Comments by "Mark H" (@markh1011) on "Questions No Atheist Can Answer – Debunked" video.
-
6
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@allaboutbuckets
"First off , hitler was raised religiously, but he merely used those views to fool those that supported him "
That excuse simply doesn't cut it.
We have a lifetime of quotes from Hitler making it clear he was religious.
Error 1
Oh and you tried to refer to mein kampf to support your position... but that completely backfired.
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord. "
Error 2.
But back to the point... you're stuck making excuses... you're stuck in a corner ... Hitler makes it very clear that he's religious.... following the Christian god... and that is even motivating him.
So you need to invent excuses.. " oh he was just pretending"
1. That's a pathetic excuse.
2. You could never prove it. It would require psychic powers.
3. The evidence shows you wrong.
You're stuck there.
"His ideals were very evolutionist based with his claims that blue eyes and blonde hair was the pinnacle "
WRONG. Again.
Evolution by natural selection is the opposite of eugenics.... that's more like playing god... intelligent design...the opposite of nature... AND even if he was doing that it doesn't in any way change how wrong you are about his undeniable religiosity.
"lazy thinkers like yourself believe in natural selection which pretty much makes any sense of morality relative since you can justify the killing of the inept, the old, disabled"
You're quite confused.
Error 3.
Evolution by natural selection is not a moral framework. It's not a philosophy. It's a scientific theory. It's a theory and a fact.
"Where does your morality come from besides “just being a good person”?"
It comes from the same place yours does, although you may not notice.
We have an innate morality. Most of us anyway. We like helping people. We have empathy. We know what it feels like when bad things happen to us so we can sense what it's like when bad things happen to other people. We like being part of a community. It's even advantageous for us to do so. We know that a community that works together will be more prosperous than the opposite.
You follow all of this as well but you probably don't want to admit it.
Is the only reason you're not killing your neighbor, their children and taking their things because it says not to in an old book? I seriously doubt it.
"You can cherry pick from a book you’ve probably only read a few pages of all you want, but it just shows how ignorant you are to the context of the things being discussed in said book. "
That's another pathetic excuse. The old "context" line to try and rationalise the horrors and absurdities of ancient religious texts. This has nothing to do with ignorance.
The religious texts are about what you would expect if written by philosophers from those times. There is intolerance, misogyny, flat out batshit crazy statements...
You're stuck making excuses again...and hoping that throwing in an insult will distract from your massive problem. Nope.
"All your knowledge is likely from those who misinterpreted, or those who bashed the Bible."
1. You have no idea how much I know about the bible.
2. You're trying to attack me to take away from the bible's many failings
3. The passages are there. ... the interpretations accepted by their followers... your attempts to deny with with vague statements about "misinterpreted" just fall flat.
" If you actually read what I wrote instead of CHERRY PICKING as usual 🙄"
Cherry picking? I've only responded to a couple of your posts before. Are you confusing me with someone else?
"You probably won’t read all this, but considering your limited understanding of reality combined with foolish pride,"
You know nothing about me.... but have decided to start attacking my "foolish pride" and supposedly limited understanding.
It's funny because anyone reading this post will see you getting schooled.
Perhaps you should spend more time thinking about your arguments instead of how to attack the other person.
You've made many errors in your post and I have pointed them out. Focus on that instead of complaining about me and you might do a little better next time.
1
-
@allaboutbuckets
"Try again friend "
As we'll see..that comment..coming from you ... can only be taken is humorous considering how badly you did..
"You must’ve thought you did something there"
*I dismantled your arguments pretty easily yes*.
Lets see what response you have to my post. ....
"Give me scriptures that you can use that prove the points you made about its failings.."
What?! That's absurdly vague and why do I need to point to scripture?
That's a terrible attempt to divert from your failings...
Oh and there is a reference to scripture in a post down below. You'll no doubt offer up some excuses about context or interpretation... haha..
I really hope for your sake that your post gets better.
"Also, you literally said that the theory of evolution is a theory and a fact... it can’t be both."
WRONG. It can.
Theories can be facts.
I'll try to educate you.
There is a theory of gravity.
Gravity is a fact.
See how that works?
"Contradiction"
The problem here is that you fail to understand some basic concepts of science.
Not going well for you so far...
"I KNOW you don’t know the Bible because it doesn’t contradict itself,"
The bible doesn't contradict itself? oh dear... it seems I know more about the bible than you do.
Here, let me help continue your education.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/number.html
"Now back to Hitler, idk if you’re aware of how controlled opposition "
All you did with that paragraph was continue to spout the pitiful rationalisations you tried in the last post.
We have a lifetime of religious talk from the man who said he was doing gods work.
You're stuck.
You can offer these excuses until the cows come home but it's not going to get you out of that corner.
"what you offered was a joke of an explanation"
So refute it.
That isn't a response.
Mate I tore you to shreds in the last post
You're not refuting what I said. You're offering vague, evasive dismissals...
Tell me... is the only think stopping you from killing your neighbors and their children... and taking their stuff... the teaching in an old book? Is the only thing stopping you from becoming a mass murderer... the teaching in an old text...? Provide a legitimate answer to these questions.
"Furthermore, if I wanted to say eugenics"
Hold on... again you're not responding to what I posted.
You got your claims about Hitler totally wrong (on more than one thing). I pointed out that you don't understand the evolution is a scientific theory and not a philosophy. I pointed out that choosing people and traits is the opposite of evolution by natural selection.
You've not responded to the points that you failed on.
You just waffled a little more about Hitler.
I'm more than halfway through your post and you've offered nothing as a response.
I feel I'm going to have to repost my entire last post and try to get you to find the courage to address it.
"which wouldn’t have came to be without the foundation of evolutionism."
Even if that were true, it doesn't change the fact of evolution. It's like saying that throwing people off a roof wouldn't work without the foundation of gravity. So gravity is to blame.
They are both scientific theories.
But what we have here is a religious who tried to wipe out another religious sect and also play god...
We can see that religion is at the core of this problem... not science or secularism.
"So again, you contradicted yourself in your own argument bro, "
What?! Nowhere did you demonstrate a contradiction. This is quite funny. Go back and tell me where you think you found a contradiction. Be prepared to defend your claim.
"I was telling you the truth based off what you have shown in each of your responses. Your disposition is quite clear and simple to understand. I’m sorry you feel the way you do, it’s sad honestly, you were lied to quite a bit and you started listening to the words of those that made you feel better about the disposition that you have.""
blah blah I only skimmed this.
You're offering nothing as a response to your last post where you got taken apart. As I advised you in the last one... the sort of blathering you're offering here isn't helping you or distracting from your failed arguments. You should spend time on constructing your arguments instead of half baked preaching like that.
"Now I could def be wrong but why does it seem that atheists are rarely if ever on the receiving end of any scapegoating or persecution"
In recent times Atheism has tended to rise in the more advanced countries where people have more freedom.
They are still persecuted in some countries.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/the-13-countries-where-being-an-atheist-is-punishable-by-death-a6960561.html
.and that's it? That's your response?
So to summarise..
Your claims about Hitler were shown to be wrong and you had no response.
Your claims about evolution were shown to be wrong and you had no response.
You didn't understand what a scientific theory was and I have tried to help you.
You had no actual response to my statements about morality.
Amazingly you claim that there are no contradictions in the bible. Wrong.
You tried to use mein kampf to claim that Hitler wasn't religious. That backfired.
You're trying to distract from your failures with all sorts of vague assertions.
So are you going to try again? Perhaps I'll just post the last post that you couldn't address...just to make you squirm.
Want to try again?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegameseriesop1300
"It's not a matter of saying "we don't know" It's the matter of ignoring that which is obvious."
That's what ancestors would have said about the cause of the weather or diseases. They didn't know the answer ...so god. To them that might have seemed obvious because there were employing the same illogical god of the gaps approach that you endorse.
" In the same manner, Allah, God has created the Universe."
You're just making a claim. I've asked you about proofs and evidence. Repeating the claim over again isn't proof or evidence.
"Even if one single particle could have gone wrong, the universe wouldn't have been created"
Not exactly but there are some precise constants that are fundamental to our universe.
"should tell you that this is no coincidence,"
You're just making an assumption. Imagine a fish stating that it's no coincidence that it happened to be born in the sea. It happened purely naturally without any intervention. But you would call it coincidence because it seems too lucky that the fish was born there instead of on top of a mountain.
"but the work of God. "
Again you're just making an assertion. You have offered no proofs or evidence.
". There is no other possibility."
Incorrect. There are many possibilities. The universe could have been created by aliens. The constants could only be that way. There could be multiple universes. Some are good and some are bad. There could be multiple dimensions and we got a good one. We could be in a simulation created by aliens.... I could go on. AND even if we wanted to pretend that a god was involved you can't actually demonstrate that it would be your god and not one of the thousand other ones that man has invented.
"Well the proof of Allah is that, in the Quran, Allah mentions many things which Science has discovered recently."
Oh does he talk of the internet? Quantum mechanics? Dark energy? The internet?
No? Yeah didn't think so.
"llah mentions in the Quran that he will preserve Pharaohs Body and later it was discovered that after the the death of Pharoah, some of his priests, hid his body and then it later it's was brought to the Museum and Allah had said this before it happened. "
What is scientific about this pointless story?
"Then Allah says in the Quran, that mountains have pegs which hold it, and later science discovered this."
What?
"And then Allah says in the Quran 1400 years ago, that the Light of the moon is not it's own light but reflected light and science discovered this in the 18th or 19th century. "
It doesn't actually say that. It doesn't use the Arabic word in`ikaas. That appears to be a modern interpretation.
"hen Allah mentions in the Quran, that there are 2 seas which don't mix which was proved later. "
What?
"So my question to you is, how can anyone predict not just 1 thing, not just 2 things, but how can anyone"
These are vague and meaningless predictions that anyone could come up with.
"but how can anyone predict everything correctly before even science was invented"
But that hasn't happened. You've offered some fairly vague predictions that don't show any divine knowledge at all.
" We don't assume. We examine and we believe in the true proofs and evidences."
Your evidence is not convincing.
So I asked for some proofs and what you provided was poor. That may be enough for you, but I assume some of that is due to the way you were programmed when you were raised.
So you haven't offered any compelling evidence or proofs and you haven't refuted anything in the video so far.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mazen1010
"Many people mix up between who is God, and the presence of an originator and creator. "
..don't you have the position that's all the same thing?
"We know God's existence and some properties form his effects, "
That's a meaningless statement. You stating you "know" gods existence is irrelevant. That's the same thing all the other religious people said about different gods.
"For example, we observe the effect of gravity but we don't know exactly what is causing it."
You're still confused here. Gravity caused by mass warping space time.
Gravity exists.
It's a fact.
It's a theory.
But you don't want to accept this... so you propose that something else is needed to explain gravity... although you can provide no valid reasoning for this.
What you're doing here is suggesting that no matter what scientific explanation you're given, you'll just ask "yeah but what caused that?" You're trying to slip god into every answer.
We know a lot about gravity... you obviously don't and that's port of your problem.
"Now, if people made many wrong imaginative assumptions about gravity, this doesn't make the effect of gravity disappear. "
The only person I see getting anything wrong about gravity wrong is you.
"Any child can explain anything, the issue is to demonstrate that we got the actual know-how. "
But no matter what answer you're given... you'll still just say the answer is god.... even though you cant explain why.
"We can't control or predict the nucleation of a storm, we can only guess its trail given the measurements of the surrounding air, water and land masse"
...and?
" Also, we have no idea how the stars are formed out of gaseous nebulae,"
WRONG. We know a lot about how stars form in nebulae.
YOU don't seem to know anything about it.
Your ignorance isn't an argument for anything.
But your comment there was again, completely irrelevant to the point...
"The ancient Greeks had the same divisions that we have today (atheists, agnostics, sophists and theists), and they all feel that they have enough evidence to support their claims.
"
Another response that has nothing to do with the point you're responding to.
You seem to be a very confused person.
"We don't know what else can pull the galaxies back together."
1. We could invent theoretical ways to do it.
2. So what?
You've made the effort to respond but so much of your post is entirely irrelevant..
"Such decay means that the present laws of physics are not the same as the laws of physics at the time of formation of the universe, as the formation needs different set of physical laws. "
It's believed that the current laws of physics were valid an instant after the initial expansion of the universe.
1. This has been researched fairly heavily.
2. So what?
You've made the effort to respond but so much of your post is entirely irrelevant..
"Therefore, we need an external originator to supply these two different sets of laws and control them. "
Wrong.
You've shown once again that your argument is the very old.. "i don't know so god did it"... argument that has failed so many times before...
All you seem to have is the god of the gaps argument...
1
-
1
-
@mazen1010
" For example, our galaxy the milky way is being pulled by an unseen force called "the great attractor". "
You're again contradicting yourself. In that case there is an effect that can be measured.
You declared that god can't be measured. Then you keep giving examples of things than can be measured.
You're just highlighting the lack of evidence for your god.
"So, what is causing gravity that is coming from the atom?"
I told you. Mass bends space time. There is a direct relationship between mass and space-time.
"Again, please check"
Again - irrelevant.
You seem to be just posting links for fun. Try to make them relevant.
"You can imagine the possibility of anything, but for the possibility to be rational, we must have some reasonable or measurable indication for such thing to occur. "
That's more short sighted nonsense.
A thousand years ago, do you think there was a measurable indication that the internet would happen? No. It was still rational.
You're ruling out future discoveries merely because you can't picture them.
"All the observable elements of the universe lack the free will and the capability to change the physical laws, so since the change has happened, then there is a necessity for a capable free-will to switch the universe from the initial state (before the birth of the universe), to the birth and subsequent growth and decay."
Again - you demonstrate no evidence or reason here. You just make an assertion. ..and even then it doesn't make sense. All the observable elements lack free will? People aren't observable? You're making up strange rules as you go.
"Then we should allow any "I am feeling smart" child, to perform medical surgeries on people."
No you didn't get the point. They don't have the knowledge. You're making a strange argument that we can have knowledge but still lack the know-how. They are interchangeable words... they mean almost the same thing. Your argument isn't valid. Talking about kids performing surgery is skirting around the problem.
" Controlled thermonuclear fusion"
Again. Irrelevant.
It certainly seems that when you can't respond to a point, you just reference a link or an article hoping that will suffice as a response.
I pointed out how your response wasn't relevant to the point and as a response you just repeated another irrelevant copy paste reference.
Try to make your responses relevant
" Therefore, it is irrational to think of such singularity as a minor divination from the curve, and to think of the gap in our knowledge as missing one letter in a word."
What the hell is a "minor divination from the curve" ? Whatever you think that is, it's not how cosmologists and theoretical physicists treat the big bang.
So again whatever point you thought you were making is irrelevant.
"There is no primitive and advanced God,"
No. I'm saying your argument is primitive. It's simplistic. If you can find something we don't know, you'll say - 'there! god must have done that because we don't know'.
You write a lot but seem to address very little.
1
-
@mazen1010
_" Similarly, the effects of God in his creation can be measured"_\
You're all over the place. You're at one point making excuses for the fact that your god can't be measured....then you're trying to explain why it should be measured ,....or something.... you're in a constant state if excuses and diversion. You do this because you can't support you position for 2 minutes...
Now you're trying to tell em that god can be measured.... ok then ..lets put aside your constant contradictions for 20 seconds.,... how can he be measured?
"At the atomic level things are different "
Yes...and...once again...irreverent.
To be honest... I think at least 3/4 of what you say is irrelevant babbling...
"Audio and visual exchange of signals was known for thousands of years,"
The ancient Greeks didn't' have radio ...or walkie talkies... wow you're ignorant...
Over and over its clear that your position is based on a lack of education..
"You claim that people had any input in the making of the universe??!!!
"
What?! I've never made that claim. You're a mess.... Your responses rarely make sense.
". So, claiming to know how the stars and planets formed without an actual demonstration "
Once again your ignorance is the problem here. Our understanding on how stars are formed is not based on some sideshow demonstration....it's based on years of evidence, all consistent with observations and theories going back to Einstein.
Once again - your lack of understanding is not an argument,
"is like a child claiming to have full know how of a surgery."
Sorry but that's just the statement of an idiot.
We have physicists and cosmologists who understand it very well.
We also have surgeons who understand their particular field.
You're all confused about this because you're uneducated.... ignorant.....not much beyond a caveman really...so you don'tr understand.
It's like trying to explain chess to a goldfish.
You're the goldfish....helpless....naive....
" So, the current state of our knowledge is not sufficient to know how the stars are formed."
Total ignorance on display again.
We know how stars are formed.
This ruins whatever argument you thought you had,......eventually you''ll find something with nuclear fusion we haven't been able to do yet... but that has no bearing on the facts about stars and gravity that we know to be true.
"I was responding to your claim that I try to infuse the idea of God, whenever there is a gap in knowledge or a singularity point (e.g. dividing by zero)."
I never made any reference to divining d by zero..
"that the creation of the universe is not something minor so to resemble it to a minor gap in knowledge "
No one.. is claiming that the creation of the universe is a minor thing.....
Look. You're doing very badly here. You should really try to put together some arguments that are actually relevant because you're drowning at the moment,.
"Before any human has ever walked the earth, the universe was created along with trillions of biological organisms. So, other than claiming that the dinosaurs or earlier biological forms where so smart and capable to create such things, the default answer is God who is infinite and all capable, who exists before time and outside the space and matter."
These two statements are just a mess. Logic isn't really your thing. You out out there that the universe is very old... Then you say put the dinosaurs as some sort of answer.. or some other organism.....and then discard them for god. ...for no logical.
You got called out on your simplistic, primitive , god of the gaps argument... and you followed it up with irrelevant gibberish.
That's not good.
You need to think about your arguments an little bit more.
1
-
@mazen1010
"No, you claimed that the theory of special relativity explains gravity."
Well actually I never posted those words. I think you mean to refer to general relativity.
" but doesn't identify the real source of gravity."
That may be true...but once again...so what? This isn't addressing anything.
"The bases of internet is to code, transmit, receive and decode signals, which are the same steps made by ancient people to communicate. "
You're trying to imply the internet is pretty much the same as signalling someone?
The underlying technology and concepts that give us the internet have little to do with waving a flag.
But either way this is again totally irrelevant to the point.
"Without actual demonstrations, no one can claim that he/she has acquired the know-how"
You're again confused.
We know how stars form. We can observe it happening.
https://scitechdaily.com/astronomers-observe-the-birth-of-a-massive-star-in-the-milky-way/
We know that gravity causes this.
Gravity has been demonstrated.
"I provided you that until now, we can't make a stable thermonuclear fusion reaction (which supposedly occurs in the stars)."
Again your lack of understanding trips you up.
Nuclear fusion in stars is uncontrolled... we understand that. That we have yet to be able to make stable controlled fusion is irrelevant.
Almost none of your responses address anything.
"So, we can't claim full knowledge of how the stars formed."
The first point here is that you're mistaken in your understanding. But your mistakes aside, there is no rating of "full understanding". There will always be something we need to determine...about anything...by your logic that means we can never know anything...which is obviously absurd.
We can understand something to a confident degree. We know how stars and planets form. It's not from any magical gods.
"Now, your claim of full knowledge falls "
You are...still... confused. There is no point of "full knowledge".
"Dividing by zero is one way to have a mathematical singularity."
Yet another irrelevant statement
"This was my response to you because you keep on using the word primitive with reference to God"
..sigh.. I have explained to you that the argument is primitive... the god of the gaps argument is primitive...it's simplistic... its flawed...are you getting this?
" So, I was telling you that God is before time and he made all these creatures, "
Yes yes more statements you can't back up with logic, evidence or reasoning.
" So, either these older creatures created everything, or God who is before time is the one who made them. "
A clumsy false dichotomy.
1
-
@mazen1010
" So, the example of measuring the effect of gravity, without being able to measure the actual source of gravity.
"
That has no relevance to god in any way.
Once again you have something we don't know... so you assume god. You keep resorting to the primitive 'god of the gaps argument'
"You claimed that in the future we can model the free-will,"
Actually no. I said in regards to science "At the moment... no... but maybe in the future it can..."
"I provided you with the basic steps used in the internet that were used thousands of years ago, "
Your steps have nothing to do with how the internet works... nor to they address my point about someone imagining the internet many hundreds of years ago.
You're failing on two levels here.
" I asked you to provide the steps for modeling the free-will that can create the world."
What? Rephrase that in a way that makes sense.
"You are making two mistakes here: the first is claiming to obtain the know-how from just observing, "
Nope. You're the one making a mistake. Observation is a key part of science. The effects of gravity are fairly well understood and over and over again predictions are made using our understanding and are shown to be right.
We send spacecraft out of the solar system.... we put robots on mars... we put people on the moon ..people live in orbit for long times... we have photographed a black hole and it matched the modeling..
So you try and reduce our understanding of stars, fusion, gravity ect to just observation is another example of your lack of understanding.
" and the second is claiming that you know that gravity is causing it "
We do that gravity causes it...
Again the problem here is that you seem to be lacking a basic education.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/how-are-stars-formed.htm
"As some stars will ignite and then shut down and then re-ignite, and then perhaps increase and decrease rapidly."
Eventually all stars will die... I'm guessing you didn't know this.
"If a child watched a brain surgery, and then got this "I'm sure that I am very smart", so we must approve such claim?"
? That ridiculous sentence has no connection with anything I've said.
It's so stupid I'm not going to bother responding to it.
"Atheism is a faith "
Wrong. You don't even know what atheism is...
Your whole position seems to be due to ignorance and naivete.
" irrational claim of owning the capability and knowledge that others attribute to God"
Nope. That's not atheism.
You're simply making things up.
Really, your ignorance is quite staggering.
1
-
1
-
@mazen1010
"These are your impressions and assertions. A"
So I point out that you're only making assertions ...and you respond by saying it's an assertion....sigh...
"So, the universe is a machine running under strict physical laws. "
A machine presupposes someone made it for a purpose.
You can't prove that.
You can only claim it....over and over...
"For anything to be built and composed, there must be some kind of motion to assemble the parts together."
So who built your god?
" You and your fellow atheists claim that nature itself has built all these living things. "
Actually that's not strictly what atheists claim...but you still don't understand atheism and seem incapable of learning.
As for nature building everything... we don't know... everything we've learnt so far points to nature and not god.
Again..we used to think that god caused storms..created the sun...the planet... etc. We learnt that isn't the case....your god is a place holder for what we don't know...until we learn the real answer.
"However, the experiment failed to create any living creature or even a living thing."
1. They created the building blocks of life.
2. So what?! You keep blurting out statements like this but make no point. I don't think you're aware of how confused your arguments sound. You're all over the place.
" So, you and your fellow atheists clinging to this failed attempt is a sign of blind "
No. That's your confusion again. The only one clinging is you. The experiments are not evidence of how life is created...they are evidence of how one step may have happened... that's all. You don't understand that people are trying to find answers....while you prefer to stay ignorant and scoff at real research. You don't even understand what you're referring to..
Science - questions you can't answer.
Religion - answers you can't question.
"I wish that I was confused enough to believe everyone who says "we can't do it right now, but perhaps after very long time, we can"."
...and what's the alternative? YOUR POSITION: We will never learn anything new. We have never progressed. We will never progress. Whatever we know now is all we will ever know.
That's what you're proposing? Not only are you ignorant and illogical, you're quite deluded....
"You failed to bring the alternative steps for communication, and failed to find another description for the internet other than it is a method of communication. So, who is babbling?"
YOU ARE. You did it again just then. You still can't see the point. How dumb are you that you still don't get it?!
Alternative steps for communication are irrelevant to the point.
Another description for the internet is irrelevant to the point. The point was whether they could conceive the internet thousands of years ago...
Not only are you losing this argument very badly.... I don't know you you're even paying attention enough to actually still even be in the argument... you're so lost.
"You keep on repeating this every time you lose an argument. "
Baahahaha...now that's funny.
No.
What's happening is that you're getting destroyed here. You're trying but your attempts are laughably clumsy due to your lack of education.
So you seem to be regularly trying to use straw men arguments.
You're summarising an argument you claim I'm making but not only have I never made that argument..not only is it not even close to anything I'm saying...it's often nonsensical.
There are so many reasons why you're failing in these posts....but when you get desperate and try straw men arguments repeatedly it looks very bad for you.
"This is your way of trying to evade a loss "
LOL.... no kid...you keep diverting to TOTALLY IRRELEVANT statements...when I call you on your desperate attempts and diversion you try to claim a loss? No. If you were actually doing ok you wouldn't need to resort to desperate misdirection.
You seem to have no debating skills at all....so I don't even know if you will understand that.
"Bring your paper that says that it was possible to manufacture a tiny star out of a gas"
A tiny star? what tiny star? What are you talking about? You spout so much nonsense....but sure I'll post links in the next post.
"Reverting to the irrelevant tactic."
Actually sport that's what you did.
You keep doing it. You keep diverting to different points because you're incapable of responding to the one being discussed.
It's cowardice.
"which means you got cornered"
Again comments like that are just funny considering how badly you've been beaten here.
Someone finding something they didn't know about stars doesn't change that we know with great certainty how they are formed.
It's not a magical spell.
It's gravity and matter.
YOU LOSE
"So, the sun switches off at night!!!"
What? Again you're spouting confused nonsense... The formation of stars has many differences to the controlled fusion in the those tests.
You're simply too dense to understand this.
You lack the intellect to even maintain the pretense of an argument. lol...
You're drowning here buddy...
You've lost on every point...so you've tried to squirm and dodge to new claims....you still don't even understand the point of my internet reference! haha...wow.
You actually try to argue that it's foolish to think we will learn new things! Amazing.
You try to deny that scientists know how stars are formed! sheer ignorance.
You're trying so hard but just digging yourself into an embarrassing hole.
1
-
Mazen Ba-abbad
"That is your presupposition, any system with moving parts is a machine."
More of your equivocation fallacies. You're inventing definitions and using terms too broadly. You're making the definition so vague that you can declare nearly anything as a machine. ..atom..gene...stars... merely having movement doesn't make something a machine in the sense of created by something for a purpose.
"For any generalization to be rational, it must apply to similar entities. Otherwise, it becomes irrational generalization. For example, we can't say "So, who peeled the sun?""
You're babbling at the start and then give an irrelevant analogy at the end.
You're evading the question.
Who built your god?
"If you said that you don't know, then at least you are making an honest statement."
..and that's a key difference between us. I can make that honest answer. You pretend you have all the answers...and the answer is always God.
" However, if the atheist/nature worshiping temple taught you to point to nature as the creator, then we should discuss such irrational claim."
1. That's not atheism. But you're so uneducated I expect confusion from you at every point now.
2. Atheism makes no claims about a creator
3. Any talk of atheism temples is nonsensical
4. So you're arguing against a claim that isn't even strictly atheism...but even then you've had every opportunity to show that its irrational and all you've managed to do is show how ignorant and illogical you are.
"God is the one who designed the universe to run according to stable physical laws"
Here you go again...you're making a claim you can never back up.
Baseless, often nonsensical, assertions is about all you have.
"For example, the Zoologist head priest is telling you to worship the double helix DNA"
This is total gibberish from an ignoramus.
No one worships DNA.
You're not connected to reality....but perhaps that helps you maintain your religious myths.
_". Later on (after making a wealth from such nonsensical book), he said, sex is for pleasure!!!
Such an education :)))"_
What on earth are you babbling about? Can you occasionally try to make a coherent statement?
"It is funny how much cheating was done to hide all the other adverse by-products!!"
What cheating? More vague, baseless assertions.
You're terrible at debating this subject..lol..
"If any of your claims were true, then we must find an earth-wide layer (similar to oil) that is rich in amino-acids"
1. What claims specifically? You only ever seem to resort to straw men arguments because you lack the ability to address what I say.
2. The rest of that statements is once again just confused nonsense....
Resorting to babbling and nonsense isn't getting you anywhere.
"Such an education!!"
With each of these nonsensical posts you're only reinforcing my point.
You simply have no idea about this topic
You lack a basic education and each comment reinforces it
"Now, you are cheer leading"
I'm schooling you and mocking you about it.
You can call that cheer leading if you want.
"Any child can wear goggles and mix some liquids of different colors including coke with mentos, so does this make birds, ducks and frogs? "
Again, a statement which has nothing to do with the science...and only shows how naive and uneducated you are.
Your staggering ignorance isn't an argument.
"At least have some honesty and decency to ask me for my position"
It's too late for you feign indignation.
YOU KEEP ARGUING THAT POSITION.
When I call you out on it you realise how dumb it sounds and you pretend you weren't.
But the posts are right there.
"Science is about extracting the laws and the mathematical models from the physical world and use them to produce products"
...and here you go again diverting away from the point.
Whenever I talk about our understanding improving you scoff at the very idea. Now here you trying to deny it.
Whenever I talk about how much our understanding has improved you divert to irrelevant blathering.
Whenever I try to make you see how people in the past wouldn't have been able to imagine what we have now you try to deny it with more irrelevant squawking.
"Only, people with medieval Christian background think that there is science vs. religion situation."
?? How can you be this clueless?
They are absolutely in opposition...this thread only confirms it more so.
One is based of evidence. The other off blind faith.
" As some guy will come 1000 years from now and say, those people had no idea that they can use X technology to travel over water."
What are you even talking about? haha you're sucj an incompetent mess...
"OK, Mr. Scientist, bring us your "many differences""
Fusion in a lab is a tiny little reaction.. its an attempt at controlled fusion with the most minimal amount of matter...stars are created with enormous amounts of matter over time.
That I need to explain this to you again shows what a bumbling fool you are.. How could you not work that out? haha
" In other words, they thought that the atomic fusion reaction is simple "
:What? Wow you're a confused imbeciule... no one has ever thought that atomic fusion reactions are simple. No one.
Wow. That's either the worst attempt at a straw man argument or you're just really ....really dumb.
Possibly both.
Wow you're a mess.
1
-
1
-
@mazen1010
“machine: a piece of equipment with several moving parts that uses power to do a particular type of work”
The universe isn’t a pice of equipment. It doesn’t have “several moving parts” ..it doesn’t do a “particular type of work”
You’ve just proven my point. You’re using terms broadly to shoehorn them into your clumsy theories.
If you want to declare that that definition can describe the universe…. Then I’m also able to declare that it fits your sky god. ..then you need to explain who built him.
”Who peeled our sun?”
You’re evasion of the question says it all really.
You lose again.
”Similarly, you after many unproved fairy tales say that the answer is my priest said it is nature.”
What unproved fairy tales?
So far anything you’ve brought up has backfired on you and you’ve shown you are woefully ignorant. They may seem like fairy tales to you but that’s because you’re so uneducated. Fire probably seems like magic to you.
”At least the theist see the power and the miraculous design of God, while you and your pseudoscience priests say the dumb nature has a secret life as it hides things in mystery labs and then come up with a primitive heart, then goes again in hiding and after millions of years it produces a more advanced heart for a different creature after it kills the old ones.”
Again this sentence is pure gibberish and has no resemblance to the real world. Those words make no sense and have no connection to science. When you have nowhere to go on a topic you resort to babbling. You end up just looking foolish and desperate.
”The denial of an infinitely capable God without providing the necessary demonstration”
You do the same thing. You are denying thousands of gods.
Have you provided evidence against them? No. So by your own definition – you’re irrational.
”n that it is a natural occurring process (e.g. wind erosion of rocks) is irrational.”
Again you fail to understand. We don’t know. We are trying to figure it out. YOU however have no evidence but think you do know.
You’re the one being irrational.
Once path relies on evidence.
The other faith – you. Irrational.
”This is the new version of nature worshipers, the ungrateful type. When someone claims that the DNA (and its ancestor the RNA) is the source of all the life on earth (similar to Gaia, the mythical earth goddess), then claims this helpless genetic strand to give the purpose of life (spread me, or else...) and you happen to believe him, then, you are the one who is disconnected from reality. :))”
Statements like this show you to be just nutty. You’re embarrassing yourself. You come off irrational and fervently crazy.
No one is claiming that DNA is the source of life. No one is replacing DNA with a magical sky god. DNA however is a fact. It is in all living beings. No one claims DNA gives purpose. You’re equivocating there… but logical fallacies make up most of your arguments…Genes are passed on… As for beliving… what we know about dna comes from evidence. Believing evidence is rational…. Waving evidence away because you don’t like (or understand) it… is what you’re doing. You hide from evidence. When confronted with it you flee…or pretend it’s something else. Yes. you are disconnected to reality.
” The Urey-Miller experiment produces some toxic and tar by-products.”
Again…. How is that cheating? You’re doing terribly here. You’re making statements and never backing them up.
” But for a blind atheist follower, anything goes”
Silly comments like this aren’t helping you cover your many lost arguments. It’s even worse that you make it after evading questions.
” That such claimed primordial soup of the Urey-Miller experiment, was the origin of life.”
I never actually claimed that. Your dishonesty is remarkable.
But for a blind religious fruitcake follower, anything goes.
’ This is to explain to you that your atheist priests are cheating you when they say that such an organic cocktail (the product of the Urey-Miller experiment) is the originator of life.”
You’re completely confused.
That is merely a working theory.
There are scientists who don’t even agree with it.
You’re clinging to arguments you heard once…and then projecting them on to people in the most clumsy manner.
You’re terrible at debating… lol
” An honest scientist would always inform people of the present limitations, a”
THEY DO. You don’t know about any of this though because you’re so wilfully ignorant. You’re like a cave man in a library…declaring that books don’t work…. Hahaha…
” However, your atheist head priests tell people that they are sure that God doesn't exist,”
There are no head priests… you sound like a moron when you say stuff like that.
You’re sitting on your computer…in a house with electricity… using the internet…to lose arguments against people on the other side of the world…but you’re opposing every thing about science… it’s really quite funny.
” ut all what they need is infinite time and infinite budget to figure out how to prove it.”
Infinite time and budget? No one is claiming this. You’re simply full of shit.
People are trying to find out the real answers. ..and you oppose the idea of learning new things so much that you mischaracterise learning new things as nonsense about “atheists priests..infinite time… infinite budget”…. Your starting position is to make something up and complain about that.
All your arguments are based on confusion, ignorant and dishonesty.
But for an uneducated, blind religious nut, anything goes.
1
-
1
-
“Actually the universe does have several (trillions of trillions) of moving parts, and all of them use power (energy/time) to do particular type of work”
Once again you fail to address the point.
Your definition fails. You’re argument is merely equivocation fallacy.
You’re using a definition that doesn’t work. But you keep trying to shoehorn and reword it..but in doing so you make it so vague I could just also apply it to your god. Who made your god?
“God is the machine maker. We make machines, but we don't necessarily have rotating parts.”
Once again you fail to address the point. The fallacious and clumsy argument you tried to make would also apply to your god. Who made your god?
”The first fairy tale is about the cosmological natural evolution, as there is no spontaneous self-assembly reactions that govern the universe.”
So much confusion. You’re so out of touch with reality it’s hard to know where to start.
No one is preaching anything. They are just trying to find the answer. Following the scientific method isn’t preaching. It’s a method of looking at evidence and repeatedly testing theories. Preaching fairy tales is what you do. …you know about a magical sky god who created the universe “pooof!” ..and people on flying horses…
No one is talking of life spontaneously self assembling.
You’re again resorted to a straw man fallacy.
”Star formation is not self-assembly”
No one calls it that… star formation is the result of matter and gravity…
You’re confused.
”otherwise, the fusion reaction would be straight-forward spontaneous self-assembly)”
That makes no sense at all. You’re confused. That stars form as a result of gravity and matter is know…. Fusion reactions are hardly “straight forward”… and even if they were it has no bearing on that stars are formed by gravity and matter.
You’re a mess.
”galaxy formation is not self-assembly”
Again it’s matter and gravity…
”(otherwise, the whole universe will be concentric spheres”
Not at all. Uneven amounts of matter are moving around in all directions…
So not only do your arguments fail miserably.
Not only do you resort to straw men.
Your arguments don’t even make sense.
”The second fairy tale is the biological evolution, as the beginning of life and variance of biology over time and space is”
1. You’re referring to abiogenesis. That isn’t evolution.
2. No one is preaching this. They are merely trying to find out how it started. No one is currently saying that they know how it started.
3. Preaching is saying “god did it….poof!” That’s what you’re doing.
So once again you’re making the error of thinking that the scientific method is preaching.
Your lack of understanding of what science is will always let you down here.
Also you’re merely projecting your failed position onto others.
”This is because your nature-worshiping priest didn't provide you with any proof”
You’re again confused. Interestingly that sentence is a response to me calling you out on spouting a nonsensical straw man argument. But those make up most of your posts it seems.
No one is worshipping anything when it comes to science. That’s your lack of understanding and projecting of your own insecurities. Science actually uses proof. It’s fundamental to science. Your position relies on faith.
So again the sentence is invalid and only really a projection of your position.
“Rationally, all what we see in the universe follow one set of physical laws and has unified building blocks.”
Again. You fail to address the point.
Thousands of cultures have had gods. Some monotheistic. Some polytheistic.
You deny all of them.
Your clumsy arguments about atheism apply to you.
You tie yourself in knots with your bungling attempts at logic and its quite funny.
”In other words, I don't know, but take this lie, it is a nice fairy-tale keep it until I find a better lie.”
WRONG.
Again you’re showing that you don’t know how it works.
They are not giving you the answer.
They are looking for the answer.
YOU are the one giving the fake answer.
YOU are the one giving the fairy tale while people figure it out.
You’re again showing your ignorance and only projecting your position onto others.
”"His contention is that the genes”
..sigh… god you’re hopeless.
1. He’s talking about genes. Not dna.
2. That’s from the selfish gene. I’ve read it.
3. You’re falling for the same equivocation problem that you get wrong over and over. You’re using ‘purpose’ in two different contexts with two different meanings
4. He doesn’t even say dna gives purpose. Your reference doesn’t even support your statement….
”"The dominant material”
Yes… so for the THIRD TIME how is that cheating?
I can only assume you’re so inept that you don’t have any idea what you’re doing. You’re posting links but you don’t even understand why… lol you’re a joke.
”Then, why you and your atheist happy friends claim that nature can originate life?”
Following the evidence.
Looking how evolution.
Understanding chemistry.
No one is claiming they know… they are merely trying to find out.
You know evidence right? Oh that’s right you’re religious you just believe what you’re told. Blind faith is much better hey sheep?
”"...we have a working theory that we know is true, which explains how you can go”
1. That statement is correct.
2. Your post has no bearing on the point you responded to…
You’re so bad at debating this topic lol…
”There is no such working theory”
…sigh… once again your lack of understanding is the problem here. There are many working theories about how life could have started… his comments there don’t contradict any of them…
You’re simply a mess.
”Christopher Hitchens vs. God”
Did hitchens pretend to be representing the creator of the universe? No.
Did he pretend to be a moral leader? No.
Did he give advice to people as if it came from a god? No.
Did people even worship him? No.
To call hitchens a head priest is once again just your ignorance and projecting your kooky world onto others.
Oh and Hitchens losing? Haha riiiiiight.
”Such as energy and matter have secret life and a secrete hide-out, where they go for millions of years and bring out a new developed heart with all the wiring ready to plug and play and they agree to install it on a new evolved species.”
..again this is the gibberish of a child who doesn’t understand. Your statement there has no resemblance to any scientific endeavour.
Your ignorance isn’t an argument.
You’re trying to erect another fallacious straw man but only look foolish in the attempt.
Once again we can see that your position is based on being woefully ill-informed about the topic. Your attempts to defend this position of ignorance are a list of fallacious arguments and confusion.
1
-
@mazen1010
”For anything to be made, it has to be subjected to time”
An assertion you don’t support.
”We know time only because things have different rates of change”
No that’s how hoe we know time. We are able to measure time.
”. If nothing changes differently with respect to the other, then we can't define time.”
Time is a dimension of the universe. It can be defined as such. It is entwined with space.
So your statement there is wrong and quite meaningless. ..and as usual it has nothing to do with what you’re responding to.
”When we observe that the universe as a machine”
You’re just repeating the same errors. You’re asserting it’s a machine. Your attempts to support this assertion have been shown to be full of faulty reasoning.
”This different set of physical laws must come from an outside source,”
Another baseless assertion.
”But this time to decay is not effecting anything outside our universe.”
You don’t know that.
You keep making these arrogant, baseless assertions.
Your arguments are a mess.
”Therefore, your clinging to a birth and manufacturing necessity for God is applying relative measures to the absolute.”
These nonsensical statements don’t get you anywhere.
You’re trying to use definitions that actually work against you.
You’re trying to set rules and then instantly break them…with god…then you’re stuck offering these pathetic half baked excuses full of broken logic and fallacies.
“Once this process stops at observing, and from that jumps to non-demonstrable conclusions”
..and once again your ignorance is the problem. They are not making conclusions. They are putting forward theories and trying to test them.
You cant seem to understand this. I can only assume you lack either the intellect or the honesty.
”So, matter and gravity had a secret life that brought stars to be formed??!!”
Secret life? You’re talking gibberish. Talking gibberish isn’t going to recover your broken arguments… lol
”But because your atheist priests said so, then they must be right!!!!”
We know how stars are formed.
Deal with it.
You may not like it. But that’s too bad. If you hate science so much go live in a cave.
You don’t realise how dumb you sound constantly complaining about science all the while enjoying all the comforts that science has brought you. Naïve. Clueless.
“The galaxies form galactic clusters, and our galaxy is being pulled by the great attractor.”
You’re admitting I’m right and you’re wrong. Haha you’re such a bumbling clown.
”So, if no one knows how it started, is it rational to claim knowledge of how it is advancing?”
How ‘what’ is advancing?! Can you please try to make sense?
”What you fail to see is how childish the evolution theory”
They might seem “childish” if you’re an uneducated, ignorant person who prefers fantasy to evidence….
”They have have no answer!!!! All what they do is to publish papers and books,”
Now you’re just descended into paranoid ranting…
You’re such an uninformed nutcase…. Now you’re crying that they only publish books? Evolution is the cornerstone of biology….and Is critical to many sciences including medicine. .. it plays a role in vaccines….you simply have no idea… all your arguments begin with your amazing ignorance. You’re like a child who knows nothing about the world but that’s the thing with ignorant people…they don’t know they are ignorant.
”We can logically conclude that there is only one infinite power that designed and is running the universe.”
All your attempts to demonstrate this have not only failed….they have failed in an embarrassing manner. You’ve shown that your position is one based on ignorance, confusion and blind faith.
Once again you don’t actually address the problem here. Your magic space god is just one of thousands of gods that man has invented. You try to skirt around the issue with preaching.
”A gene is the basic physical and functional unit of heredity. Genes are made up of DNA.”
No kidding moron. That doesn’t change my point. People are made of atoms. But atoms and people don’t behave the same way.
As always, your statement, which was irrelevant, was wrong.
That’s another characteristic of your terrible pots… your babbling is as irrelevant as it is incorrect.
”Such dishonesty and acrobatic word games make the other 50%”
You just described yourself perfectly. You seem to project yourself onto others a lot.
”I will stop here,”
You should quit while you’re behind….well about 100 miles behind.
1
-
@mazen1010
”If time is frozen, can anything be made?”
What the hell is frozen time? How could that possibly happen?
But to answer your question, possibly. We don’t know.
Some theories say that time began with the big bang.
Your position relies on a magical god creating time…and creating the universe… from nothing.
”Similarly, if all the elements of the universe have stopped changing, can we measure time?”
Yes.
”As for the time-space making an imaginary fabric,”
Imaginary? You’re the only one talking about imaginary things here sport.
”God is outside the universe and God is outside the time function.”
This is just more preaching. You’re not making an argument. You’re making claims you can’t ever support. Sure you like to repeat them. ..but repeating them doesn’t change your failure to support them.
”This shows that you are a nature worshiper,”
Destroying your argument and holding up the pieces in front of you makes me a nature worshipper?
Your statement there is utterly moronic….but then again pretty much everything you say is.
”as you can't think of anything before the universe and outside it.”
Oh I can think of lots of things. Unlike you though I care about evidence…while you cling to fantasy.
”it. You have this as your brain system default, and all your arguments are based on that.”
You’re projecting your problems again…. Its quite funny.
”But relax, the Miller-Urey experiment couldn't prove that lightning is your creator,”
See previous post. Your lack of understanding and programming to believe in space god makes you obsess over the miller urey experiments without even understanding their relevance… or science…or facts…or reason… you really don’t understand anything…
But you sure love your space god! He sent a flying horse for his paedophile prophet. Really he did!
”Again you are lying on behalf of your atheist priests, as they made us headache claiming that "evolution is supported by large amount of evidence" and "evolution can explain"..”
So now you’ve jumped to evolution.. you’re so bad at debating… hahaha.
Evolution IS supported by a large amount of evidence.
That must really annoy you.
Poor religious crackpot.
Your god is a fantasy….
”For who much I can buy a tiny red-dwarf? It would be nice if you can make me a grow-in-water toy star for my children :)))”
The ramblings of a brain dead zombie.. lol
”That was response to you claiming that the universe has matter scattered, so I pointed out that the galaxies are formed into galactic clusters. “
No retard, you tried to declare everything would be in concentric circles…
I educated you otherwise….then you supported me.
You’re a clown…. Simply too stupid for discussions such as this.
”You admit that your atheist priests do not know how life started, but they magically became experts in how life is developing through time.”
Wow.. So much stupidity.
1. Every time you call them priests you sound like a moron.
2. Looking at evidence isn’t magic. It may seem like magic to really….reallly…dumb people… like you…but you probably think its magic when someone turns a light on….
3. Abiogenesis and evolution by natural selection are different concepts. You wouldn’t know this because you’re a babbling caveman.
”So, now I became the bad guy for asking your head priests to give me a practical solution for a practical problem??”
You’re not a bad guy. You’re a dumb guy. Your lack of intellect and education is your problem.
As for “asking”…you could get an education…but you don’t want one. You want to remain stupid and clueless.
”This is the same response I get when I ask an illusionist to”
Yes but you think looking at evidence is magic…. You probably think everything is magic. A lot of things seem like magic to really dense people.
”hen tell me you immortal one, who brought life to earth when it was lifeless?”
We don’t know how it started….and neither do you.
”Your lightning god failed Miller”
Haha that you keep clinging to your confusion about these experiments only makes you look more foolish. Those experiments brought us closer to an explanation… that’s progress….progress that only reinforces how foolish your space god fantasy is…
”Based on your analogy (living people made out of non-living atoms), now we must believe the gene is a living being made out of DNA???!!!”
That makes no sense at all…and has no relationship with anything I have said.
When you lose arguments…resorting to mindless babbling isn’t going to recover any dignity.
”I will save this joke for my kids,”
Oh you have kids? That’s sad. I feel bad for kids that have to grow up with a father as poorly educated and as thick as you are. What chance do they have?
Poor kids. Their dad is a loser.
1
-
@mazen1010
”We know and realize time only because things change with different rates with respect to each other.”
You’ve already tried that line… we can measure time. We have atomic clocks. We don’t need two different rates.
You’re talking nonsense.
”So, before the universe clock started ticking, there was no time in the universe.”
But according to you nothing can be created without time…. So where did your magical space god come from?
You’re contradicting yourself all over the place here.
”Therefore, you can't apply a relative state experienced only by creatures to God who created all these creatures”
We know god didn’t create all the creatures…. Don’t you even know how pro creation works?
God you’re clueless.
”Time is just a relation that exists between creatures.”
No that’s not what time is. Exactly what time is, is still something that people are working out…but it’s a relation between creatures….that’s also simply nonsense.
You’re terrible at this.
”Time and space are two independent relations,”
Time and space are not independent.
”and coupling them together in a fabric is imaginary.”
Are you trying to talk about special relativity? No. It is not imaginary. It has been demonstrated.
You probably think its imaginary…just like you probably think everything you don’t know anything about is imaginary… and that’s quite a lot of things.
Again the problem here is that you’re too uneducated to even try to discuss such topics….
”time can change without the distance changing, but the theory of relativity doesn't apply at the subatomic level.”
The laws work. They work in their areas of applicability.
You don’t understand this. So you declare they are imaginary….haha you’re a blind fool.
”God's existence outside the universe is a rational conclusion”
So you keep claiming….yet whenever you try to talk about it you just shoot yourself in the foot and make a monumental arse of yourself.
”It is based on the observed universe requiring the existence of an external free-willed and infinitely capable power to transfer it from its initial state”
That isn’t a requirement at all… so once again you fail quick and fail miserably…
”This is what your priests taught you to say that "you have evidence".”
Your priests taught you to deny evidence at all costs.
You’re projecting again.
It’s quite amusing when you do it. You describe your failings perfectly and try to project them to me.
You can’t address the evidence…. So you just deny it and cry like a baby about “atheist priests”… aww the nasty scientists keep making your magical space god irrelevant?
Yeah deal with that, nutcase.
”. Did you see the nature's forces that you claim to create everything, manufacture a Rubik's cube?”
Did you see god to it? No. A book told you….and you were dumb enough and gullible enough to just believe it…. That’s a good sheep…whatever you do… make sure you hide from evidence and pretend it isn’t there! lol good sheep.
”But still your priests fooled you to believe that they have "evidence" that nature created birds and animals and trees”
Are you trying to refer to abiogenesis? No one claims to have all the evidence for abiogenesis…
So once again you’re reduced to lying.
You lie so much.
What happens to deceptive people in your crazy cult? Burning?
”es, I must lack the understand of you kneeling down to the electric arc”
?? What? Do you take medication?
”Like the zodiac supported by many imaginary l”
Yes yes the same old weak lines… You don’t understand evolution so you think its wrong… you don’t like evolution, so you jump up and down and pretend the evidence doesn’t exist…
You’re an uneducated Neanderthal who likes the fantasy of his magic space god better than reality….
Much of the world has gone past you….you’re several hundred years behind in many respects.
1
-
@mazen1010
”This shows your arrogance and dishonesty. If I was a brain dead zombie, what makes of you who respond to "my debate from the realm of the dead"?? :)))”
If that was an attempt at a joke it was unfunny. If it wasn’t then you’re even dumber than I thought, which is really saying something.
”Again your dishonesty at work, I was telling you that the universe is not created by a self-assembly reaction, that is why it is not concentric spheres.”
That’s what I’m talking about you imbecile
You said if it weren’t created by magic space man it would be “the whole universe will be concentric spheres), nor any planet formation.”
YOUR WORDS…
You’re simply to stupid to even maintain the pretence of a debate. lol…
”. Then you responded with a stupid claim indicating another false god of yours "randomness", so I responded that it is not random”
I never said anything about randomness… I have been talking about natural processes…
Oh that’s right you deny all evidence and don’t understand science…. So you wave it away with silly statements… You’re a buffoon.
”But since I am not your honored priest, you wouldn't accept anything I say even if it was true.”
Accept what you say? Everything you say is either intellectual dishonesty or straight out gibberish.
You’re a dishonest moron who doesn’t know anything. I feel sorry for your kids.
You think intellectually dishonesty is ok if its for the magic space god..
You’re a vile person.
”There is no evidence for evolution occurring,”
Wrong. You’re an uneducated moron.
”evolution is just a fairy tale mad”
Wrong. You’re an uneducated moron.
” made to connect the scattered observations and partial experiments.”
Wrong. You’re an uneducated moron.
” So, it is similar to Abiogenesis in that it claims to have evidence”
Wrong. No one claims they have worked out abiogenesis….You’re lying again. You lie all the time.
You’re an uneducated moron.
” while it is just crystal ball gazing”
Evidence…science…testing predictions are the opposite of looking at crystal balls….you’re projecting your own failings onto others again.
” Evidence is through reproducible results.”
… you bumbling Neanderthal…evidence comes in many forms…
Evolution has been demonstrated over and over…
You don’t like it because it ruins your magic space god fantasy…. So you just deny with the most pathetic excuses possible.
” Evolution is just a horoscope reading.”
Yes yes you’ve made this ignorant silly line. You really only have about 4 or 5 idiotic lines that you just repeat hoping they distract from your constant failures….
” lso, anyone can see that all the natural forces (e.g. lightning, earthquakes, wind, waves, tsunamis, volcanoes and/or sunlight) can't manufacture anything not even a bicycle or a football”
This is a confused mix of straw and argument from incredulity…. Fallacies everwhere.
Your problem is always the same…you don’t get it…you don’t like it…you’re too dense to understand it….so you invent idiotic scenarios then dismiss them. You’re a joke. Naïve. Desperate. Dishonest.
” . So, the rational conclusion is that there is an external invisible force who is extending”
That’s just the god of the gaps argument…. You don’t understand therefore the answer is the magic space wizard.
” Just like the progress of a drunken loser”
Unfortunately for you….you’re the drunken loser here who doesn’t know what he’s doing…can’t stand up…can’t prove anything…can’t understand anything but keeps babbling….”mehh… god space mand did it!!!....I said so derp….erm.”….
Hahahaha
” You made a stupid lie + it got exposed +”
Nope. You just got caught lying.
You keep spouting these statements that don’t have any connection with anything I have said.
When you get called out on your desperate straw man arguments you just squeal that I’m lying.
You sport. You’re lying. You’re resorting to straw man arguments ever time.
You lose.
Every time you resort to a straw man argument you’re admitting you can’t defend your position.
” prefer to be a loser than to join the atheist faith that claims "Rubik's cubes are manufactured by natural forces, d”
There you go again. They don’t claim that.
You just got caught out lying again.
Your kids got screwed having you for a dad….
Dumb. Clueless about the world. A perpetual liar.
What a shit dad....
1
-
Mazen Ba-abbad
”This is another joke that you say”
You think our ability to measure time is a joke?
Haha… do you live in a cave? How can you be this dense?
” (after the atoms:people = DNA:genes)”
Why are you lying again? Oh that’s right you’re a compulsive liar. I never said they were equal. I used a simplistic analogy to illustrate how idiotic your statement was.
I tried to keep it simple but you’re simply to stupid to understand even simple concepts.
”. As if everything was vibrating at the same rate as the atomic clock, the relative speed will be zero, and again time will not be defined.”
More gibberish… every time you spout nonsense like this you show have no idea about any of this.
”God's action of creation is outside of time”
Bahahaha… so basically..again you declare a rule…then instantly break it…then make up a rule that god doesn’t need to follow rules… hahaha..
You’re such a dumbass.
”Because your electric arc did it???!!!”
I’m talking about animal procreation and you’re talking about electric arcs?! Haha you’re drooling retard.
”Each creature has its clock, there are biological clocks and there are different days and years for every planet.”
Wow that’s humours babbling but it doesn’t support your idiotic claim that time is just a “relation between creatures”.
You don’t appear to know…anything…
You never went to school did you?
”So, based on your claims we will not have a unit for distance measurement as it will keep changing over time?”
Nope. That’s not how it works at all. We do have units for distance measurements.
The main problem here is just that you’re a retard….
”Also, again you make another joke as space is defined as the distance between any two objects, according to you no time can be calculated for a single quark!!!”
No I never said…. I never said anything like that ….
You seem to lie every few sentences…. It’s other nonsense….or lies… or lies that are nonsense...
”This is a late confession from you,”
Haha educating you about basic physics is a confession? Wow you’re confused.
”, but since you are a dishonest person, I don't expect you to correct your above wrong statement.”
I have no wrong statement to correct.
So you made a false statement. I explained why your statement was wrong. You tried to just declare it was a confession. That was me refuting your statement…. You get confused by everything.
Wow you’re dumb.
”I am sorry, I couldn't make you leave your nature worshiping, with your gods;”
Blah another statement of yours crushed so you cry about nature and miller urey…
Haha why do even try when you’re so hopeless at this?
You’re making muslims look like morons….
”All these acrobatics that you are doing so to protect your nature's gods”
Again ..just projecting your own insecurities…
I refuted your stupid statement….so you fall back on the same tired lines….
You have nothing of substance.
”Sorry that is another nature's god of yours I missed, the god of random mutation and his friend-adversary the god of random selection (similar to yin and yang).”
…and again your statement was shown to be wrong…you don’t know what to do…so you cry “”…erm…nature …random….erm…”
You’re flailing about like the village idiot.
Actually I think that’s probably the only profession you’re qualified for.
How do you kids feel knowing their dad is the village idiot?
Sad.
i bet magic space god Allah and pedophile Muhammad would be disappointed with you too....
Sad.
1
-
1
-
@mazen1010
”Without any demonstrable experiments, your pseudo-scientists are no different than any shaman reading the signs of the silver owl and the golden eagle.”
Gravity has been demonstrated you babbling ignoramus…
” your pseudo-scientists are no different than any shaman reading the signs of the silver owl and the golden eagle.”
You’re again projecting your own position.
You deny science and evidence…in favour of magic because you like it better…
” Hydrogen gas + gravity = a self-assembled star, where is it???”
It’s self assembled if an external force, gravity causes it.
I gave you a list of papers about star formation…
You refused to look at them.
You’re like a cowardly neanderthal hiding in a cave…with his head in his hands…murmuring…”space god …space god….I like space god”
Once again your argument is “I’m too dumb to understand it so I refuse to accept it”
” I think you are using the word "natural" to mean "non-man made".”
..and here you go again trying to redefine what words mean…this has failed every time but hey give it another go dummy!
So you’re now denying what natural means… haha
” However, your continuous irrational denial of God”
You’ve yet to show any reason to believe in god.
Your only argument is “I’m too dumb to understand it so I refuse to accept it”
That argument doesn’t prove there is a magic space god. It only shows you’re an idiot.
”xposes your nature worshiping gods (the god of lightning, the god of hydrothermal vents, the mud god,...etc.)”
Blah blah nature god…atheist priest….you have of handful of dumb lines you repeat that don’t help you at all and only make you look mentally challenged.
”Since we have been debating for long.”
This isn’t a debate… you’re not capable of debating this topic…
This is me mocking an idiot….
I didn’t read your joke.
You tried to evade the point – you being completely wrong… with some joke.
Pathetic.
”'m really not of the type of person who takes the saying of anyone”
Blah blag your response had nothing to do with the point ….again… dumbass.
”All non-existent things are irrelevant.”
I guess your magical space god is looking pretty irrelevant until you can prove that he exists….
”But to claim that God doesn't exist, all the observations that proves that your natural gods (i.e. the gravity god, the lightning god, the mud god) are dead and can't create anything must be ignored.”
The logic of a child…with mental issues. Your argument is that “natural gods” are dead…so therefore your magic space god…is real… sigh…
God you’re stupid….hahaah…..how did I get into this with someone as dumb as you… lol
The logic there is a mess.
There is no evidence natural gods.
Lighting. Gravity. Mud. ..all exist… that’s a fact..
Your logic that your god must exist…if these non existant ‘natural gods’ don’t exist…is a non sequiter it’s totally illogical… you’re a twit.
”He died because of cancer, and he didn't live a long happy life. I”
No he seemed to have a very happy fulfilled life. He died at 62.
”I feel sorry for him not to see the truth “
He was an intellectual. Not a brain dead moron like you.
He made your religion look so stupid… people love his videos…
”He is your head priest,”
Your comment was so dumb even you are too scared to support it….lol…
”It needs some digging,”
You probably made it up.
You’re a compulsive liar.
Until you find it, I’ll assume you’re just lying again.
”t you just for a change try once to respond only to the logical and scientific claim”
You’ve yet to say anything logical or scientific.
Most ten year olds know more about science and logic than you do…. You’re one of the dumbest people I’ve ever come across.
I’m surprised you can use a keyboard.
”But they fail to provide any demonstration at any scale that such "natural occurrence"”
Wrong. I gave you a list to numerous papers about this.
You just hide from what you can’t deal with….like a scared little Neanderthal hiding in his cave…
Another post with no intelligent statements…. You evaded every point you couldn’t deal with….you cried about atheists a lot.
You seem to really hate them.
They must make your feel really stupid….and really bitter…
They laugh at your dumb religion and show how irrelevant it is with science…
Poor dumbo…
Hey dumbo …how old do you think the earth is?
Do you think dinosaurs are real?
The paedophile Mohamed fly away on a magical winged horse?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1