Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 3/29/09 11:33 AM, Pugberto wrote: Yes exactly that, he has been documented in the Bible but remember that was the earliest form of documentation. We didn't have people studying the Earth that time ago. Many people most likely wrote of him but paper doesn't last forever.

Ancient writing on paper is not evident itself. You have also stated these have been changed.

Show me in ANY definition which says exactly this. To save you the leg work, you wont find it. Atheism is a lack of belief or disbelief in God. It makes no claims about the creation of life.

It is the general belief that Atheists have on the creation of the universe. It was comparison of those beliefs compared to the beliefs of Christianity.

WRONG! If an Atheist thinks the universe was made from a fart and another thinks the universe was made from evil tomato's, they'll still be Atheists either way.

However, if you're talking to me then I would answer Abiogenesis. It has more study and research behind it than any sort of deity.

Think to yourself the odds of you existing from the creation of the universe to this point in time. You'd realise how improbable it is. Say it's a one in a billion chance that we were here, then we are that one but the likely hood of that one is extremely low.

The point I was making is that if view both in a nutshell their improbable and both without hard evidence. Neither of us are greater than the other.

Once again, probability fallacy.

If that were the case then please show me a study claiming Atheists are more likely to commit suicide.

Ok here

Conservapedia?

Look what else I found on your 'unbias' website

People's purpose and worth are diverse and subjective regardless of belief.

Yes that is correct.

Then therefore it's illogical to assume Atheists have no purpose purely because they're Atheist.

If that were true, then you would have overwhelming evidence to show we were designed.

If you have it, then feel free to share. If you do not, then your claim is no more valid than those who think the earth is flat or the moon doesn't exist.

Find an animal on this planet that is able to think, talk and feel emotions like us.

Every creature has their own social structure and method of communication.

There are none. Evolution doesn't seek intelligence, it seeks survival so why would we evolve a brain if monkeys are surviving just fine in the wild?

Because it suited our environment. Using your logic all primates would be identical.

Evolution isn't only about survival, don't be so vague.

Now let's look at DNA. All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billions of these letters in every human cell.

Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.

One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

If we were designed why would we have genes for making tails? Why do we have junk DNA?

We evolved into what we are by an ever changing genome. It never remains the same.

Oh just to let you know. Our genome is nothing like a computer program. We're biological, that is inanimate.

You seem to be flirting ever so close to the "if we don't know it's cause, then God did it" Yet history has shown every other thing which was unknown and is now known has had a natural explanation to it. I wouldn't be surprised if you lived 500 years ago and said the same thing about grass.

Bad word: Faith. Unproven trust or acceptance.

I do not offer faith because I demand evidence for it. If I am to accept God, then I need to KNOW he is there instead of offering faith.

If you offer faith then you will know.

Knowledge doesn't arise from faith. Knowledge arises from evidence. Your God is lacking it.

---

At 3/29/09 02:19 PM, SimonIndigo wrote: If I was going to believe in a higher power, I would be forced to come to the conclusion that he was either evil or dead. I know about free-will and everything, but if my children were going around killing each other for no good reason I would step in and put them in time out.

Technically, wouldn't Hell and/or Purgatory be God's version of time out?

---

At 3/28/09 08:06 PM, SimonIndigo wrote:

At 3/28/09 07:16 PM, Ericho wrote: I have an idea. How about secularists respect religion if religious people agree to respect them?

A total impossibility. While it is possible for religion and secular views to co-exist, there will never be 100 percent respect between both parties.

I'm trying to be optimistic. I'm just saying it would be nice if we could all learn to act like that. Then there would truly be no bias.

---

Only a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, not even 10%.

---

At 3/29/09 06:32 PM, bgraybr wrote: Only a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, not even 10%.

I love that you used the number 10. I mean, fuck, if it was just 1%, then that would still be a awful lot. I mean, 1% would mean that 1 out of 100 Muslims are terrorists. Holy fuck I wouldn't want to live in a Muslim community if that was true. The odds of there being a terrorist close to me at all times would be really great.

But don't worry, it's only a small percentage, it's not even 10%. ;)

---

At 3/29/09 03:15 PM, dySWN wrote:

At 3/29/09 02:19 PM, SimonIndigo wrote: If I was going to believe in a higher power, I would be forced to come to the conclusion that he was either evil or dead. I know about free-will and everything, but if my children were going around killing each other for no good reason I would step in and put them in time out.

Technically, wouldn't Hell and/or Purgatory be God's version of time out?

Naa. Hell's not time out. That's eternal damnation. That's if I caught my son stealing a cookie out of the jar and I threw him in a tub filled with gasoline and lit him on fire.

Purgatory is sorta time out. Still not completely though.

But either way, you don't your children like that for a mistake you made. It's like if you create a pudding that tastes like shit, do you blame the pudding for being so fucking gross it made you puke? No, you blame your shitty cooking and make a better pudding.

---

At 3/29/09 06:32 PM, bgraybr wrote: Only a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, not even 10%.

I love this notion that if a Muslim doesn't want to blow himself up then it's all good.

And seriously, 10% is fucking massive.

---

At 3/30/09 01:43 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 3/29/09 06:32 PM, bgraybr wrote: Only a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, not even 10%.

I love this notion that if a Muslim doesn't want to blow himself up then it's all good.

And seriously, 10% is fucking massive.

10% may even be right. The Taliban or Al-Qaidea (no idea how it's spelled :P ) have lots of members, who might blow themselves up.

---

At 3/29/09 03:06 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 3/29/09 11:33 AM, Pugberto wrote:

Ancient writing on paper is not evident itself. You have also stated these have been changed.

::

....(laughs)

Your own entire way of belief is based entirely on writings and similar things that were passed on so your beliefs are no different as far as evidence goes because you can't use science to describe what science is n you can't prove science in any exact way you may want people to think, so poo poo to you, no talking out your ass.

---

At 3/29/09 02:19 PM, SimonIndigo wrote:

This is alot less than famous, its actually an old broken scape goat for retards who don't want to face the music n I'll demonstrate how each one of these can be shuffled off.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Yes he is more than willing to eliminate all evil and much more than able.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Well I just said he's most likely both more willing and able than yourself.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Well if you had an open mind n actually asked or looked then you would probably have heard the stroy of Adam and Eve n I'm not going to get into the details but thats where evil came from, it came from our choice to not love and obey our creator n that is why we don't deserve to be saved from anything including ourselves or eachother.

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Well he is willing and able, a good question to ask is "why doesn't God destroy evil?"
A good answer in my opinion is that we ourselves are pretty much made of evil because we do some pretty bad things, so if God were to destroy all evil then we would go "bye bye", but obviously god loves us so much that he is willing to give us many many chances to apologize for our sins n ask for forgivness.... pretty easy to understand i think.

---

Or it's because positive energy can't exist without negative energy. Those are different from good and evil though.

Basically anyone who thinks you can have the good without the bad is plain retarded philosophically, scientifically, and spiritually.

---

At 3/30/09 05:53 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote:

At 3/29/09 03:06 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 3/29/09 11:33 AM, Pugberto wrote:

Ancient writing on paper is not evident itself. You have also stated these have been changed.

....(laughs)

Your own entire way of belief is based entirely on writings and similar things that were passed on so your beliefs are no different as far as evidence goes because you can't use science to describe what science is n you can't prove science in any exact way you may want people to think, so poo poo to you, no talking out your ass.

Yes, both ways of belief have been written down on paper. But religion was written by men who did no research and just wrote down what "God revealed to them". Science on the other hand, has actually been researched. What is written down is the result of conclusions made by lengthy observations. And guess what? We're still studying, making new dicoveries and observations. While religion clings to idolatry and scripts that are thousands of years old, written at a point in history when religion was the only way man had to understand his world.

---

At 3/29/09 06:32 PM, bgraybr wrote: Only a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, not even 10%.

Far far smaller than that. Some have estimated it to be a ratio of 1 to 80,000. That being terrorist Muslims to simply Muslims.

---

At 3/29/09 12:22 PM, Patton3 wrote:

At 3/28/09 06:12 AM, Pugberto wrote: Islam is very much a violent religion where as Christianity is a religion of peace and love. Sure Islam has peace and love but for a religion that says "Kill those who try to leave" or "Kill all non-Muslim's" is not a peaceful religion.

Christianity is the most hipocritical religion out there, Catholicism in particular. Besides, if you read the Quran, it says a fateful Muslim should defend their religion, it doesn't exactly condone some of the bullshit a very small minority choose to do. I fyou would actually care to read the Quran, go
here.

;;;;
Your both wrong.
All monotheistic Religions right now are based on a God that is one evil bastard in my opinion.
If god is so loving and so great , he would never have allowed hell to exist.
No religious writing that puts forward the idea of killing anyone for any reason can truely be deemed a "peaceful religion" , simply by the fact that proof exists that in the writings of these religions, they call for the deaths & harm to others.
That's all the proof I need that your religons is fucked up dude ! Don't matter which one you pick !
That Christianity, Judaism, & Muslim religions (in alaphabetical order) have spent most of their historical careers in conflict & competition with each other, that they have come from the same geographical area & are all based on earlier religious beliefs of this area . Shows that none of them have anything to do with God ...but are simply system of controling peoples to the whims of those who lead the various factions, with God as the all powerful who gives them the right to lord it over you. ---BUT that can only be done if your stupid enough to allow them that power over you---

An omniputent power has nothing to do with any of them. That each seeks to be the ultimate authority over mankind is the real reason of their existence & stupidity on the part of most people who are a part of these religious groups, is why we have the troubles in the past & right up until today & why it will continue into the future .

There is no such thing as good or bad when it comes to a religion, that promotes any type of violence on anyone whether a member of said religion or not. Any of you who believe differently are only fooling yourselves & or allowing your religious leaders to fool you.

Wake up, throw away your wool coat, your not sheep & you really need to open your eyes and see what these religions have done in the past thats wrong, & look at what's going on today to see just how wrong they are.
Palestinians killing Jews over land they have both occupied for thousands of years yet neither recognises the rights of the other.
A pope who only a week or so ago comes out against condems ,as being no good in the fight against Aids. Can't any of you see how out of touch this guy is with reality?!
Muslim extemeists killing , Jews ,Christians, & fellow Muslim's... If you are incapable of recognizing this as a major reason to totally disreguard a religion as if its something that's 'Good', you really need professional help.

---

You realize of course, morefngbs, that I'm atheist, and was pointing out that most Muslims and even the Qaran itself don't condone suicide bombings which mostly just kill civilians...Right?

---

At 3/30/09 12:43 PM, morefngdbs wrote: Your both wrong.
All monotheistic Religions right now are based on a God that is one evil bastard in my opinion.

The God of Christianity is the father of Jesus who was the greatest role model ever, so he can't be thatbad. Look at the positives.

---

At 3/30/09 12:49 PM, Patton3 wrote: You realize of course, morefngbs, that I'm atheist, and was pointing out that most Muslims and even the Qaran itself don't condone suicide bombings

;;;;
My comment wasn't about your belief's ,it wasn't about GOD & shouldn't be used as if i was talking about GOD. It was about the BIG 3 Monotheistic religious groups & their so called sacred books/scrolls & how any religion with ABSOLUTELY any mention in them about HARMING anyone, proves my point that they can never be confused with being 'good' or being 'holy' because as soon as you put punitive punishment down as being somehow reasonable ...even if it was hundred's or thousands of years ago. You have the idea that harming another human can somehow be right, in the tenants of your religions belief.

Ericho , Jesus as written about in the fabricated stories of the bible are just that fabrications. Stories of fiction with no actual sources to prove any of it, except the bible itself. Doesn't mean Jesus didn't exist, doesn't mean he was, good or bad or even indifferent, just means that all there is for actual evidence is heresay...& that's not admissable in any Court of Law, & is what drives such debates between Atheists & Christians & is why Jesus is mentioned in the Koran as just another one of many prophets/teachers.
Remember the Koran wasn't written until after Mohammed died & he supposedly was given instruction for it by god for 23 years....But no one bothered to write anything down & actually share it until around 650AD( well after his death) give or take a half dozen years ( I remember reading how a large portion of supposed Muhammad writings were eaten by a goat ! )That's the way to take care of documents , that are supposedly the direct words to mohammad from God -LMAO- they were really important to everyone back then 'eh .

Want as good a role model as Jesus, how about Bill Cosby, & that T.V. show he did. Right up there on par with Jesus & we all know Bill didn't go around attempting to get the population riled up against the Romans/(American) Government, he never desecrated Jewish places of worship .

While I myself am a big fan of several Fiction writers like Robert Jordan, RA Salvador, Raymond Feist are a couple right off the top of my head...I at least am capable of telling fiction/fantasy from what is supposedly Truth. The religious writings of those Monolithic religious groups is fiction with large doses of fantasy, and if you actually take the time to research/look into comparisons of these religions & religions of the same area but of a earlier time the similarities are too overwheming to disreguard.

---

At 3/30/09 06:06 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote:

At 3/29/09 02:19 PM, SimonIndigo wrote:

This is alot less than famous, its actually an old broken scape goat for retards who don't want to face the music n I'll demonstrate how each one of these can be shuffled off.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Yes he is more than willing to eliminate all evil and much more than able.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Well I just said he's most likely both more willing and able than yourself.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Well if you had an open mind n actually asked or looked then you would probably have heard the stroy of Adam and Eve n I'm not going to get into the details but thats where evil came from, it came from our choice to not love and obey our creator n that is why we don't deserve to be saved from anything including ourselves or eachother.

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Well he is willing and able, a good question to ask is "why doesn't God destroy evil?"
A good answer in my opinion is that we ourselves are pretty much made of evil because we do some pretty bad things, so if God were to destroy all evil then we would go "bye bye", but obviously god loves us so much that he is willing to give us many many chances to apologize for our sins n ask for forgivness.... pretty easy to understand i think.

Alright, this is SimonIndigo, but on his main. I figured I should comment back and clear some shit up for you.

You are the kind of person who probably believes in original sin. I am not. I am not an evil person. There are evil people in this world - why should they be allowed to exist?

And don't talk about the bible around me. I've read that shit. The only cool part is the passage about the bastard commanding bears to maul some kids because they called him bald.

I was raised Christian, I know all about their beliefs. Adam and Eve don't mean shit. Why should they be punished for the trickery of the serpent? They shouldn't. It was his fault. He should have gotten punished. I know they took his legs off, but damn.

And you didn't answer any of the questions. Why wouldn't he help? He helped before. He's sent down shit to smite people. How come that shit doesn't happen now? It's because he's either dead, or doesn't exist. Or doesn't care. Most likely he doesn't exist, though. All of the shit in the Bible that obviously isn't made up bullshit can be figured out by modern science.

---

At 3/30/09 05:53 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: Your own entire way of belief is based entirely on writings and similar things that were passed on so your beliefs are no different as far as evidence goes because you can't use science to describe what science is n you can't prove science in any exact way you may want people to think, so poo poo to you, no talking out your ass.

Can't prove science? What dipship school did you drop out of? See? I can be as much of a dickhead as you.

Science is a METHOD of gaining knowledge.

Your computer: Science
Your hospitals: Science
Your Television: Science
Your clean running water: Science

Oh look, Science has given you the luxuries you take for granted. I find it funny how you talk about your brother and yet it was SCIENCE done by the SAME scientists that support evolution which kept him alive.

You only support science when it benefits you. Stop biting the hand that feeds you.

---

At 3/30/09 07:22 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 3/30/09 05:53 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: Your own entire way of belief is based entirely on writings and similar things that were passed on so your beliefs are no different as far as evidence goes because you can't use science to describe what science is n you can't prove science in any exact way you may want people to think, so poo poo to you, no talking out your ass.

Can't prove science? What dipship school did you drop out of? See? I can be as much of a dickhead as you.

Science is a METHOD of gaining knowledge.

Your computer: Science
Your hospitals: Science
Your Television: Science
Your clean running water: Science

Oh look, Science has given you the luxuries you take for granted. I find it funny how you talk about your brother and yet it was SCIENCE done by the SAME scientists that support evolution which kept him alive.

You only support science when it benefits you. Stop biting the hand that feeds you.

Seriously, man. People don't understand that shit. Everything you know and love in this world came from science. Everything, man. You can't disregard it, because science holds grudges.

And science will rape you.

---

At 3/30/09 07:22 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Can't prove science? What dipship school did you drop out of? See? I can be as much of a dickhead as you.

No not really, you cant define Science using Science and you can't even prove that Science is anything more than a pigmant of the imagination which it is, what you say science tells you about one thing may be completely different to another, n they could be using the exact same science you're using, just like people try n justify horrible crimes in the name of science, you may not agree with them since science is broken down n modified by every individual n they make their own determination of what science is since obviously you cannot describe what science really is, so then you have on one hand people conducting cruel n inhuman experiments on people cuz they think it will benifit everyone on their side, n on the other you have people working alongside nature trying to make the world a better place for everyone n not doing any unnecessarry actions.

Science is a METHOD of gaining knowledge.

So that is what you believe science to be? ok, well I'm sure other people would give a pretty different description such as "science is what we make it" "science is how things are" "science is an organized system of ignorance" "science is cause and effect n nothing more" blah blah blah.

Your computer: Science

Well how do you think my computer got here, it was created, do I doubt it was created, fuck no.
Science has never created anything dude, its as if you're implying that science is some sort of being or physically manafested voice of reason, sorry dude but banging a couple things together n seeing what happens isn't very scientific to me.

Your hospitals: Science

Actually hosptials were made to help people n they've been around for a very long time, not in the big fancy way they are today but people had hearts n they wanted to help people who were sick n wounded, thats pretty much the thing that inspired them, after that science may have come along but I'm not quite sure mixing a bunch of plants n maybe bits of animals together to make medicine n other things are very scientific.

Your Television: Science

Again, banging two or more things together n seeing what happens isn't very scientific, an animal can do that n we're not animals are we?

Your clean running water: Science

No, i dont think so, clean running water was the result os people getting tierd of having dirty ass water n drinking out of wells that can easily be polluted, so in a way you could "say" its scientific since you start with a problem n you try to fix it, theres really nothing to it.

Oh look, Science has given you the luxuries you take for granted. I find it funny how you talk about your brother and yet it was SCIENCE done by the SAME scientists that support evolution which kept him alive.

Again the things that inspired people to make things that help people was not science, somone didn't just stuff plants down a sick person's throat n demand something in return wether it helped them or not, I was tempted to just delete this part n not comment to it but it seems you're worse than I thought. My brother was officially dead for a while and as far as I've heard it wasn't the doctors or scientists who saved him, they were ready to give up, and excuse me but I don't believe that evolution has anything to do with respect to religion unless you're ready to admit that evolution is one, moving on.

You only support science when it benefits you. Stop biting the hand that feeds you.

You speak as if you're somehow better than I, (no you don't really speak, ur typing but you know what I mean)
As if people "owe" something to your own interpretation of "science" that you seem to love so much, again you speak as if science is a living thing that created us n can punish or reward us....do I sense a belief in a God...?

Well if you aren't leaning towards that point then I'd suppose you're implying that you are a follower of a better religion n that the reawards from the people who created it are much better than any other.

Also, who would support science if it didn't benifit them? You sure as shit wouldn't, you come up with this bullshit "oh yeah I'm more evolved cuz I believe in evolution!"
Well let me get this straight, lets say some scientists in Russia discovered that everyone in America or wherever you live is infected with a flawed strain of DNA that may weaken everyone else, n they started killing each n every person with the self justification that they were doing the right thing in the name of science n the protection n benefit of themselves n not you, you would still support that without another word? or would raise question that what they had discovered may have been a lie or misunderstanding er miscalculation?

Dude I really hope you read all of this cuz if you really believe the shit that has been pumped into your brain, you may not be around much longer, n I say that with your well being in mind, not threatening or insulting, I'm serious, you'll probably commit suicide within a few years if you're at all serious about what you just wrote.

---

At 3/30/09 09:50 AM, JackPhantasm wrote: Or it's because positive energy can't exist without negative energy. Those are different from good and evil though.

How...the fuck....would you know? What is positive energy created negative energy or vice versa, you can't be sure about a damn thing.

Basically anyone who thinks you can have the good without the bad is plain retarded philosophically, scientifically, and spiritually.

OMG Please explain that, I fucking dare you, explain what you mean by that.

But before you do, read this.

Lets say there are good people and bad people, both are either pure good or pure evil, you still have good n bad just within two seperate beings, human on the other hand have both good n bad in them, that means there should be a pure form of both, and if you even believe in good n evil them you really have to admit that there is a creator to this whole cycle er battle, maybe the cause of evil was free will n thats why we humans have both good n evil in us cuz we have choose to do good or bad huh?
So maybe when we die we'll either become pure good or pure evil, you can't say that can't happen because you simply don't know n you'll only know when its your turn.

---

At 3/30/09 02:44 PM, Ericho wrote: The God of Christianity is the father of Jesus who was the greatest role model ever, so he can't be thatbad. Look at the positives.

Setting up the would so that humanity requires the blood sacrifice of your only son doesn't exactly seem like something that would score points with people on the 'father of the year' award comitee to me.

---

Should I bother replying to shaggy? Apart from the fact he wont read it and still be making the same arguments (as usual) it would be far too easy to refute every single thing he said but largely time consuming.

Should I? Shouldn't I?

---

At 3/31/09 04:14 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: No not really, you cant define Science using Science and you can't even prove that Science is anything more than a pigmant of the imagination which it is,

the definition of science is "knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world."

what you say science tells you about one thing may be completely different to another, n they could be using the exact same science you're using,

Through years of testing and observations and having to go through immense criticism making sure their work has no accidental or purposeful errors, what they say has far more validation than a little boy who generally refuses to use proper grammar.

just like people try n justify horrible crimes in the name of science,

Like who? People will use scientific achievements to harm another but they never use it in the name of science.

you may not agree with them since science is broken down n modified by every individual n they make their own determination of what science is since obviously you cannot describe what science really is,

Look above. Also read this.

so then you have on one hand people conducting cruel n inhuman experiments on people cuz they think it will benifit everyone on their side, n on the other you have people working alongside nature trying to make the world a better place for everyone n not doing any unnecessarry actions.

Cruel experiments on people? A product or method is heavily examined before human trials and even then the people/person involved is doing it VOLUNTARILY!

Science is a METHOD of gaining knowledge.

So that is what you believe science to be? ok, well I'm sure other people would give a pretty different description such as "science is what we make it" "science is how things are" "science is an organized system of ignorance" "science is cause and effect n nothing more" blah blah blah.

People who actually know about Science know it's a method of gaining knowledge, people who don't use what you listed.

Tell me, have you ever studied any Scientific field in depth?

Your computer: Science

Well how do you think my computer got here, it was created, do I doubt it was created, fuck no.
Science has never created anything dude, its as if you're implying that science is some sort of being or physically manafested voice of reason, sorry dude but banging a couple things together n seeing what happens isn't very scientific to me.

Oh look!

Your hospitals: Science

Actually hosptials were made to help people n they've been around for a very long time, not in the big fancy way they are today but people had hearts n they wanted to help people who were sick n wounded, thats pretty much the thing that inspired them, after that science may have come along but I'm not quite sure mixing a bunch of plants n maybe bits of animals together to make medicine n other things are very scientific.

A bunch of plants and animals?.......

So anyone with Asthma, diabetes ect are all just eating bits of plants and animals?

Guess what? They'd be dead. Before Scientific study on the human body doctors were no better than butchers. No pain killers, no antibiotics and anyone needing surgery would most likely end up dying.

Without the scientific achievements made, we'd be living in third world conditions.

Your Television: Science

Again, banging two or more things together n seeing what happens isn't very scientific, an animal can do that n we're not animals are we?

Name me an animal that can look at an electrical diagram and build an electrical component.

It's not banging things together you idiot, it's testing and observations and once the product is built new ways are found to make it BETTER.

Your clean running water: Science

No, i dont think so, clean running water was the result os people getting tierd of having dirty ass water n drinking out of wells that can easily be polluted, so in a way you could "say" its scientific since you start with a problem n you try to fix it, theres really nothing to it.

Chlorine is one of the main products used to purify water, it's application was studied by a CHEMIST. Chemistry is a field of SCIENCE.

Again the things that inspired people to make things that help people was not science, somone didn't just stuff plants down a sick person's throat n demand something in return wether it helped them or not, I was tempted to just delete this part n not comment to it but it seems you're worse than I thought. My brother was officially dead for a while and as far as I've heard it wasn't the doctors or scientists who saved him, they were ready to give up, and excuse me but I don't believe that evolution has anything to do with respect to religion unless you're ready to admit that evolution is one, moving on.

Then you'll have no problem building your own water purification system to help people. Oh wait, you need a degree for that, where do they come from? Universities.

You only support science when it benefits you. Stop biting the hand that feeds you.

You speak as if you're somehow better than I, (no you don't really speak, ur typing but you know what I mean)

I don't think I'm better than you, I know I'm smarter than you for many reasons.

As if people "owe" something to your own interpretation of "science" that you seem to love so much, again you speak as if science is a living thing that created us n can punish or reward us....do I sense a belief in a God...?

When have I said Science is a living entity or people owe it anything? I'm refuting your dogmatic, overly bizarre definition of it.

Well if you aren't leaning towards that point then I'd suppose you're implying that you are a follower of a better religion n that the reawards from the people who created it are much better than any other.

Now you're typing gibberish.

Also, who would support science if it didn't benifit them? You sure as shit wouldn't, you come up with this bullshit "oh yeah I'm more evolved cuz I believe in evolution!"

Science is always beneficial because it gains KNOWLEDGE.

Well let me get this straight, lets say some scientists in Russia discovered that everyone in America or wherever you live is infected with a flawed strain of DNA that may weaken everyone else, n they started killing each n every person with the self justification that they were doing the right thing in the name of science n the protection n benefit of themselves n not you, you would still support that without another word? or would raise question that what they had discovered may have been a lie or misunderstanding er miscalculation?

Evidently not you idiot otherwise anyone with an infectious disease would just be killed off instead of seeking help. They would try to rectify the problem, not mass genocide.

Dude I really hope you read all of this cuz if you really believe the shit that has been pumped into your brain, you may not be around much longer, n I say that with your well being in mind, not threatening or insulting, I'm serious, you'll probably commit suicide within a few years if you're at all serious about what you just wrote.

I'll live with the benefits of science. But you on the other hand can live in the forest with no technological or medical help and see how far you go without Science.

---

At 3/31/09 11:11 AM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: talking with shaggy is impossible trust me.

;;;;
I'm not bothering to point by point argue with Shaggy's response either.
While I have no problem with him expressing his views, the latest one in this thread is IMO pretty much just fantasy & the topic of Religion & respecting them is something I feel strongly about (I don't respect them at all)

But respecting or disrespecting religion has nothing to do with Science, God or anything else.

---

At 3/31/09 10:47 AM, Victory wrote: Oh lol.

Arguing with him is futile, he won't listen to you.

You're absolutely right. Every time he makes a post dozens of people refute it, yet he still makes the exact same arguments over and over again. Even when he can't argue against someone he either insults them, says he's going to bed or doesn't bother reading them.

He gets his arguments from Evangelical Kent Hovind or Youtube user Venomfangx. Kent is in prison for Fraud and even though his ministry stated his videos are not copyrighted they still filed copyright infringement claims on anyone with opposing views and using their material.

Coincidentally Venomfangx did the same thing and continuously demands people remove videos with his face on them. Several people were willing to file purgery charges because they never violated copyright law or the Youtube guild lines.

What's even funnier is just like Shaggy, they're censors. Not just for spam and trolls but for anyone with opposing views. I found this out when I had a discussion with him on our comment sections.

Perhaps we should act just like shaggy to visually show him what a jackass he is. All we need to do is make stereotypical, generalizing, uneducated statements while saying "n' shit" after every sentence.

---

At 3/31/09 08:32 AM, Brick-top wrote: Should I bother replying to shaggy? Apart from the fact he wont read it and still be making the same arguments (as usual) it would be far too easy to refute every single thing he said but largely time consuming.

Should I? Shouldn't I?

I would go with just stopping. My impression of Shaggy is that he'd diss the Pope himself if he disagreed with the Bible in any minute way. He'll just bring up dipshit arguments like "You can't prove that evrything isn't a figment of your imagination", so you can't expect to really get anywhere with this guy. Just sit back and watch the world leave his sorry ass behind.

---

At 3/31/09 08:32 AM, Brick-top wrote: Should I bother replying to shaggy? Apart from the fact he wont read it and still be making the same arguments (as usual) it would be far too easy to refute every single thing he said but largely time consuming.

Should I? Shouldn't I?

NO, QUIT IT.
haha