You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Nonsense of Atheists
- Thread starter RenaissanceMan
- Start date
yeah i think darwinism and buddhism have about the same credibility.
what makes any theory or teaching a religion is the egotistical and emotional attachment that a person has in regards to it. atheists imo are just as attached to their beliefs as religious people.
what makes any theory or teaching a religion is the egotistical and emotional attachment that a person has in regards to it. atheists imo are just as attached to their beliefs as religious people.
yeah i think darwinism and buddhism have about the same credibility.
what makes any theory or teaching a religion is the egotistical and emotional attachment that a person has in regards to it. atheists imo are just as attached to their beliefs as religious people.
Wrong again Lori. Atheists have no belief, it's a lack of belief, completely different. :shrug:
Buddhism is NOT a scientific theory
Darwin's Theory of Evolution IS a scientific theory.
They really can't be compared in the same manner.
Wrong again Lori. Atheists have no belief, it's a lack of belief, completely different. :shrug:
Buddhism is NOT a scientific theory
Darwin's Theory of Evolution IS a scientific theory.
They really can't be compared in the same manner.
there's no scientific proof of either of them (origin of the species or reincarnation), and yet some believe it anyway. i would compare them in that manner. actually, i would argue there's more evidence supporting reincarnation than there is origin of the species.
there is evidence of evolution though. the theory may not be totally perfect but this jist of it technically is true especially regarding adaptation and mutation.
but there is absolutely no evidence for the origin of species, which is the theory i'm referring to. and since we have statistically deemed our fossil record to be relatively complete, odd's are there's never going to be evidence to support it.
there's no scientific proof of either of them (origin of the species or reincarnation), and yet some believe it anyway. i would compare them in that manner. actually, i would argue there's more evidence supporting reincarnation than there is origin of the species.
:shrug: Sorry you are simply wrong on this as far as The Theory of Evolution goes, but also wrt Buddhism as not all Buddhist's believe in reincarnation.
I'd love to see your PROOF of reincarnation.
So angry. So hateful. So condescending.
Yes, your OP exhibits all those characteristics. Well done!
It's about ideas, and discussion, and reality.
Funny how atheists have a tendency to show believers reality through ideas and discussion attempting to demonstrate that the invisible and undetectable are exactly what they are defined to be, yet believers consider this as being angry, hateful, condescending, etc...
Further to that, the believer will consider the presenting of reality as some sort of belief system conjured up by atheists to promote an agenda, all the while embracing their fantasies of magical kingdoms and super beings, whirling dervishes surrounding us and using us as if we're just puppets on a string. This is supposed to be reality according to the believer.
Strangely enough, the believer will call an apple and apple, an orange an orange and a banana a banana, with sanity, reason and rationale intact. Yet, they will state quite emphatically that gods and demons rule our universe, leaving sanity, reason and rationale being tossed right out the window.
Where does this demarcation of their worldview diminish into the abyss of stark delusion?
but there is absolutely no evidence for the origin of species...
I see no reason to debate a topic of understanding with one who has only read the title of a book that reveals such an understanding.
but there is absolutely no evidence for the origin of species, which is the theory i'm referring to.
actually there is more evidence for that based on a lot of varying information which support it.
it is just way more realistic than anything else. either way, mutation is real.
actually there is more evidence for that based on a lot of varying information which support it.
it is just way more realistic than anything else. either way, mutation is real.
oh well, that sounded real scientific. lol. evidence like what?
i bet if darwin were alive today he would laugh at you.
I see no reason to debate a topic of understanding with one who has only read the title of a book that reveals such an understanding.
i understand that there is no evidence to support it. it's a theory, and for all we know, it's incorrect.
you want to explain the cambrian explosion? go right ahead...
:shrug: Sorry you are simply wrong on this as far as The Theory of Evolution goes, but also wrt Buddhism as not all Buddhist's believe in reincarnation.
I'd love to see your PROOF of reincarnation.
it's not proof; it's evidence. there have been people who have recollected things that they really have no way of knowing...stuff like that.
and i'm not talking about evolution. any moron who observes even just a couple of generations can see evolution. i'm talking about the origin of species. there's no connection there.
it's not proof; it's evidence. there have been people who have recollected things that they really have no way of knowing...stuff like that.
and i'm not talking about evolution. any moron who observes even just a couple of generations can see evolution. i'm talking about the origin of species. there's no connection there.
I said proof, your opinions and belief don't matter one whit, unless it can be proven scientifically.
Sorry Lori, speciation has been verified in the lab.
But with athiesm your still in a paradox regardless of how much "evidence" you think you have to support your theory on origin. Athiests.... do you believe existance is limited to our focal point of perspective?? Maybe were all an subjective expression of collective consiousness and god is everything including ourselves.
religionists have been given too much leeway, it's quite a shame actually. they are a very good at survival, that's for sure.
we are supposed to believe that somehow humans just always were and maybe some god just "poof" magically made it happen and there is no mutation, no evolution or no speciation. this is all so that religionists can believe they are special.
somehow, in the minds of theists, this is somehow much less laughable and much more realistic. somehow even darwin would laugh at atheists to boot. derp..derp..
they say they have 'evidence' of reincarnation based on people's personal accountings or stories but somehow it's "not" evidence observing dna, mutation, adaptation or speciation.
why would anyone have to respect not just bad reasoning but reasoning indicative of a mental wiring that is bent to err on the side of the most absurd veering into dishonesty.
we are supposed to believe that somehow humans just always were and maybe some god just "poof" magically made it happen and there is no mutation, no evolution or no speciation. this is all so that religionists can believe they are special.
somehow, in the minds of theists, this is somehow much less laughable and much more realistic. somehow even darwin would laugh at atheists to boot. derp..derp..
they say they have 'evidence' of reincarnation based on people's personal accountings or stories but somehow it's "not" evidence observing dna, mutation, adaptation or speciation.
why would anyone have to respect not just bad reasoning but reasoning indicative of a mental wiring that is bent to err on the side of the most absurd veering into dishonesty.
Really? No connection?and i'm not talking about evolution. any moron who observes even just a couple of generations can see evolution. i'm talking about the origin of species. there's no connection there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species
this is the real truth. religionists are basically parasites. they can live easily with their beliefs while the scientists do the real work in making life livable for them all the while citing that it's god at the helm the whole time. even though their reasoning process would fight against any progress, once it happens they will give credit to god and incorporate it into their beliefs, restructuring and keep on trucking. notice if they think for even a split second that there could be any possible loopholes to exploit in any reasonable theories, they will revert to their religious beliefs and reshow their true colors. they only 'adapt' as a "show and dance."
to theists, atheists and scientists are their "bitch" so to speak.
i think their religious arguments deserve to be shred to pieces and though they may deserve some respect, it's bare minimum such as religious tolerance among themselves. i don't think their arguments deserve an iota of respect outside of it.
to theists, atheists and scientists are their "bitch" so to speak.
i think their religious arguments deserve to be shred to pieces and though they may deserve some respect, it's bare minimum such as religious tolerance among themselves. i don't think their arguments deserve an iota of respect outside of it.
i understand that there is no evidence to support it.
No, you don't understand it, that's the point. You haven't a clue what evolution is about and only look the complete fool when you make such comments.
No, you don't understand it, that's the point. You haven't a clue what evolution is about and only look the complete fool when you make such comments.
oh, don't forget though, there is "evidence" to support reincarnation but not evolution. oh, it was not about 'evolution' but about 'origin of species', like there is a difference. heh.