”