question for athiests

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Hiya fan <ok>

The bit above my post.You may as well say Santa exists.

I dont know how much of the thread you read

I just think that people who cannot accept that god may have 'just existed' cannot say that matter and energy 'just existed'

If the latter is true then based on what we know a creator without a beginning or end is plausible
 
so why bring him up? Still with the doesnt work. define work?
I know the guy spends a lot of his own time and money in doing lots of things
I KNOW what he gets I asked him, YOU are having difficulty accepting YOU are WRONG.
This was a piece inthe Daily Mail, who also said he gets 24 hour police protection
WRONG

He specifically mentions tax credits and child benefits
WRONG AGAIN

Bottom line you are not prepared to accept the evidence or proof.
Methinks the internet Warrior way

You assumed and I replied. simples

I found your reply huffy

I brought him up because you were being similarly evasive about your job and you know him.
I thought he might have given you a few tips!

If you asked him, then I'm sure you'll have no trouble telling us.
You're claiming that I'm wrong without saying that he doesn't receive the benefits that I've suggested.

He's admitted to the minor, largely irrelevant benefits that a lot of people get.
He doesn't seem to deny being on income support.
Is he?

What proof or evidence have I denied?
You don't seem to understand what an internet warrior is, either.
I don't ever act tough on here or suggest that I'm a hardman.
 
and I answered it using your link. Then repeated it
natural selection and the evolution of the eye are different theories

You keep asking who created God etc etc
yet accept that matter and energy may have always existed

You didn't answer it using the link that I posted, as the link supports it.

I was asking who created god in reply to your claim that everything has a creator, which is not one that I accept.
I was pointing out the flaw in your logic.
Evidence suggests that matter and energy cannot be destroyed or created.
Evidence doesn't suggest that god even exists.
 
@ Fan

I know **** all about energy,matter,antimatter or evolution but if there is a all seeing,all knowing Deity then why the **** are one week old children dieing with starvation?What the **** did they do to anyone?

Why would a 'God' let babies die and let ****s let Ian Huntley live?
 
Maybe so, but the US and the British have no business invading these countries. Do they really think we are naive enough to believe that the soldiers are there to protect us from terrorists and that they are trying to help the respective country's egalitarianism?

Some people do believe that.
I don't.

True, but the US and the British are basically blaming those two countries predominantly for the 9/11 attacks, even though most of the terrorism attacks were from Pakistan. The Brits and the US are using it as an excuse to invade the countries and take their wealth off of them. This has clearly aggravated the inhabitants and the militants in the countries as it's not just and so they've retaliated by harming the soldiers with bombs and whatnot, basically telling them to **** off and leave them alone.

They won't leave and so the war will continue.

I don't believe the soldiers will withdraw by 2015, either.

I don't think that Iraq had anything to do with that form of Islamic terrorism, at all.
Wasn't Saddam an enemy of Al-Qaeda?
You'd have to ask where all these militants were when he was butchering their countrymen, though.

It's a poor situation that nobody particularly comes out of well.
George Bush did, though.
Financially.
 
I brought him up because you were being similarly evasive about your job and you know him.
I thought he might have given you a few tips!

If you asked him, then I'm sure you'll have no trouble telling us.
You're claiming that I'm wrong without saying that he doesn't receive the benefits that I've suggested.

He's admitted to the minor, largely irrelevant benefits that a lot of people get.
He doesn't seem to deny being on income support.
Is he?

What proof or evidence have I denied?
You don't seem to understand what an internet warrior is, either.
I don't ever act tough on here or suggest that I'm a hardman.

evasive? where you been? I have never held back on crtain information
in fact ask ST

Methinks you are being faecaetious (sp)

ask him, I will arrange the meeting. come on you purveyor of evidence/proof

I am putting on a plate the direct source to a question you are discussing with me, no take up

As for Internet Warrior you have said more than ones that you cant allow certainthings to go unchallenged etc (may words thought I would clarify as you like semantics)

but when given the source you have bottled it
 
You didn't answer it using the link that I posted, as the link supports it.

I was asking who created god in reply to your claim that everything has a creator, which is not one that I accept.
I was pointing out the flaw in your logic.
Evidence suggests that matter and energy cannot be destroyed or created.
Evidence doesn't suggest that god even exists.

no you are being tedious it has been answered.

here read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

You not accepting it does not make it any less true. Unless you can prove it
logically everything has a source/origin/creator so the conclusion is valid
 
evasive? where you been? I have never held back on crtain information
in fact ask ST

Methinks you are being faecaetious (sp)

ask him, I will arrange the meeting. come on you purveyor of evidence/proof

I am putting on a plate the direct source to a question you are discussing with me, no take up

As for Internet Warrior you have said more than ones that you cant allow certainthings to go unchallenged etc (may words thought I would clarify as you like semantics)

but when given the source you have bottled it

I've already pointed out that I have no interest in meeting him.
I'd have nothing to gain and there'd be nothing to stop him from lying, refusing to answer or evading any questions put to him.
He does so in interviews all the time, so why would a meeting with me be any different?

I could easily meet him on my own anyway, as he's hardly a massive distance from where I live.

How does refusing to allow bullshit to stand unchallenged in any way represent acting like a hardman?
Have I ever threatened anyone or suggested anything violent?
I guess it's just another term that you don't understand the real meaning of.
 
no you are being tedious it has been answered.

here read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

You not accepting it does not make it any less true. Unless you can prove it
logically everything has a source/origin/creator so the conclusion is valid

What?!
What part of that even challenges the evolution of the eye?
It explains it!

Everything doesn't logically have a source.
I've shown you that time and again.
I refuse to believe that you're this stupid.
If you're making the claim that everything does have a source, then you have to prove it.
 
@ Fan

I know **** all about energy,matter,antimatter or evolution but if there is a all seeing,all knowing Deity then why the **** are one week old children dieing with starvation?What the **** did they do to anyone?

Why would a 'God' let babies die and let ****s let Ian Huntley live?

At least you are honest enough to say that. These lot wont accept wikki but source t anyway

The answer to your question is complicated in all honesty

But for me the conclusion is not wether god exists or not.

Let me explain using ethiopia. Now under the Islamic caliphate ethipoia was a country that exported foodstuff to other parts of the world
today it si in poverty and children are dying

Yet we know that these countries are still able to export, just not use domestically

People blame God (again I dont like that word as it paints the wrong picture) but its the actions of us (man) that has caused that

A simple way to explain it would be that if you are speeding and get killed is that Gods fault?
 
I've already pointed out that I have no interest in meeting him.
I'd have nothing to gain and there'd be nothing to stop him from lying, refusing to answer or evading any questions put to him.
He does so in interviews all the time, so why would a meeting with me be any different?

I could easily meet him on my own anyway, as he's hardly a massive distance from where I live.

How does refusing to allow bullshit to stand unchallenged in any way represent acting like a hardman?
Have I ever threatened anyone or suggested anything violent?
I guess it's just another term that you don't understand the real meaning of.

yes and despite all that you bring him up?

bottle it methinks
 
@ Fan

I know **** all about energy,matter,antimatter or evolution but if there is a all seeing,all knowing Deity then why the **** are one week old children dieing with starvation?What the **** did they do to anyone?

Why would a 'God' let babies die and let ****s let Ian Huntley live?

Exactly! Ask Jamie Bulgers parents if there is a god, and countless others that have lost children to the ill done deeds of monsters. Funny thing is because of religious beliefs some of them forgive the perpetrators of such obscene crimes. Sad really, but if there is a god he is a **** and doing a really bad job and should be sacked forthwith.
 
PNP, I heard rumours that Bush was a Devil worshipper and was somehow linked with the Illuminati?

Would you believe any of it? And would you be surprised if any of it was true? <laugh>

I don't think he's smart enough, to be honest.
He barely strikes me as being clever enough to tie his own shoelaces, but that might all be an act.

[video=youtube;JvknGT8W5jA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvknGT8W5jA[/video]

Seriously, where the **** did that guy go?
 
What?!
What part of that even challenges the evolution of the eye?
It explains it!

Everything doesn't logically have a source.
I've shown you that time and again.
I refuse to believe that you're this stupid.
If you're making the claim that everything does have a source, then you have to prove it.

natural selection does NOT fit the evolution of the eye
also see Cambrian explosion

logically everything has a source. even energy has a source
nothing exists without a source
 
Despite what?
The fact that meeting him wouldn't benefit me in any way?

Why would I be scared to meet him?
He's not a violent man, in person.
Too much of a coward for that.

more assumptions/assertions yet scared to meet him

You raised the matter, there is a simple solution
but you dont want that

coward methinks
 
more assumptions/assertions yet scared to meet him

You raised the matter, there is a simple solution
but you dont want that

coward methinks

More baseless claims.

I've already pointed out why there's no point in me meeting him.
Why wouldn't he refuse to answer my questions, evade them or even outright lie?
You have no answer to that, so you're just repeating the same old bullshit, just as you are with your accusation of cowardice.

Why would I be scared of him?
What is it that you think I believe he'll do to me?