Discussion:
Here's the biggest reason why Evolution is a laughable concoction by Atheists, for Atheists...
(too old to reply)
old man joe
2010-05-01 11:05:32 UTC
Permalink
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.

and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.

the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins. to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point. this, they studiously avoid.

the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing. Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.

here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table. nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements. botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.

no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ? no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive. these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead. life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.

before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.

at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.

botta-bing ! non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave life to itself. this
is all made possible from the early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk, cooled off over time, which is not
alive either, and lo and behold, non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to think that don't have the wrath of
God and Judgment Day hanging over their head's.

dream on, boys.

now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
Mark Evans
2010-05-01 13:32:39 UTC
Permalink
On May 1, 7:05 am, old man joe <***@home.001> wrote:

(SNIP RANT)

You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from. It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created. Som OMJ, which is it? A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred? Or are you simply wrong.

Mark Evans
All-Seeing-I
2010-05-01 17:59:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Wombat
2010-05-01 18:42:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Since you snipped the relevant phrase what does that tell us about
your (tenuous) grasp on this thread?

Wombat
Virgil
2010-05-01 19:24:56 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
How is your question in any way relevant to whether the theory of
evolution is a valid scientific theory or not?
Mark Evans
2010-05-01 20:14:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Nothing. What part of "how does the creator myth fit in" don't you
get? If the creator is alive where did he, she or it come from. If
not alive it violates the life from life mantra of creationists.
Claiming a supernatural creator just shows that you don't know enough
to answer the question. Now go back to your copy of Ancient
Manuscripts fo Dummies and ask for help with the big words.

Mark Evans
All-Seeing-I
2010-05-02 01:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Nothing.  What part of "how does the creator myth fit in" don't you
get?  If the creator is alive where did he, she or it come from.
You assume the creator is alive as we understand life.

Now, If you want to believe that the creator is alive then read the
Sumerian tablets.

They think the creator was in fact alive as we know life. BUT even
this lesser-creator-god that susposedly created humans was still
created by the single Sumerian God, Anu.

So either way you look at it, be it from the hebrew or the sumerian
version, or even hindu version, there was a single creator of
everything. Different cultures call him by different names.

Islam calles it Alla
Hebrew calls it YHVH
Hindu calls it Braham
Christians call it God, Jehovah and others
Greeks called it Zeus

It is all the same God.
 If
not alive it violates the life from life mantra of creationists.
How so?
Claiming a supernatural creator just shows that you don't know enough
to answer the question.
Are you trolling me? Or have you been hitting that peace pipe?
 Now go back to your copy of Ancient
Manuscripts fo Dummies and ask for help with the big words.
The bible explains that if you pay attention.

God is, was, and always has been.

God has no begining, God has no end.

Alpha and Omega.

look it up
Pink Freud
2010-05-02 03:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from. It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created. Som OMJ, which is it? A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred? Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Nothing. What part of "how does the creator myth fit in" don't you
get? If the creator is alive where did he, she or it come from.
You assume the creator is alive as we understand life.
What a fucking retarded thing to say.

Of COURSE he assumes that saying "the creator is alive" refers to "alive" as
we understand life.
What the fuck else is it supposed to be taken as?

This is just another example of you spewing forth vacuous bullshit in an
attempt to weasel your way out of the argument you just lost, isn't it?
Virgil
2010-05-02 03:16:30 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by All-Seeing-I
Islam calles it Alla
Hebrew calls it YHVH
Hindu calls it Braham
Christians call it God, Jehovah and others
Greeks called it Zeus
It is all the same God.
That presumes that any of those actually exist, which has never been
unequivocally established.

Only those whose unfounded assumptions require the existence of some
gods claim certainty that there are any.
Mark Evans
2010-05-02 22:37:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Nothing.  What part of "how does the creator myth fit in" don't you
get?  If the creator is alive where did he, she or it come from.
You assume the creator is alive as we understand life.
Well, not alive as we understand it equals not alive. Or are you
willing to own up to the elements in the periodic chart being alive
but not as we understand life? Remember, creationists are the ones
who insist on this sharp line between living and nonlivein.
Post by All-Seeing-I
Now, If you want to believe that the creator is alive then read the
Sumerian tablets.
Hmm. Bringing in a non-Christian mythos to buttress your claims, eh.
I had no idea that you could read Sumerian. Oh, wait a minute. You
can't! How the explicative for fornication can you claim they support
anything you say since you are dependant upon an unknown number of
translations over thousands of years?
Post by All-Seeing-I
They think the creator was in fact alive as we know life. BUT even
this lesser-creator-god that susposedly created humans was still
created by the single Sumerian God, Anu.
Ok then, was Anu alive or non-alive. If alive, who, or what, created
him/she/it/them?
Post by All-Seeing-I
So either way you look at it, be it from the hebrew or the sumerian
version, or even hindu version, there was a single creator of
everything. Different cultures call him by different names.
Islam calles it Alla
Nope. Try Allah
Post by All-Seeing-I
Hebrew calls it YHVH
Actually it is not allowed to speak the name of the Hebrew god. Or
write it. Even in English. I know Jews who write G*D instead.
Post by All-Seeing-I
Hindu calls it Braham
Um, no. Braham is a a creator but only one of an infinate series.
Post by All-Seeing-I
Christians call it God, Jehovah and others
Some, maybe. Most take the creation myth with a large grain of salt
and identify it as the allegory it is.
Post by All-Seeing-I
Greeks called it Zeus
Nope. Zeus was not a creator god. He was the son of a Titan, a race
of divine beings who predated the Olympian gods. Guess you never read
your Hesiod.
Post by All-Seeing-I
It is all the same God.
A lot of blood has been shed over that idea and it is still not
resolved.
Post by All-Seeing-I
 If
not alive it violates the life from life mantra of creationists.
How so?
Lets be basic on this. If you have two mutually exclusive conditions
you only have two choices. What part of alive/not alive is hard for
you? It is like pregnant/not pregnant, light turned on/light turned
off, capable of thought/ASI.
Post by All-Seeing-I
Claiming a supernatural creator just shows that you don't know enough
to answer the question.
Are you trolling me? Or have you been hitting that peace pipe? And trolling your is one fo the funniest ideas you have posted to date.
 Now go back to your copy of Ancient
Manuscripts fo Dummies and ask for help with the big words.
The bible explains that if you pay attention.
Actually the bible explains very little. You like to expand on what
is there and mix it with your fantasy concepts of what other legends
say and add a large dose of delusions and claim it is biblical truth.
Of course you can put lipstick on a chicken and say it is your wife
too.
Post by All-Seeing-I
God is, was, and always has been.
God has no begining, God has no end.
Alpha and Omega.
look it up
This is a nonsense statement and you know it. BTW, what does the
Greek alphabet have to do with anything? (Aside from writing Greek,
of course.) I always found the "I am Alpha and Omega" quote a pretty
odd thing for a Midian storm god to claim to an on-the-run murderer
from Egypt. Was
Greek some international common language?

Mark Evans
Virgil
2010-05-02 23:04:47 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by All-Seeing-I
You assume the creator is alive as we understand life.
On the contrary, we atheists and agnostics do not assume any creator at
all.

Evolution is compatible with all known observations, but for any
creationist notion of a "creator" to be equally compatible, we must
postulate a creator wishing to deceive humanity about its creation.
Burkhard
2010-05-03 07:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
Nothing.  What part of "how does the creator myth fit in" don't you
get?  If the creator is alive where did he, she or it come from.
You assume the creator is alive as we understand life.
Now, If you want to believe that the creator is alive then read the
Sumerian tablets.
They think the creator was in fact alive as we know life. BUT even
this lesser-creator-god that susposedly created humans was still
created by the single Sumerian God, Anu.
So either way you look at it, be it from the hebrew or the sumerian
version, or even hindu version, there was a single creator of
everything. Different cultures call him by different names.
Islam calles it Alla
Hebrew calls it YHVH
Hindu calls it Braham
Christians call it God, Jehovah and others
Greeks called it Zeus
It is all the same God.
Zeus is not a creator god. He is third generation deity, when
everything was already in place. The world, or rather Gaia, the mother
godess might have been born from an egg laid by Nyx, the bird with
black wings, but it is more likely she came from chaos, pre-law
nothingness - big bang theory shows again Greek religion to be true.
Gaia conceived with herself Uranus, the sky. Their children were the
titans. One of the Titans, Prometheus, created humans (animals
probably evolved all by themselves, though some say they were created
by other Titans, especially Epimetheus. According to this source,
Epimetheus created animals over a long period of time, and gave each
animal a special ability to survive depending on where they would
live- obviously confirmed by the ToE). Zeus is a relative latecomer
who doesn't do much
Jack
2010-05-08 02:23:05 UTC
Permalink
"What part of _________ didn't you understand?"

This is bitch talk. Cliche.
SkyEyes
2010-05-02 05:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
What part of "Where did your god come from?" did *you* not understand?

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
Virgil
2010-05-02 05:33:06 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by SkyEyes
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
What part of that is relevant? As far as I can see, the issue of how
life came into being and the issue of whether the theory of evolution
fits the fats are two entirely separate issues, and those who attempt to
conflate them are attempting to deceive us.
Post by SkyEyes
What part of "Where did your god come from?" did *you* not understand?
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
Glibb BecKKK
2010-05-02 06:47:26 UTC
Permalink
"Fossils" are "the biggest reason why Evolution is" tangible evidence
evreyone can see and/or touch, unlike the "beLIEf" in your heads only you
[crazy people] can, ass you say, "see" ...
--
At the RNC incest is priority-one because that's how the GOP got started, all
the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)

https://www.cafepress.com/YbeLIEve

Got Conscience?
Syd M.
2010-05-03 06:48:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by SkyEyes
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
What part of "Where did your god come from?" did *you* not understand?
The question part.

PDW
Virgil
2010-05-03 07:12:01 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Syd M.
Post by SkyEyes
What part of "Where did your god come from?" did *you* not understand?
The question part.
You seem to have some difficulty with the answer part as well.
Father Haskell
2010-05-08 03:53:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by All-Seeing-I
Post by Mark Evans
(SNIP RANT)
You know, the failure of creationism is that it never explained where
its creator came from.  It is fixiated on life not coming from non-
life but keeps ignoring the fact that their creator must have come
from nothing or was itelf created.  Som OMJ, which is it?  A creator
coming form nothing or being creatred?  Or are you simply wrong.
Mark Evans
What part of "Nothing is alive" in The Periodic Table was so hard to
understand?
What part of "carbon has 4 electrons in its outermost shell"
can't you understand?
Ken
2010-05-01 13:56:11 UTC
Permalink
And a Senile Crossposting Old Troll is He
raven1
2010-05-01 14:41:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
Then why is your "God" exempt from this? Idiot.
L.Roberts
2010-05-01 14:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.  to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.  this, they studiously avoid.
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing.  Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table.  nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements.  botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ?  no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive.  these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.  life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.
botta-bing !  non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave life to itself.  this
is all made possible from the early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk, cooled off over time, which is not
alive either, and lo and behold, non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to think that don't have the wrath of
God and Judgment Day hanging over their head's.
dream on, boys.
now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
What, pray tell, is the best alternative to 'evolution'? Magic?
Performed by a 'genie thingy'?
Christopher A. Lee
2010-05-01 15:41:05 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 May 2010 07:05:32 -0400, old man joe <***@home.001>
wrote:

What is it with you wilfully pig-ignorant, aggressively stupid,
dishonest, deluded lying morons who are in complete denial about the
real world?
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
Nobody ever said you could, imbecile.
Post by old man joe
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
Liar.

Even without abiogenesis plants still convert minerals to living
matter.
Post by old man joe
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution
Evolution is nothing to do with atheism or vice versa. So why do you
keep repeating this lie, lying liar who lies through his teeth?

It is a set of observations that won't go away no matter how many
lying creationists like you lie through their teeth about it, lying
liar.

Darwin merely gave the first scientifically derived explanation for
it.

And research to confirm or refute it shoed not just that he was right
but led to who new sciences and technologies that wouldn't even exist
without it. Including genetics, biotech, forensic use of DNA etc. And
genetics even led to the discovery of a second mechanism for evolution
- genetic drift.
Post by old man joe
does not need a starting point is exactly where the fun begins.
It doesn't, lying liar who lies through his teeth. It is the observed
change and divergence of life over time.
Post by old man joe
to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.
It says nothing about how life originated, liar.

That is abiogenesis - a parsimonious label for life from non-life.

Which is a completely different field, and part of biochemistry not
biology, liar.

As long ago as the 1950s amino acids and other building blocks of life
were shown to be produced by natural processes BY SCIENTISTS, and it
is nothing to do with atheism or vice versa.

Followed by the production of simple proto cells BY SCIENTISTS who
applied heat amino acids resulting in thermal proteins, and then
immersing the residue in salt water. More natural processes. So they
knew it happened, but not how or why.

More recently Jack Szostak has been researching the how and the why,
producing these results in his lab at Harvard...



Watch this, show you have understood it and ASK intelligent questions
instead of lying about it.
Post by old man joe
this, they studiously avoid.
The only people avoiding anything are lying creationists like you,
lying liar who lies through his teeth.
Post by old man joe
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God
Liar.
Post by old man joe
when
required to show from their brand of science exactly how life
IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM, LIAR.
Post by old man joe
came from elements that are not alive... after all, for
Explained to you several times. You just can't stop lying, can you?
Post by old man joe
Evolution to be true, the second living thing had to evolve
out of the first living thing. Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing
came into existence.
Liar.
Post by old man joe
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic
Table. nothing in it is alive.
Nothing to do with evolution, liar.
Post by old man joe
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these
elements. botta-bing... a dead human being has exactly the same
elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other
is alive.
Good thing that's just your dishonest straw man, serial liar.
Post by old man joe
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive...
SO FUCKING WHAT?
Post by old man joe
ya get it, boys ? no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive. these elements constitute our physical beings
but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.
SO FUCKING WHAT?
Post by old man joe
life comes from the Living God,
What "Living Good", question-begging imbecile?

It takes a fucking moron to insist to people outside his religion,
that its god did anything.
Post by old man joe
not Darwin;
The only people who say it did, are lying creationists putting words
into other people's mouths.
Post by old man joe
the Atheist
explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
What "atheist explanation" are you lying about, lying liar who lies
through his teeth?
Post by old man joe
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the
Atheists once said on a Natgeo program aired 2 years ago, the
SCIENTISTS, many of whom are Christian, not atheists, liar.

AND THEY EXPLAIN HOW THEY REACH THAT CONCLUSION - from genetics,
comparative morphology, protein chemistry and paleontology.
Post by old man joe
dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from s
omething alive... all the way back to the very first living thing
which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
Liar.

Again, SCIENCE *C*O*N*C*L*U*D*E*S* THIS, and it is nothing to do with
atheism.

Dinosaur evolution:
http://www.youtube.com/user/djarm67#p/c/887668013730BFEE
Post by old man joe
at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.
That's why it's called abiogenesis, imbecile.
Post by old man joe
botta-bing ! non-living elements came together in just the right
way and gave life to itself. this is all made possible from the
early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH DARWIN, IMBECILE.

Watch the frikking videos about abiogenesis.
Post by old man joe
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk,
cooled off over time, which is not alive either, and lo and behold,
non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
Watch the frikking videos, liar.
Post by old man joe
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to
Liar.
Post by old man joe
think that don't have the wrath of God and Judgment Day hanging
over their head's.
Why do you imagine anybody gives a thought to somebody else's
religion's threat?

Face it, are you scared of being reincarnated as a maggot for not
being a good little Hindu?

Are you really, honestly this stupid?
Post by old man joe
dream on, boys.
It's your strawman, lying liar who doesn't stop lying through his
teeth.
Post by old man joe
now, watch the cursing of God
Liar.
Post by old man joe
and man begin since they can not
refute that God is the Giver of life,
Liar.
Post by old man joe
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them,
Liar.
Post by old man joe
rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
What kind of fucking moron imagines the scripture of somebody else's
religion has any authority for people outside that religion?
Ken
2010-05-01 15:49:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
What kind of fucking moron imagines the scripture of somebody else's
religion has any authority for people outside that religion?
A creationut moron, but that's being a bit repetitive, isn't it
JayPee Vee
2010-05-01 16:01:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
"Ho!" <whack>
Uncle Vic
2010-05-01 17:09:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
And your conclusive evidence for this is?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
"The Bible talks about the first rainbow after the Great Flood, and we see
rainbows in the sky today. This is proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ
and the existence of God." - Zacharias Mulletstein
Joe Bruno
2010-05-01 17:20:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.  to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.  this, they studiously avoid.
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing.  Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table.  nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements.  botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ?  no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive.  these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.  life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.
botta-bing !  non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave life to itself.  this
is all made possible from the early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk, cooled off over time, which is not
alive either, and lo and behold, non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to think that don't have the wrath of
God and Judgment Day hanging over their head's.
dream on, boys.
now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
Charles Darwin was not an atheist:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin%27s_religious_views
Virgil
2010-05-01 19:21:09 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Joe Bruno
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin%27s_religious_views
In his later life he certainly had some doubts.
Grisha
2010-05-01 21:55:01 UTC
Permalink
According to most biographies he lost his faith gradually and the
death of his daughter was the last drop/straw. After that he
oscillated between atheism and agnosticism.
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.  to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.  this, they studiously avoid.
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing.  Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table.  nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements.  botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ?  no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive.  these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.  life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.
botta-bing !  non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave life to itself.  this
is all made possible from the early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk, cooled off over time, which is not
alive either, and lo and behold, non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to think that don't have the wrath of
God and Judgment Day hanging over their head's.
dream on, boys.
now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin%27s_religious_views
Burkhard
2010-05-01 17:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
Funnily enough, not according to Christian folklore;
http://www.libraryireland.com/Wonders/Bleeding-Stone.php

But my guess is that the spoilsport atheists are not going to believe
it.
Post by old man joe
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.
 to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.  this, they studiously avoid.
Well, what is maybe vaguely funny is your misunderstanding of the
theory of evolution. Evolution did indeed need a starting point.
Everything does. The theory of Evolution by contrast is a scientific
framework that explains only a small part of reality, to wit, why we
have a huge diversity of species which nonetheless have a recurring
pattern of similarity between them.

For this theory, it is neither necessary, nor indeed helpful, to
explain how life came into being.

Linguistic theories of vowel change that explain how modern English
evolved from Germanic languages do not need to describe where language
comes from, or even the history of Germanic languages.

The history of the United States does not need to describe how
Britain was colonised by Celtic tribes.

Explaining and teaching the laws of baseball does not require to
describe or explain the laws of cricket, despite baseball being a
corrupted form cricket.

An architect or bricklayer know how bricks can be used to build a
house, but they don't need to know, and often do not know, how rock
formation happens, let alone about the Big Bang

etc etc etc
Post by old man joe
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing.
Indeed, which should answer your question, really: the theory of
evolution explains things only after there is life,

Evolution doesn't want
Post by old man joe
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.
Evolution is a natural process and doesn't say much, anyway.
Evolutionary biologists, in their professional capacity are quite
happy to say that the theory of evolution has no answer to, and indeed
not much interest in, the question how life came into existence. Some
of them will be aware though of the fascinating research that other
scientists do in that field.
Post by old man joe
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table.  nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements.  botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.
and a diamond has exactly the same elements as a pencil. And a house
has exactly the same elements as a rock quarry. With other words,
"Having the same elements as" is a necessary, but not sufficient
condition for "being the same as".
Post by old man joe
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ?  no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive.  these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.  life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
You are confusing the theory of evolution, a scientific theory, with
atheism, an attitude to metaphysics. Evolutionary biologists, be they
Christians, Hindus or atheists, have no direct involevement with the
question of the origins of llife.
<snip>
Virgil
2010-05-01 19:18:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a
starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.
Since Evolution says absolutely nothing about how life began, there is
no possible such beginning that could falsify Evolution.

Those who claim otherwise have no understanding of science.

[snipped "omj"'s further variations on that disabled theme]
Father Haskell
2010-05-01 21:41:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
And you'll never get a holey ghost out of a church.
Budikka666
2010-05-01 22:28:24 UTC
Permalink
When creation goes up against evolution, creation gets trounced:
Item 1: http://tinyurl.com/mnkb94
Item 2: http://tinyurl.com/n9dcfh
Item 3: http://tinyurl.com/kt2exk
Item 4: http://tinyurl.com/mfztxy
Item 5: http://tinyurl.com/n596r7
Item 6: http://tinyurl.com/ncree3
Item 7: http://tinyurl.com/nqufcj
Item 8: http://tinyurl.com/p7vu8u
Item 9: http://tinyurl.com/lxjw29
Item 10: http://tinyurl.com/muapjy
Item 11: http://tinyurl.com/nvdqsz
Item 12: http://tinyurl.com/ovpe85
Item 13: http://tinyurl.com/ltk5fy
Item 14: http://tinyurl.com/loykqv
Item 15: http://tinyurl.com/koarf7
Item 16: http://tinyurl.com/lq5jwg
Item 17: http://tinyurl.com/oyjkpu
Item 18: http://tinyurl.com/qha55o
Item 19: http://tinyurl.com/l6e6u2
item 20: http://tinyurl.com/krp2g5

Here are 26 proofs of macroevolution, every one of which Liar Dave ran
from rather than give the scientific discussion he lied he would:
http://tinyurl.com/78y2p

666 items of strong evidence for macroevolution, every one of which
Liar Dave ran from rather than give the scientific discussion he lied
he would:
Example 1: http://tinyurl.com/dxqjc
Example 2: http://tinyurl.com/d4376
Example 3: http://tinyurl.com/d5vqm
Example 4: http://tinyurl.com/dmbxj
Example 5: http://tinyurl.com/cy7r7
Example 6: http://tinyurl.com/dj9sh
Example 7: http://tinyurl.com/aplxu
Example 8: http://tinyurl.com/clpsx
Examples 9-539: http://tinyurl.com/cy9m2
Example 540: http://tinyurl.com/dsjku
Example 541: http://tinyurl.com/bhxw2
Example 542: http://tinyurl.com/77tyl
Example 543: http://tinyurl.com/bpdqm
Example 544: http://tinyurl.com/czsdq
Example 545: http://tinyurl.com/9qnrc
Example 546: http://tinyurl.com/dxg8s
Example 547: http://tinyurl.com/88kch
Example 548: http://tinyurl.com/88kch (shared with 547 thread)
Example 549: http://tinyurl.com/ccw8y
Example 550: http://tinyurl.com/7cxsz
Example 551: http://tinyurl.com/74o4q
Examples 552-577: http://tinyurl.com/7u8lv
Example 578: http://tinyurl.com/9xo8o
Example 579: http://tinyurl.com/avzzk
Example 580: http://tinyurl.com/7segx
Example 581: http://tinyurl.com/8c8od
Example 582: http://tinyurl.com/9voan
Example 583: http://tinyurl.com/76zao (misnumbered as 582)
Example 584: http://tinyurl.com/crzmz
Example 585: http://tinyurl.com/exagp
Examples 586-590: http://tinyurl.com/c4pea
Example 591: http://tinyurl.com/9aveh
Example 592: http://tinyurl.com/d2vmd
Example 593: http://tinyurl.com/dsg6z
Example 594: http://tinyurl.com/75rdt
Example 595: http://tinyurl.com/ak3oo
Example 596: http://tinyurl.com/anqh5
Example 597: http://tinyurl.com/89zjr
Example 598: http://tinyurl.com/9s6cq
Example 599: http://tinyurl.com/7oorv
Example 600: http://tinyurl.com/cujkx
Examples 601-608: http://tinyurl.com/bnflb
Examples 609-615: http://tinyurl.com/9pl7b
Examples 616-635: http://tinyurl.com/cqb3n
Examples 636-666: http://tinyurl.com/ay53o

"Five Questions Evolutionists Would Rather Dodge" are not dodged at:
http://tinyurl.com/8d77u
And 10 questions creationists would rather dodge are dodged at:
http://tinyurl.com/7lvwr
And finally, a leading supporter of intelligent design is disowned by
his own university:
http://tinyurl.com/dydbr
And embarrassed on court on the topic:
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Day11PMSession.pdf

And finally, be sure to check Past It Dave's Sure-Fire Guide to
Winning Arguments to see how many of his rules he adhered to in this
"response":
http://tinyurl.com/e37pw

Bible Absurdities, Contradictions, and Lies, parts 1 - 8:
http://tinyurl.com/8bsws
http://tinyurl.com/aumcy
http://tinyurl.com/bpy24
http://tinyurl.com/b34ts
http://tinyurl.com/cfodb
http://tinyurl.com/974pu
http://tinyurl.com/77ga3
http://tinyurl.com/cjcp7

Evolution is supported by solid science. Intelligent design is
nothing
but tired religion. Read "Vital Dust" by Nobel laureate Christian de
Duve. Read about the many experiments that have produced organic
chemicals that are the basis of life. Read about how these same
chemicals are found in space.

Read about:
Abiogenesis:
http://home.houston.rr.com/apologia/orgel.htm
http://informationcentre.tripod.com/abiogenesis.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/default.htm

Proto cells:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1142840.stm

Factories of life:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/275738.stm

Lab molecules mimic life:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm

Mechanism for evolution described:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/222096.stm

Smallest genome a lot smaller than smallest modern cell:
http://mednews.stanford.edu/news_releases_html/2001/febreleases/bioet...

Precambrian to cambrian:
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/evolution/PSCF12-97Miller.html

Early diversification:
http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/Ecology/early_animal_evolution.htm

Transitional forms:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Primitive fish different:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/504776.stm

Fish with fingers:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/fishfossil0312.html

Snake with legs:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/680116.stm

Ant-wasp evolution:
http://research.amnh.org/entomology/social_insects/publications/ms_sp...

Mosquitoes still evolving:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/158522.stm

Origins of flight:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2664541.stm

4-winged dinos:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2684927.stm

Dog evolution:
http://www.provet.co.uk/online/dogs/evolution%20of%20the%20dog.htm

Human evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

Computer simulated evolution:
http://necsi.org/postdocs/sayama/sdsr/

Evolution vs. creationism debates:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/science/creationism/debates.html

Evolution not "atheist religion":
http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Inside/01-97/creat2.html

29 Evidences supporting evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

The evolution of the eye:
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/eye.html

The woodpecker's tongue:
http://omega.med.yale.edu/~rjr38/Woodpecker.htm

Radiometric dating - a Christian perpective:
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html#page

Noah's ark never happened:
http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/noahs_ark.html

Ex-creationist on why young Earth creationism doesn't work:
http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/

Another ex-creationist:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/

Creationists cannot define "kind":
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/kinds.htm

Even evolutionists believe in God!:
http://www.exn.ca/Stories/1997/04/04/01.asp

General anti-creationism/pro-evolution FAQs:
http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/index.html
http://www.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/newindex.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-meritt/complexity.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/specif...
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Creationism.htm
http://vuletic.com/hume/cefec/index.html

Questionable creationist credentials:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html

Even dyed-in-the-wool creationists think a lot of their arguments are
bad:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

Why There Is No God:
Parts 1-5 at: http://tinyurl.com/6uhnl
Part 6 at: http://tinyurl.com/3ms66
Parts 7-11 at: http://tinyurl.com/5yhjn
Part 12 at: http://tinyurl.com/5ndow
Parts 13-15 at: http://tinyurl.com/65x6g
Parts 16-25 at: http://tinyurl.com/3jmrq
Parts 26-42 at: http://tinyurl.com/4569y
Parts 43-50 at: http://tinyurl.com/6hkax
Parts 51-55 at: http://tinyurl.com/48abq
Parts 56-65 at: http://tinyurl.com/4a95v
Parts 66-70 at: http://tinyurl.com/3jyxg
Parts 70-78 at: http://tinyurl.com/3jyxg
Parts 79-90 at: http://tinyurl.com/6aa8l
Parts 91-99 at: http://tinyurl.com/6xnhh
Parts 100-119 at: http://tinyurl.com/9fcsw
Parts 120-139 at: http://tinyurl.com/bp8za
Parts 140-155 at: http://tinyurl.com/72vlr
Parts 156-170 at: http://tinyurl.com/d3ubb
Parts 171-174 at: http://tinyurl.com/8jcja
Parts 175-189 at: http://tinyurl.com/cuvxb
Parts 190-199 at: http://tinyurl.com/9uo6f
Parts 200-219 at: http://tinyurl.com/8tsrg
Parts 220-235 at: http://tinyurl.com/a9rc2
Parts 236-245 at: http://tinyurl.com/b9of7
Parts 246-254 at: http://tinyurl.com/cz9yq
Parts 255-280 at: http://tinyurl.com/aze8x
Parts 281-299 at: http://tinyurl.com/7dn3s
Parts 300-325 at: http://tinyurl.com/bj4mu
Parts 326-360 at: http://tinyurl.com/8unme
Parts 361-400 at: http://tinyurl.com/89tdu
Parts 401-500 at: http://tinyurl.com/8un3t
Parts 501-550 at: http://tinyurl.com/8snjp
Parts 551-600 at: http://tinyurl.com/nakgj
Parts 601-640 at: http://tinyurl.com/lrzuz
Parts 641-666 at: http://tinyurl.com/pjjg7

Budikka
MarkA
2010-05-03 16:32:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
So says someone who still believes that there is some mystical animating
force in living things that makes them intrinsically different from the
non-living. That notion was popular before science discovered that the
line between living and non-living was not as sharp as they thought it
would be.
--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock
Father Haskell
2010-05-03 22:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by MarkA
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
So says someone who still believes that there is some mystical animating
force in living things that makes them intrinsically different from the
non-living.  That notion was popular before science discovered that the
line between living and non-living was not as sharp as they thought it
would be.
--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock
19th century, before chemists synthesized the first
organic molecules -- "organic" originally meaning
"only life can create it?"
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-06 08:39:08 UTC
Permalink
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe in
such hogwash.
fasgnadh
2010-05-06 11:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!

The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it

- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher

René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in
the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system
used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important
work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy
partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas
with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.


I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world

- Louis Pasteur 1822-95

As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.

- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727

The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.

- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918

There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.

- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918

"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington

Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.

- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911

Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)

George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)

Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)

John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)

George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)

Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)

Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)

Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)

Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)

Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)

Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)

Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)

Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.

Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)

Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)

Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)

Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)

Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)

Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)

Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)



Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)


"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein

"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28

"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)


Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;

Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry based
on experimentation and inductive reasoning.

Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.

William Turner the "father of English botany"

John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.

Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic solids
was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most famous
scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was
based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous
astronomical observations,

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.

- Galileo Galilei 1615.

..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.

- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954

The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven

- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642

Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).

Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology

Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.

John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.


Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating
machine

Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.

Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society

Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.

Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.

Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,

Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician

Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday

Charles Babbage

Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"

Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.

Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist
and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax,
chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.


Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,

Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials

Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry

John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.

Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics

Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the Milne
model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the Royal
Astronomical Society,

Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.

Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest

Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science

von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.

Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.

Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.

John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.

Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.

Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize

Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.

John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.

Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.

Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.

Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.


And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

Loading Image...


Loading Image...
L.Roberts
2010-05-06 14:09:44 UTC
Permalink
On May 6, 4:50 am, fasgnadh, the profoundly ignorant bastard
<***@yahoo.com.au> wrote: A mess of shit apropos to naught.

Seon was talking about religion ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit. Get with the program, will
ya, ya dumb fuck.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 03:09:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by L.Roberts
On May 6, 4:50 am, fasgnadh, the profoundly ignorant bastard
Seon was talking about religion ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit. Get with the program, will
ya, ya dumb fuck.
No wonder my server wouldn't let me open his reply. Maybe it auto detected
he was an ignorant troll.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 03:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
On May 6, 4:50 am, fasgnadh, the profoundly ignorant bastard
Seon was talking about religion ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit. Get with the program, will
ya, ya dumb fuck.
No wonder my server wouldn't let me open his reply. Maybe it auto detected
he was an ignorant troll.
I can open it now, whoop die do. But anyway yes that had nothing to do with
what I said.
fasgnadh
2010-05-07 09:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Seon received a Darwin award, not a Nobel prize! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution
in the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate
system used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did
important work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First
Philosophy partially concerns theology and he was devoted to
reconciling his ideas with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he
was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry
based on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic
solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most
famous scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary
motion, was based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho
Brahe's meticulous astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography,
helped develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a
calculating machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist
and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax,
chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the
Milne model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the
Royal Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Seon was talking about religion
So were all the Greatest Scientists in the history of the planet.

You naturally agree with a dumbfuck nobody like Seon,
and I naturally think that the pantheon of brilliant
scientific geniuses is worth listening to, but you are not.

Thanks for proving my point by giving us an example
of your best thinking on the subject, so I can compare it
to that of Pascal, Einstein and Le Maitre, all of whom clearly
possessed the RATIONAL MINDS which neither you nor Seon show
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit.
Get with the program, will ya, ya dumb fuck.
Your brain has obviously been replaced by a cheap
Taiwanese Tourettaphone! poorly played! B^D

Naturally, all the other Chimps in alt.atheism will
screach and gebber their agreement with you.. they can't
even SPELL Quantum Mechanics, and think it's a company
who could repair their car! B^D

Seon is such an ignoramus he doesn't even know a SINGLE
modern scientist.. even though I listed dozens for him!

You knuckle dragging neanderthals who attack these men as FOOLS
for having religious beliefs AS WELL as brilliant scientific minds
are, yourselves, a JOKE! B^]

You are both insignificant DUMBFUCKS who have never contributed
ONE IOTA to the sum of human knowledge, rather, you are like
Black Holes, whose super-dense idiocy SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion! B^D

Now run along and continue your practice, trying to master the only
device for your retarded IQ level, the Tourettaphone;

http://www.rathergood.com/touretteaphone
Post by Seon Ferguson
No wonder my server wouldn't let me open his reply.
A bad tradesman always blames his tools.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Maybe it auto detected he was an ignorant troll.
And you mock world class scientists who
believe in religion? pffffft!
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Virgil
2010-05-07 19:58:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
So were all the Greatest Scientists in the history of the planet.
Today, over 90% of the worlds top scientists are openly non-theist and
over half of all scientists are openly non-theist.

Since this is true also in the USA where the vast majority are theist,
this underlines the well known fact that theism correlates with both
ignorance and stupidity, and non-theism with both knowledge and
intelligence.

And, at least up until 1970 or 1980, most of the scientists who had ever
lived were still living.
fasgnadh
2010-05-08 00:13:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Seon received a Darwin award, not a Nobel prize! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution
in the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate
system used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did
important work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First
Philosophy partially concerns theology and he was devoted to
reconciling his ideas with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he
was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry
based on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic
solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most
famous scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary
motion, was based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho
Brahe's meticulous astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's
theorem (math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography,
helped develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a
calculating machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french
chemist and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies,
anthrax, chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to
the development of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the
Milne model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the
Royal Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the
Lewis Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Seon was talking about religion
So were all the Greatest Scientists in the history of the planet.
You naturally agree with a dumbfuck nobody like Seon,
and I naturally think that the pantheon of brilliant
scientific geniuses is worth listening to, but you are not.
Thanks for proving my point by giving us an example
of your best thinking on the subject, so I can compare it
to that of Pascal, Einstein and Le Maitre, all of whom clearly
possessed the RATIONAL MINDS which neither you nor Seon show
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by L.Roberts
ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit. Get with the program, will
ya, ya dumb fuck.
Your brain has obviously been replaced by a cheap
Taiwanese Tourettaphone! poorly played! B^D
Naturally, all the other Chimps in alt.atheism will
screach and gebber their agreement with you.. they can't
even SPELL Quantum Mechanics, and think it's a company
who could repair their car! B^D
Seon is such an ignoramus he doesn't even know a SINGLE
modern scientist.. even though I listed dozens for him!
Virgil is even MORE insane, if that is possible;
Post by Virgil
up until 1970 or 1980, most of the scientists who had ever
lived were still living.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA


Can you believe these cretins? Galileo and Newton, Maxwell
Pascal, Pasteur.. etc etc were still living by 1970!?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAAHAA
living
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You knuckle dragging neanderthals who attack these men as FOOLS
for having religious beliefs AS WELL as brilliant scientific minds
are, yourselves, a JOKE! B^]
You are both insignificant DUMBFUCKS who have never contributed
ONE IOTA to the sum of human knowledge, rather, you are like
Black Holes, whose super-dense idiocy SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion! B^D
Now run along and continue your practice, trying to master the only
device for your retarded IQ level, the Tourettaphone;
http://www.rathergood.com/touretteaphone
Post by Seon Ferguson
No wonder my server wouldn't let me open his reply.
A bad tradesman always blames his tools.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Maybe it auto detected he was an ignorant troll.
And you mock world class scientists who
believe in religion? pffffft!
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Virgil
2010-05-08 04:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Virgil is even MORE insane, if that is possible;
Post by Virgil
up until 1970 or 1980, most of the scientists who had ever
lived were still living.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA
The number of scientists had been increasing exponentially throughout
the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries anyway.

Then as a direct result of the WWII, many who would not otherwise have
become scientists were drafted into it.

The Manhattan Project alone drafted thousands into scientific work.

So, as usual, Fasgnadh has picked the wrong side of this issue.
fasgnadh
2010-05-07 07:57:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Seon received a Darwin award, not a Nobel prize! B^D
Post by L.Roberts
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in
the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system
used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important
work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy
partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas
with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry based
on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic solids
was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most famous
scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was
based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous
astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating
machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist
and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax,
chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the Milne
model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the Royal
Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Seon was talking about religion
So were all the Greatest Scientists in the history of the planet.

You naturally agree with a dumbfuck nobody like Seon,
and I naturally think that the pantheon of brilliant
scientific geniuses is worth listening to, but you are not.

Thanks for proving my point by giving us an example
of your best thinking on the subject, so I can compare it
to that of Pascal, Einstein and Le Maitre, all of whom clearly
possessed the RATIONAL MINDS which neither you nor Seon show
Post by L.Roberts
ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit.
Get with the program, will ya, ya dumb fuck.
Your brain has obviously been replaced by a cheap
Taiwanese Tourettaphone! poorly played! B^D


Naturally, all the other Chimps in alt.atheism will
screach and gebber their agreement with you.. they can't
even SPELL Quantum Mechanics, and think it's a company
who could repair their car! B^D

Seon is such an ignoramus he doesn't even know a SINGLE
modern scientist.. even though I listed dozens for him!

You knuckle dragging neanderthals who attack these men as FOOLS
for having religious beliefs AS WELL as brilliant scientific minds
are, yourselves, a JOKE! B^]

You are both insignificant DUMBFUCKS who have never contributed
ONE IOTA to the sum of human knowledge, rather, you are like
Black Holes, whose super-dense idiocy SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion! B^D

Now run along and continue your practice, trying to master the only
device for your retarded IQ level, the Tourettaphone;

http://www.rathergood.com/touretteaphone
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Virgil
2010-05-07 19:51:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by L.Roberts
Seon was talking about religion
Of a 445 line posting by Fasgnadh , the above is the only line Fasgnadh
did NOT write, and the only line that made any sense.

The non-theist version of atheism can hardly be as foolish as Fasgnadh
tries to claim when, as is the case today, over 90% of the worlds TOP
scientists are openly non-theist and a clear majority of ALL scientists
are also openly non-theist.
George
2010-05-07 20:10:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by L.Roberts
Seon was talking about religion
Of a 445 line posting by Fasgnadh , the above is the only line Fasgnadh
did NOT write, and the only line that made any sense.
The non-theist version of atheism can hardly be as foolish as Fasgnadh
tries to claim when, as is the case today, over 90% of the worlds TOP
scientists are openly non-theist and a clear majority of ALL scientists
are also openly non-theist.
Trying to make sense of Fasgnadh a godbotherer posting religious
diatribe into an athiest newsgroup is like poking holes in water so
the fish can breath !
fasgnadh
2010-05-08 00:23:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Virgil
atheism can hardly be as foolish as
# From: Haywire <***@gmail.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: You know what's really sad?
# Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 17:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
# Message-ID:
# <a760daf5-925d-4f44-8003-***@a7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
#
# > I wish a believer with even half of a brain
# > would come here so we could have real discussions.
#
# Seconded.
# If there are any of you out there,
# come on in,
#
# we don't bite!

Lies!

The atheist hypocrites got their wish, someone
with half a brain posted on the Book of Moroni,
and they all wet themselselves with excitement;


From: Budikka666 <***@netscape.net>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: The Book of Mormon / KJV Bible Connection
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:
<e89f6e2d-f76f-4f70-beb1-***@c21g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

# On Apr 23, 8:24=A0pm, "Xan Du" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
# > "Budikka666" <***@netscape.net> wrote in message
# > news:d3785d3a-58c1-4fc7-9621-***@i40g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
# >
# >>The more we learn about religion, the better armed
# >>we are to beat it down where it belongs!
# >
# > >Budikka
# >
# > Thanks for the support guys. Since we hardly ever talk about
# > Mormonism on alt.religion.mormon anymore, I might just
# > treat y'all to a weekly column.
# >
# > -Xan
#
# Looking forward to it!
#
# Budikka
Post by George
Trying to make sense of
a godbotherer posting religious
diatribe into an athiest newsgroup is like poking holes in water so
the fish can breath !
Sure, but atheists are clearly FUCKWITTED DELUSIONAL HYPOCRITES who
lie pathologically and can't maintain a coherent rational argument!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA!

Showing what fools atheists are is like shooting FISH IN A BARREL!



Here's what the atheists were running from when they started that
latest irrational and self-contradicting RANT;
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Seon received a Darwin award, not a Nobel prize! B^D
Post by George
Post by Virgil
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution
in the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system
used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important
work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy
partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas
with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry
based on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic
solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most
famous scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion,
was based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's
meticulous astronomical observations,
Post by George
Post by Virgil
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's
theorem (math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a
calculating machine
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french
chemist and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies,
anthrax, chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the
Milne model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the
Royal Astronomical Society,
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the
Lewis Thomas Prize.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
Post by George
Post by Virgil
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Seon was talking about religion
So were all the Greatest Scientists in the history of the planet.

You naturally agree with a dumbfuck nobody like Seon,
and I naturally think that the pantheon of brilliant
scientific geniuses is worth listening to, but you are not.

Thanks for proving my point by giving us an example
of your best thinking on the subject, so I can compare it
to that of Pascal, Einstein and Le Maitre, all of whom clearly
possessed the RATIONAL MINDS which neither you nor Seon show
Post by George
ya jackass bastard. Nothing you posted
had to do with his statement, ya dumbshit.
Get with the program, will ya, ya dumb fuck.
Your brain has obviously been replaced by a cheap
Taiwanese Tourettaphone! poorly played! B^D


Naturally, all the other Chimps in alt.atheism will
screach and gebber their agreement with you.. they can't
even SPELL Quantum Mechanics, and think it's a company
who could repair their car! B^D

Seon is such an ignoramus he doesn't even know a SINGLE
modern scientist.. even though I listed dozens for him!

You knuckle dragging neanderthals who attack these men as FOOLS
for having religious beliefs AS WELL as brilliant scientific minds
are, yourselves, a JOKE! B^]

You are both insignificant DUMBFUCKS who have never contributed
ONE IOTA to the sum of human knowledge, rather, you are like
Black Holes, whose super-dense idiocy SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion! B^D

Now run along and continue your practice, trying to master the only
device for your retarded IQ level, the Tourettaphone;

http://www.rathergood.com/touretteaphone
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Virgil
2010-05-08 03:59:26 UTC
Permalink
Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is also rising.

Those who are still trying to sell theism are losing market share,
particularly among the more intelligent.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-08 00:09:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by L.Roberts
Seon was talking about religion
Of a 445 line posting by Fasgnadh , the above is the only line Fasgnadh
did NOT write, and the only line that made any sense.
The non-theist version of atheism can hardly be as foolish as Fasgnadh
tries to claim when, as is the case today, over 90% of the worlds TOP
scientists are openly non-theist and a clear majority of ALL scientists
are also openly non-theist.
Exactly and most of the scientists fasgandh posted lived in a time where the
church controlled science.
Virgil
2010-05-07 20:24:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;
The openly non-theists of today include over 90% of the worlds top
scientists and over 50% of all scientists
Post by fasgnadh
You naturally agree with a dumbfuck nobody like Seon
Far better to agree with someone sensible like Seon rather that someone
idiotic and compulsively wrong like Fasgnadh.
Post by fasgnadh
and I naturally think that the pantheon of brilliant
scientific geniuses is worth listening to
The openly non-theists of today include over 90% of the worlds top
scientists and over 50% of all scientists, and this has been the case
for almost a half century.
Post by fasgnadh
Thanks for proving my point by giving us an example
of your best thinking on the subject, so I can compare it
to that of Pascal, Einstein and Le Maitre, all of whom clearly
possessed the RATIONAL MINDS which neither you nor Seon show
any signs of possessing
Einstein openly rejected the claims of all established religions, so
that fasgnadh is citing him in support of what he despised.
Post by fasgnadh
Your brain has obviously been replaced by a cheap
Taiwanese Tourettaphone! poorly played! B^D
Fasgnadh again descends to ad hominem argument.
Post by fasgnadh
Naturally, all the other Chimps in alt.atheism
Fasgnadh again descends to ad hominem argument. But forgets that he is
one of the more prolific posters in alt.atheism so names himslef a Chimp.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon is such an ignoramus he doesn't even know a SINGLE
modern scientist.. even though I listed dozens for him!
Few of those Fasgnadh listed are alive. And of todays top scientists,
over 90% openly non-theist, so prove Fasgnadh foolishly wrong.
Post by fasgnadh
You knuckle dragging neanderthals who attack these men as FOOLS
for having religious beliefs AS WELL as brilliant scientific minds
are, yourselves, a JOKE!
By comparison to todays non-theists scientists, you theists are the
knuckle dragging neanderthals.
Post by fasgnadh
You are both insignificant DUMBFUCKS who have never contributed
ONE IOTA to the sum of human knowledge
Those 90% non-theist top scientists are contributing a good deal more
light and a good deal less heat than fasgnadh.


, rather, you are like
Post by fasgnadh
Black Holes, whose super-dense idiocy SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion!
Fasgnadh, and his ilk aref this NG's super-dense idiots whose reliance
on ad homs rather than logic SUCKS the intelligence out of any
discussion the enter!

So that Fasgnadh is the one whose prose is tourette-like.
Virgil
2010-05-06 19:59:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.

Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 03:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Burkhard
2010-05-07 06:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;       BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try

Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS

to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 06:36:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian who
embraces evolution. What I am against is religious people who deny evolution
straight out because they think it goes against their scriptures.
Post by Burkhard
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
The rest seem to be professors and stuff but still intelligent. I'm not sure
what their views on evolution are but I still don't think credible
scientists are creationists who deny evolution. There's mountains of
evidence to support evolution. If your religious then just adapt your views
to support the evidence.
Burkhard
2010-05-07 18:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;       BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know)  try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian who
embraces evolution. What I am against is religious people who deny evolution
straight out because they think it goes against their scriptures.
Post by Burkhard
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
The rest seem to be professors and stuff but still intelligent. I'm not sure
what their views on evolution are but I still don't think credible
scientists are creationists who deny evolution. There's mountains of
evidence to support evolution. If your religious then just adapt your views
to support the evidence.
Sorry, misunderstanding - NONE of them denies evolution, and would be
shocked by the idea. The post I replied to asked only for "devout
believers" not for "lunatic evolution deniers". They are all UK based
(FRS = Fellow of the Royal Society", i.e. the top level of UK
scientists), and over here the Churches of England and Scotland
actively participated celebrating Darwin year.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 23:59:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely with
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their public
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian who
embraces evolution. What I am against is religious people who deny evolution
straight out because they think it goes against their scriptures.
Post by Burkhard
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
The rest seem to be professors and stuff but still intelligent. I'm not sure
what their views on evolution are but I still don't think credible
scientists are creationists who deny evolution. There's mountains of
evidence to support evolution. If your religious then just adapt your views
to support the evidence.
Sorry, misunderstanding - NONE of them denies evolution, and would be
shocked by the idea. The post I replied to asked only for "devout
believers" not for "lunatic evolution deniers". They are all UK based
(FRS = Fellow of the Royal Society", i.e. the top level of UK
scientists), and over here the Churches of England and Scotland
actively participated celebrating Darwin year.
So why can't all Christians be like that? Is it ignorance? Or just because
they listen to what other ignorant authors say. I have nothing against
Christians who embrace evolution and teach it to their kids or support it
being taught as science.
fasgnadh
2010-05-08 01:06:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were >>
believers.
Post by Virgil
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely
with
Post by Virgil
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their
public
Post by Virgil
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian
who embraces evolution.
No you don't;

"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."

You don't even acknowledge brillian Christian scientists of the past,
let alone the present.

YOu are on record DENYING that Galileo and Newton were Christians.
Post by Seon Ferguson
What I am against
Is having someone show what a WINDSOCK you are, shifting ground as if
you think people have forgotten what you said just five minutes ago!


"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon

"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."

Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"

Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"

Seon: "I am happy believing in God"

Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."

Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
Post by Seon Ferguson
is religious people who deny evolution straight
out because they think it goes against their scriptures.
Catholic, Protestant Jewish and Muslim schools in my state,
all teach evolution, yet you have broadly dismissed 'religion'
as laughable hogwash and now tell us it is merely the tiny
subset of Creation Science you are referring to.

You are a slandering moron.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
The rest seem to be professors and stuff but still intelligent.
None of them had been exposed to your posts, guaranteed
to such the intelligence from the room like a Black
Hole of malign ignorance.
Post by Seon Ferguson
I'm not sure
The only truthful thing you have posted in years.
Post by Seon Ferguson
what their views on evolution are
How many times do you think you can PRETEND we are discussing
something NEW, just because you have woken up that you have been
aggressively asserting COMPLETELY LAUGHABLE HOGWASH which you
cannot support with rational argument and now have to ground shift?

"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash." Now, presented with a list of...

"any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st century who are devout
believers."

... you don't apologise for your ignorance,
you don't apologise for your lies, you don't beg pardon from those
who have shown what a FOOL you are...

you try and move to a discussion of 'evolution' when the major
churches and OTHER WORLD RELIGIONS .. TEACH IT in their schools.
Post by Seon Ferguson
but I still don't think
That's two honest statements from you! 8^o

Theist scientists have always been at the forefront of human knowledge,
religious systems have inspired, built and sustained the worlds great
and enduring civilisations, and atheism has managed only a handful of
20th century states, every one of which was a totalitarian disaster.

Why are atheists so obtuse?
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-08 01:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were >>
believers.
Post by Virgil
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely
with
Post by Virgil
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their
public
Post by Virgil
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian
who embraces evolution.
No you don't;
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."
You don't even acknowledge brillian Christian scientists of the past,
let alone the present.
YOu are on record DENYING that Galileo and Newton were Christians.
Post by Seon Ferguson
What I am against
Is having someone show what a WINDSOCK you are, shifting ground as if
you think people have forgotten what you said just five minutes ago!
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."
Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"
Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"
Seon: "I am happy believing in God"
Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."
Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
Post by Seon Ferguson
is religious people who deny evolution straight
out because they think it goes against their scriptures.
Catholic, Protestant Jewish and Muslim schools in my state,
all teach evolution, yet you have broadly dismissed 'religion'
as laughable hogwash and now tell us it is merely the tiny
subset of Creation Science you are referring to.
You are a slandering moron.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
The rest seem to be professors and stuff but still intelligent.
None of them had been exposed to your posts, guaranteed
to such the intelligence from the room like a Black
Hole of malign ignorance.
Post by Seon Ferguson
I'm not sure
The only truthful thing you have posted in years.
Post by Seon Ferguson
what their views on evolution are
How many times do you think you can PRETEND we are discussing
something NEW, just because you have woken up that you have been
aggressively asserting COMPLETELY LAUGHABLE HOGWASH which you
cannot support with rational argument and now have to ground shift?
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash." Now, presented with a list of...
"any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st century who are devout
believers."
... you don't apologise for your ignorance,
you don't apologise for your lies, you don't beg pardon from those
who have shown what a FOOL you are...
you try and move to a discussion of 'evolution' when the major
churches and OTHER WORLD RELIGIONS .. TEACH IT in their schools.
Post by Seon Ferguson
but I still don't think
That's two honest statements from you! 8^o
Theist scientists have always been at the forefront of human knowledge,
religious systems have inspired, built and sustained the worlds great and
enduring civilisations, and atheism has managed only a handful of 20th
century states, every one of which was a totalitarian disaster.
Why are atheists so obtuse?
Don't tell me how I feel. I know I respect Christians who believe in
evolution. That's why i respect the Bahai faith, it says science and
religion can live in harmony.
Post by fasgnadh
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
I was rejecting religion, mainly Islam
Post by fasgnadh
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."
You can believe in God without believing in religion.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"
I still believed in God I just wanted the evidence. You never provided it
for me. All you did was accuse atheists of being communists.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"
I never said I didn't believe in God I just acknowledged there was no
evidence.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon: "I am happy believing in God"
As I said I was rejecting religion, mainly Islam.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."
I never said I didn't believe in God I just acknowledged there was no
evidence.
Post by fasgnadh
Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
Yep and I still don't take anything you say seriously. You are the one who
resorted to silly childish names.

By the way you say you are agnostic. Are you also agnostic about the God and
Goddess of Wicca? Are you agnostic about the Gods and Goddesses of Paganism?
Are you agnostic about Buddha or the Hindu Gods? Well answer me, why are you
only agnostic about God and why can't you define God?
Virgil
2010-05-08 04:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were >>
believers.
Post by Virgil
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely
with
Post by Virgil
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their
public
Post by Virgil
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian
who embraces evolution.
No you don't;
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."
You don't even acknowledge brillian Christian scientists of the past,
let alone the present.
YOu are on record DENYING that Galileo and Newton were Christians.
They had no choice in the matter. But today's scientists do.
AND
Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is also rising.
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
Post by fasgnadh
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."
Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"
Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"
Seon: "I am happy believing in God"
Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."
Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-08 05:05:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them to be
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were >>
believers.
Post by Virgil
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived under the
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely
with
Post by Virgil
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their
public
Post by Virgil
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in the 21st
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post well...they
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian
who embraces evolution.
No you don't;
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."
You don't even acknowledge brillian Christian scientists of the past,
let alone the present.
YOu are on record DENYING that Galileo and Newton were Christians.
They had no choice in the matter. But today's scientists do.
AND
Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is also rising.
That's what I have been trying to point out. Your sure better at explaining
things then I am.
Post by Virgil
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
Post by fasgnadh
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."
Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"
Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"
Seon: "I am happy believing in God"
Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."
Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
fasgnadh
2010-05-08 06:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; >>> >>
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
Since over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and have been ever since it has been safe for them
to >>> > be
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
open about it, those like fasgnadh have the wrong end of that stick.
Post by fasgnadh
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were >>
believers.
Post by Virgil
Fasgnadh's list included only those who, like Galileo, lived
under >>> > the
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Virgil
repression of a dogmatic established religion which dealt severely
with
Post by Virgil
those who did not profess the faith. So their theism, like the atheism
of those living under Marxism, is only a necessary part of their
public
Post by Virgil
face, and may not be presumed to be their private belief.
Show me such a list of openly theist scientists after it became
occupationally safe for non-theist scientists to be open about their
non-theism, fasgnadh, and I will show you a list of non-theist
scientists 10 times as long.
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists living in
the >>> 21st
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
century who are devout believers. And the one's he does post >>>
well...they
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
weren't religious. Theists love misquoting them.
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
I looked that guy up, he seems intelligent and I respect any Christian
who embraces evolution.
No you don't;
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."
You don't even acknowledge brillian Christian scientists of the past,
let alone the present.
YOu are on record DENYING that Galileo and Newton were Christians.
Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising.
What has that got to do with your bum boy's LIE that Galileao and
Newton were not Christians?

How long will you try and hide him up your skirt?
Post by Seon Ferguson
That's what I have been trying to point out.
Shutup Monkey, everyone can see you can't explain your LIES,
let your string puller do your talking for you, you weak minded puppet!

Here's your last chanve to recover some dignity and not be seen
as merely Virgil's Willy warmer....

Here's a list of the top 100 scientists;

Name the 90% who you claim are atheists!!!

http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html


[ Watch the liars SQUIRM and Sqeual! ]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Your sure better at explaining things then I am.
Donald Duck is better at explaining things than you.

You are just Virgil's sockpuppet, you have no independent mind.

The proof will be that you won't be able to answer the question(you
NEVER CAN B^), and your organ grinder will have to speak for his
MONKEY! B^]

How humiliating for you, but then you are used to making a complete fool
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
Post by fasgnadh
"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash."
Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"
Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"
Seon: "I am happy believing in God"
Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."
Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
2010-05-07 10:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Virgil and Seon snipped the list of
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists
Fasgnadh's list included only those
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists
I listed dozens of the greatest scientist and you ignored them
because they are theists.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by your asinine prejudice against
people who have TWO things you lack.. powerful minds AND faith!
Post by Burkhard
Post by Seon Ferguson
living in the 21st century who are devout believers.
Who said people who approve of religion or have religious faith
had to be 'devout believers', you pathetic intellectual midget?

You and Virgil slide about, changing your story, defining
the test of reason arbitrarily because all the HISTORICAL evidence
shows that the worlds greatest scientists have always been believers..
right down to the modern age.

You quoted THREE scientists in this debate,

Hawking, Newton and Galileo ALL of them talk of GOD!!!!
the subject of religion which YOU claim is entirely hogwash and
laughable! You are the fool and you and Virgil are the JOKE!

And you are rank HYPOCRITES, now demanding that becasue ALL of Science
for MOST of human history has been done by THEISTS, that we should
not look at those examples.. but we should ONLY consider those living
in the 21st Century!!!!!!!


YOUR OWN HANDPICKED LIST OF THREE was 66% over 3 centuries old!

Newton lived in the 17th century, Galileo SIX HUNDRED years ago,
yet you dismissed hundreds of the most important scientists in
history when I cited them, simply because they are all theists!!!


You and Virgil are INSANE BIGOTS who hate BOTH the greatest
scientists of all time AND men of deep and sincere faith.

You oppose BOTH faith AND reason!


Now you imitate that other gibbering baboon, Virgil, and
reverse your tack, claiming that Galileao and Newton are no longer
modern enough!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAA

You change YOUR OWN ground-rules to suit when you are losing the
argument!

Pathetic, but just what we expect from two atheist nitwits
who are as clueless about the history of science as they are
about the history of faith.

Here's one of the foremost physicists of our time, Richard Feynman,
an ATHEIST, Nobel prize winner and brilliant educator, maybe he can
knock some sense into you two IGNORANT fuckwits:


Listen to what he has to say about who HE thinks is the MOST
SIGNIFICANT SCIENTIST...

"I think that the discovery of electricity and magnetism and the
electromagnetic effects which were finally worked out, the full
equations for everything was worked out by Maxwell in 1873 is
probably the most fundamental transformation, the most remarkable
thing in History, the biggest change in history!"




Feynman is that rarity, something you and virgil clearly are not,
an INTELLIGENT atheist, one who is capable of acknowledging that
BRILLIANT SCIENCE is brilliant science NO MATTER WHO MAKES IT!

And he, an atheist FAR MORE COMPETENT to comment on what is
SIGNIFICANT in science acknowledges that the the outstanding
achievement affecting the modern age, was that made by Maxwell
in 1873.
Post by Burkhard
Off the top of my head (and with a UK bias, just people I happen to
know) try
Prof. R.J. Berry , FRS
Prof. Sir Brian Heap FRS
Professor Sir Martin Evans FRS
Prof. Bob White, FRS, FGS
Prof. Sir John Houghton FRS
Prof. Colin Humphreys
Revd Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS
Prof. Eric Priest FRS
to only name people active in the 21 century, and who take their
belief serious enough to have published about it
You and I are wasting our time trying to discuss science
and reason with two epsilon sub moron atheists who know
nothing about either.

All Seon can manage is to cut and paste from Wikipedia
references to Hawking, Galileo and Newton.. ALL OF WHOM
ILLUSTRATE THAT SCIENCE AND RELIGION ARE IN HARMONY:

"Then we shall… be able to take part in the discussion
of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist.
If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph
of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God."
- Stephen Hawking


"As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things."
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations."

- Galileo Galilei 1615.

Each of these brilliant men has something profound to say
about God, something which clearly is of interest to the vast
bulk of modern mankind, who remain overwhelmingly open
to the concept of God, and spiritual evolution.. and which falls
on the DEAF ears and BLIND eyes of the ignorant and unreasoning
hate filled anti-theists, Virgil the post forging cyberstalker and Seon
the dimwitted windsock who plays monkey to Virgil's Organ-grinder!



The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven

- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 11:03:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Virgil and Seon snipped the list of
Post by Seon Ferguson
over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists Fasgnadh's list
included only those
Also he doesn't seem to know any CREDIBLE scientists
I listed dozens of the greatest scientist and you ignored them
because they are theists.
Your ignorance is only exceeded by your asinine prejudice against
people who have TWO things you lack.. powerful minds AND faith!
They are not Christians. There is nothing wrong with believing in God and
science, I have a great respect for the Bahai faith. What I am against is
religious morons saying I am going to hell or rejecting science because
their scripture goes against it.
Virgil
2010-05-07 20:51:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man
would believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;
SCientists do but Fasgnadh does not.
Post by fasgnadh
Virgil and Seon snipped the list of
theist scientists who dared not be openly non-theist.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
over 90% of the world's most brilliant scientists are openly
non-theist, and a claer majority of all scientists are
non-theist.
Fasgnadh's list included only those who lived in times when being
openly non-theist was extremely risky. look what happened to
Galileo for much less that open non-theism, and to all of those
the RCC called heretical.
I listed dozens of the greatest scientist and you ignored them
because they are theists.
Your list included few, if any, who wold have dared to be openly
non-theist, as the religious powers of those times suppressed such
openness violently.
Post by fasgnadh
Your ignorance is only exceeded by your asinine prejudice against
people who have TWO things you lack.. powerful minds AND faith.
Those with powerful minds and those with faith are becoming less
entwined daily. Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists
today are openly non-theist and that percentage is also rising.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
living in the 21st century who are devout believers.
Who said people who approve of religion or have religious faith had
to be 'devout believers', you pathetic intellectual midget?
You and Virgil slide about, changing your story, defining the test of
reason arbitrarily because all the HISTORICAL evidence shows that the
worlds greatest scientists have always been believers.. right down to
the modern age.
Not so!

Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is also rising.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 03:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would believe
in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Which brilliant scientist, you mean Hawking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#Religious_views
Hawking takes an agnostic position on matters of religion.[50][51] He has
repeatedly used the word "God" (in metaphorical meanings)[52] to illustrate
points made in his books and public speeches. His ex-wife, Jane, however,
said that he was an atheist during their divorce proceedings.[53][54]
Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the normal sense" and he
believes that "the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may
have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.

Sir Issac Neton?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Isaac_Newton#Religious_views
Historian Stephen D. Snobelen says of Newton, "Isaac Newton was a heretic.
But ... he never made a public declaration of his private faith — which the
orthodox would have deemed extremely radical. He hid his faith so well that
scholars are still unravelling his personal beliefs."[6] Snobelen concludes
that Newton was at least a Socinian sympathiser (he owned and had thoroughly
read at least eight Socinian books), possibly an Arian and almost certainly
an antitrinitarian.[6] In an age notable for its religious intolerance there
are few public expressions of Newton's radical views, most notably his
refusal to take holy orders and his refusal, on his death bed, to take the
sacrament when it was offered to him

Galileo? The guy who was oppressed by your beloved church? he would roll
over in his grave if he knew you were trying to link him with the same
superstitious morons who tried to oppress him.

Religion has been the worst scam that was ever bestowed upon humanity. It
has not only slowed scientific progress but because of religion many of the
books in the ancient world have been lost, thousands of people have died in
the name of religion and families have been destroyed.
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in the
Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system used in
plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important work on
invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy partially
concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas with the
dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry based on
experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic solids
was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most famous
scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was based
on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous
astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of science
could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating
machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist and
microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax, chicken
cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the development of the
first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes, Fleming
valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the Milne
model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the Royal
Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of Rebuilding
the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
--
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
2010-05-07 07:33:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash.
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments; BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Which brilliant scientist,
The one's I posted, you stupid fuckwit.. can't you even READ, before
opening your mouth and demonstrating once again that you LACK the
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even though we
are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in
the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system
used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important
work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy
partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his
ideas with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry based
on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic
solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most
famous scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion,
was based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's
meticulous astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating
machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist
and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax,
chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the
Milne model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the
Royal Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
you mean Hawking
"Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." - Stephen Hawking making a liar and a fool out of Seon! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
He has repeatedly used the word "God" (in metaphorical meanings)
[52] to illustrate points made in his books and public speeches.
And yet Seon presumes to call him a fool for speaking of God!? B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
His ex-wife, Jane, however, said that he was an atheist
during their divorce proceedings.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHA

Yell you what you silly little bitch, you believe his EX-WIFE
and I will believe3 HAWKING HIMSELF!

That way we are continuing to demonstrate which intellect each of
us most closely approximates, and respects!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAAAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the
normal sense"
Who is? B^D Jesus certainly wasn't! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
and he believes that "the universe is governed by the laws
of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not
intervene to break the laws.
Why would the Lawmaker God Hawking is discussing, in a way you have
dismissed as idiotic, you worthless insect, break his own Laws?

You are clearly not adequately equipped for this discussion, you are
quoting THREE MEN who all, in thrir lives and actions, rejected your
moron's idiotic opinion that metaphysics is hogwash, and discussed
God at length.

It's simple, follow your own advice and STFU on a subject, like all
others, about which you are CLEARLY CLUELESS, and leave that discussion
to the GREATEST MINDS OF SCIENCE.. and me!

B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Sir Issac Neton?
he never made a public declaration of his private faith
So another Great Scientist who was a man of faith, which you
have deemed foolish.

Thanks for admitting my point and revealing what a COMPLETE FUCKWIT you
are!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Galileo?
Galileo remained a Christian all his life, you MORON! B^D

He prayed to God that the moron, even more stupid than YOU, who
persecuted him, and misrepresented him, as you are doing STILL,
would wake up to the TRUTH!

It took them SIX HUNDRED YEARS for his prayer to be answered,

There is even less chance that you will EVER wake up! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
The guy who was oppressed by your beloved church?
Not my church, you LYING moron, and not relevant because the
Church has apologised for it's idiocy and that just leave YOU
attacking Galileo for believing what you are clearly TOO STUPID
to even begin to grasp.
Post by Seon Ferguson
he would roll
over in his grave if he knew you were trying to link him with the same
superstitious morons who tried to oppress him.
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.. when both
those cretins AND YOU, are obviously NEITHER!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA

Thanks for demonstrating the 2 major differences between YOU and every
one of those brilliant scientists.

THEY could THINK, AND they believed! B^]


Run along now and play with your crayons, you have demonstrated
once again, why they are theist geniuses and you are a
sub-epsilon moron.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
--
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 07:50:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
you mean Hawking
"Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." - Stephen Hawking making a liar and a fool out of Seon! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
He has repeatedly used the word "God" (in metaphorical meanings)
[52] to illustrate points made in his books and public speeches.
And yet Seon presumes to call him a fool for speaking of God!? B^D
No because he wasn't talking about God. If you actually researched these
people you would see that they are not Christians.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
His ex-wife, Jane, however, said that he was an atheist
during their divorce proceedings.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHA
Yell you what you silly little bitch, you believe his EX-WIFE
and I will believe3 HAWKING HIMSELF!
But he never said he was religious.
Post by fasgnadh
That way we are continuing to demonstrate which intellect each of
us most closely approximates, and respects!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAAAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the
normal sense"
Who is? B^D Jesus certainly wasn't! B^D
Not religious in the sense that religious people are. Jesus was Jewish.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
and he believes that "the universe is governed by the laws
of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not
intervene to break the laws.
Why would the Lawmaker God Hawking is discussing, in a way you have
dismissed as idiotic, you worthless insect, break his own Laws?
Because he wasn't talking about the God of religion.
Post by fasgnadh
You are clearly not adequately equipped for this discussion, you are
quoting THREE MEN who all, in thrir lives and actions, rejected your
moron's idiotic opinion that metaphysics is hogwash, and discussed
God at length.
But they were not believers.
Post by fasgnadh
It's simple, follow your own advice and STFU on a subject, like all
others, about which you are CLEARLY CLUELESS, and leave that discussion
to the GREATEST MINDS OF SCIENCE.. and me!
B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Sir Issac Neton?
he never made a public declaration of his private faith
So another Great Scientist who was a man of faith, which you
have deemed foolish.
Isaac Newton was a heretic
Thanks for snipping out that part.
Post by fasgnadh
Thanks for admitting my point and revealing what a COMPLETE FUCKWIT you
are!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Galileo?
Galileo remained a Christian all his life, you MORON! B^D
But he was persecuted by the church for daring to say something it's leaders
disagreed with.
Post by fasgnadh
He prayed to God that the moron, even more stupid than YOU, who
persecuted him, and misrepresented him, as you are doing STILL,
would wake up to the TRUTH!
It took them SIX HUNDRED YEARS for his prayer to be answered,
Have I woken up? Idiot.
Post by fasgnadh
There is even less chance that you will EVER wake up! B^D
So his prayers went unanswered.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The guy who was oppressed by your beloved church?
Not my church, you LYING moron, and not relevant because the
Church has apologised for it's idiocy and that just leave YOU
attacking Galileo for believing what you are clearly TOO STUPID
to even begin to grasp.
Oh and that makes it better does it?
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
he would roll
over in his grave if he knew you were trying to link him with the same
superstitious morons who tried to oppress him.
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.. when both
those cretins AND YOU, are obviously NEITHER!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA
Thanks for demonstrating the 2 major differences between YOU and every
one of those brilliant scientists.
Who were not Christians.
Post by fasgnadh
THEY could THINK, AND they believed! B^]
Run along now and play with your crayons, you have demonstrated
once again, why they are theist geniuses and you are a
sub-epsilon moron.
You are the idiot who stands up for intolerant fools who say I will go to
hell for not believing what they do. How dare you or anyone says I will go
to hell just because I don't believe what they believe? And what kind of an
idiot would believe anyone would go to hell? You can have your guilt and
fear but I am happy not believing in your God. I don't have any guilt and I
don't have to worry about going to hell or what will happen to me. I can do
what I want, when I want. I just have to accept if I break the law I will go
to jail. But I am much happier then you or any stupid theists ever will be.
Well maybe not, you are happy in your ignorance. But I am truly happy and
truly liberated. I don't need fairy tales to give me morals or give me
"Hope"
fasgnadh
2010-05-08 06:12:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The only thing laughable is religion and why any
grown man would believe in such hogwash.
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Sure Seon, all these numbskulls wish they had your brilliance
and accomplishments;
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Which brilliant scientist,
The one's I posted, you stupid fuckwit.. can't you even READ, before
opening your mouth and demonstrating once again that you LACK the
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
The Greatness of God is something we cannot understand even
though we are aware of it
- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific
Revolution in the Western World. honoured by having the
Cartesian coordinate system used in plane geometry and
algebra named after him. He did important work on
invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First
Philosophy partially concerns theology and he was
devoted to reconciling his ideas with the dogmas of
Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the
infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no
idea of the manner by which the All-Wise God
perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us,
of why and how an old song can move us to
tears.... Science is reticent too when it is a question of
the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion
and science. Every serious and reflective
person realizes, I think, that the religious elements
in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all
the powers of the human soul are to act together in
perfect balance and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's
intelligence can soar into the heights,
with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible
to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of
science alone he would make no progress,
but fall into the despairing slough of materialism.
- 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense
interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with
chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth
speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts
seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning
occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible.
Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes
it very difficult not to use the word 'miraculous'
without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
"I find it quite improbable that such order
came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing
principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation
for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical
standards, a pampered, cosseted, cherished group
of creatures.. .. If the Universe had not been made with
the most exacting precision we could never have come
into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the
evidence, the thought insistently arises that some
supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved.
Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have
stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme
Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal
mind or Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference
from the present state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads
us to a unique event, a universe which was
created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance
needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order
and beauty of the universe and the strange
coincidences of nature, it's very tempting to take the leap
of faith from science into religion. I am sure many physicists
want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order
displayed by our scientific understanding of
the physical world calls for the divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the
scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of
reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled
the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the
highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall…
be able to take part in the discussion of the
question of why it is that we and the universe exist.
If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph
of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I
began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was
a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined
that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show
that the central claims of Judeo- Christian theology are
in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions
of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God
created it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only
one....Many scientists, when they admit their views,
incline toward the teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the
Universe, in context of expansion,
that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him [God]." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford
University, 1981 Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems
to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and
the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible
answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science
comes in those occasional moments of discovering
something new and saying to myself, 'So that's how God did it.'
My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as
difficult to understand a scientist who does
not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality
behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend
a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois)
"Life in Universe - rare or unique?
I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that
given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets
that formed and evolved in ways very,
very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial
life at least. There are other days when I say that the
anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could
be entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe.
We are like a little child entering a huge library.
The walls are covered to the ceilings with books
in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must
have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does
not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms
would be generated by accident, is zero."
- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25,
pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is
balanced on a knife-edge, but that the
entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge, and would be
total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off even
slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Just a few believers who exceeded the intellectual output of this
ignorant atheist fuckwit and his cronies in alt.atheism;
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of
inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a
heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing
logarithms, Napier's bones, and being the popularizer
of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting
Platonic solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas;
his later and most famous scientific contribution, the
Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was based on empirical
data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous
astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who
has endowed us with senses, reason and
intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct
experience or necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly
imbued with the aspiration toward truth
and understanding. This source of feeling, however,
springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are
marvellously discerned in all His works and divinely
read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics),
Pascal's theorem (math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that
the study of science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica
Infinitorumis, introduced the term Continued fraction,
worked on cryptography, helped develop calculus,
and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants,
a calculating machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest
scientists and mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a
french chemist and microbiologist. He also solved the
mysteries of rabies, anthrax, chicken cholera, and
silkworm diseases, and contributed to the development
of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley
Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on
vacuum tubes, Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel
Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician
proposed the Milne model and had a Moon crater named
for him. Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory.
Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966
wrote The Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal,
and the Lewis Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical
Society.
Micha Heller mathematical physicist relativistic
physics and Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George
Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human
Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of
the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and
author of Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith
in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best
known for evolutionary dynamics.
And that's just a partial list of Western scientists
who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
you mean Hawking
"Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." - Stephen Hawking making a liar and a fool out of Seon! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
He has repeatedly used the word "God" (in metaphorical meanings)
[52] to illustrate points made in his books and public speeches.
And yet Seon presumes to call him a fool for speaking of God!? B^D
No because he wasn't talking about God.
Which part of "then we would know the mind of God" did you not
understand to be referring to God" you lying little piss-ant?
Post by Seon Ferguson
If you actually researched these
people you would see that they are not Christians.
Who said ANYTHING about Christians, you fuckwitted drongo?
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
His ex-wife, Jane, however, said that he was an atheist
during their divorce proceedings.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHA
Tell you what you silly little bitch, you believe his EX-WIFE
and I will believe3 HAWKING HIMSELF!
That way we are continuing to demonstrate which intellect each of
us most closely approximates, and respects!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAAAA
But he never said he was religious.
"I don't think it is very useful to speculate on what
God might or might not be able to do. Rather we should examine
what he actually does with the universe we live in." _ Hawking

That is precisely what every theist scientist in history has done!

Neither Hawking, nor all those other brilliant scientists,
nor myself, can help your own poor, stunted, simplistic,
unsophisticated misunderstanding of what it all means.
You are just TOO stupid to grasp what is being said.


# "Do you think that God can intervene in the universe as he wants
# or is God to bound by the laws of science?"
#
# "Your question of whether God is bound by the laws
# of science is a bit like the question 'can God make a stone
# that is so heavy that he can not lift it'. I don't think it
# is very useful to speculate on what God might or might not
# be able to do. Rather we should examine what he actually does
# with the universe we live in. All our observations suggest
# that it operates according to defined laws. These laws may
# have been made by God, but it seems he does not intervene in
# the Universe to break the laws, at least not once he had set
# the universe going." - Prof Stephen Hawking
#
#

Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the
normal sense"
Who is? B^D Jesus certainly wasn't! B^D
Not religious in the sense that religious people are.
Jesus was Jewish.
You always miss the point. You don't get to determine what
'normal' religion is. The pharisees and saducees assumed they could,
defining what is 'heretical' and they fucked up so badly they
condemned to death the most spiritually enlightened entity on the
planet! God is NOT defined by His Creatures, especially the low IQ
ones such as you, who make the ridiculous assumption that their own
idiocy and ignorance can measure 'normality' in religion! B^D

Potentially there are as many different religions as their are believers,
you don't know.

Like Virgil and all the dimwitted atheists, you operate on
a handful of slogans and stereotypes.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
and he believes that "the universe is governed by the laws
of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not
intervene to break the laws.
Why would the Lawmaker God Hawking is discussing, in a way you have
dismissed as idiotic, you worthless insect, break his own Laws?
Post by Seon Ferguson
Because he wasn't talking about the God of religion.
Anyone's view of God IS RELIGION, you poor deluded simpleton!

AND you haven't addressed the question.. why do YOU have a problem
with the Lawmaker God described by Hawking NOT breaking his OWN LAWS?

It seems you don't understand THAT IS THE RELIGION OF EVERY
ONE OF THOSE BRILLIANT THEIST SCIENTISTS IN HISTORY.

The reason religious scientists DOMINATE ALL THROUGH HISTORY
is becasue they EXPECTED the universe to have meaning and they
set out to discover it.

If you think you are a pointless random cluster of physical
accidents and meaningless chemical reactions, you sit on your arse
in some atheist cyber cafe and bore everyone witless with your
adolescent sub-branch of tiresome Nihilist claptrap!

They conceived of a UNIVERSE with meaning, and then they set about
DISCOVERING IT!

There is a STRAIGHT line between their DEEP understanding of religion
and Einsteins view;

"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein


"..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind."

- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954


Now, simple minded fuckwits who know as little about science as they
do about religion, protest that Einstein did not hold a conception of
a PERSONAL GOD, (by which he rejected the HUMAN conceptualizations,
typically a bearded gent painted on medieval ceilings) BIG DEAL,
few of the deep thinking religious, or the Sufi mystics or any one
who thinks about it for a moment, believes they can conceptualise God.

Nothing much can be said about God, because the table cannot conceive of
the Carpenter, nor the pot of the Potter.. and so Hawking is making a
deep THEOLOGICAL point when he says such speculation on the nature of
God is POINTLESS!!!!!!!

It will never be any different.

All we can know of God is what his Messengers reveal, the Word they
delivered, their attributes of Love, Justice, Compassion etc, and the
evidence of the great and enduring civilisations built upon those VALUES
and insights into the nature of mankind, from it's Creator.

And that is why I'm an agnostic, you cannot PROVE or DISPROVE
the existence of God, the entire argument is a waste of breath.

But you can see the evidence of God everywhere, in the universe, where
theist scientists have uncovered profound meaning, and in our history,
where our evolving nature is revealed.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
You are clearly not adequately equipped for this discussion, you are
quoting THREE MEN who all, in thrir lives and actions, rejected your
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
moron's idiotic opinion that metaphysics is hogwash, and discussed
God at length.
But they were not believers.
Galileo and Newton NOT BELIEVERS??? B^D


Run along you pathetic lying IMBECILE!!!! B^D

You are a waste of time.

The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven

- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642


I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.

- Galileo Galilei 1615.


As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.

- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727

He was definitely talking about YOU, you dimwitted moron! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
It's simple, follow your own advice and STFU on a subject, like all
others, about which you are CLEARLY CLUELESS, and leave that discussion
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
to the GREATEST MINDS OF SCIENCE.. and me!
B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Sir Issac Neton?
he never made a public declaration of his private faith
So another Great Scientist who was a man of faith, which you
have deemed foolish.
Isaac Newton was a heretic
Who says? Your previous lie, that he 'never made a public
declaration of his private faith' is shot to shit by the
quotes we have from him (see above) so now, having ADMITTED that
he has a 'private faith' you try and backflip by claiming it
was a 'heretical faith'!?!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

Who made YOU the fucking Lord High Inquisitor who can
pronounce on the truth of the faith of OTHERS, you deluded martinet!

You can't even coherently state YOUR OWN!!!! B^D

Thanks for conceding that Newton and Galileo WERE believers, and
you just want to tell THEM that their beliefs don't match yours,
and so they, brilliant thinkers, are WORONG, and you a brainless
fuckwit who contradicts himself in the space of ONE SENTENCE, is
the Measure of Religious Certitude!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA

Priceless!

You act JUST LIKE the fundies who have upset you, as if YOU
can make authoritative statements about the station and
truth of the beliefs of others!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Thanks for snipping out that part.
I did try and save you the humiliation of having your cupidity
exposed, once again, but you insisted on your right to be ridiculed!

B^D

Let's recap. you now admit that Newton has a faith, you just
want to call him a heretic because you have appointed yourself
as God's Right Hand on Earth!

YOU, deciding who's a 'hertetic' ! Priceless! B^D

Next you will be quoting Torquemada to support your claim!! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Thanks for admitting my point and revealing what a COMPLETE FUCKWIT
you are!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Galileo?
Galileo remained a Christian all his life, you MORON! B^D
But he was persecuted by the church for daring to say something it's
leaders disagreed with.
YOUR CLAIM: "they were not believers."

Now you claim Galileo WAS a believer, such a believer that his faith
remained intact EVEN WHEN IDIOTS as brainless as YOU called him a
HERETIC, as you have done with Newton! B^p

So.. you are on the side of the medieval dimwits who neither understood
Galileo's SCIENCE or his FAITH, and I am one of those who grasps BOTH!

What is the point of me talking to a fundie nutjob like you?
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
He prayed to God that the moron, even more stupid than YOU, who
persecuted him, and misrepresented him, as you are doing STILL,
would wake up to the TRUTH!
It took them SIX HUNDRED YEARS for his prayer to be answered,
Have I woken up?
Clearly NOT, as I just said, THEY woke up, it seems YOU never will

What do look like now, agreeing with me?
Post by Seon Ferguson
Idiot.
Yup.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
There is even less chance that you will EVER wake up! B^D
So his prayers went unanswered.
You poor demented dimwit, his prayer was that the IGNORANT
CHURCH LEADERS would wake up ... he didn't have to deal with
the even greater cluster of morons ... you and Virgil! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The guy who was oppressed by your beloved church?
Not my church, you LYING moron,
You liars seem to think that anyone who shows YOU to be
ranting nonsense must be supporters of whoever you ar4e wrong about.

Wrong!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
and not relevant because the
Church has apologised for it's idiocy and that just leave YOU
attacking Galileo for believing what you are clearly TOO STUPID
to even begin to grasp.
Oh and that makes it better does it?
Nothing could make your LIES and SLANDER about me better,
it simply explains what a fool you are as well, you are on the side
of the IGNORANT clerics, slandering Gelileo, a great scientist and a
firm believer.

He clung to what he believed to be true, you are windsock who changes
with every gust from any direction!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
he would roll
over in his grave if he knew you were trying to link him with the same
superstitious morons who tried to oppress him.
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.. when both
those cretins AND YOU, are obviously NEITHER!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA
Thanks for demonstrating the 2 major differences between YOU and every
one of those brilliant scientists.
THEY could THINK, AND they believed! B^]
Who were not Christians.
Lenin, Stalin, Mao Pol Pot, Virgil and you.

The scientists I listed were Christians, or Muslims, or Jews, or
Hindus... or.. .
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Run along now and play with your crayons, you have demonstrated
once again, why they are theist geniuses and you are a
sub-epsilon moron.
You are the idiot who stands up for intolerant fools who say I will
go to hell for not believing what they do.

No I don't. And you can't show me ever doing so.

You ARE the intolerant fool, you make false accusations you can't prove,
and when you are shown to be talking shit you snip and run,
avoid all the evidence of your stupidity and tell new lies.
Post by Seon Ferguson
How dare you or anyone says I will go to hell
It's simple.. you are a fucking LIAR.

I don't believe in hell, I don't tell anyone they will go to hell,
from reading your posts it seems clear you are already IN IT! B^D

Your hell is a psychosis, you feel persecuted and you probably are,
becasue no one like a pathetic, snivelling cowardly LIAR!

Now fuck off an go back to grovelling with that other moral maggot,
Virgil, he has the same lack of honesty and intellectual
integrity that you constantly reveal.

If you can find any example of me preaching Hell,
then come back and I will show you how Virgil fabricated it,
he's a notorious post forger.
Post by Seon Ferguson
just because I don't believe what they believe?
Who gives a fuck what a deluded windsock like yo7u believes from moment
to moment?

The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
believe in such hogwash.
And what kind of an idiot would believe anyone would go to hell?
You apparently.. it has upset you so much you are ranting
incoherently at me about your fear of someone saying you will go there!

Why don't you GROW up and stop whining all over Usenet?
Post by Seon Ferguson
You can have your guilt and fear but I am happy not believing in your
God.

"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon


"Yes Atheists have beliefs" - Seon

Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"

Seon: "I am happy believing in God"

Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."

Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"

Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."



This is Seon, the Atheist convert, who can't keep his story straight,
claims he's happy believing in God, has no evidence for God, admits
he's irrational for believing in something he has no evidence for,
and wants someone else to provide evidence for HIS irrational (PRETEND)
beliefs..

That is Seon, in a nutshell.. where any atheist nut belongs!


"I didn't snip anything" - Seon

"I snip them" - Seon, in the SAME sentence, unable to keep his lies
straight.

_______________________



Seon declares I have converted him to atheism:

# From: "Seon Ferguson" <***@gmail.com>
# Subject: Re: Atheist Ads on Spanish Bus - Proof that Atheists
# Proselytise their Beliefs! And they LIE about it!!!
# Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:38:32 +1100
# Message-ID: <49652ef0$0$28522$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
#
# "John Baker" <***@bizniz.net> recruits a convert
# >
# >
# > Should you decide to "deconvert", we'd be glad to have you. <G>
# >
# >
# >
# > Yep and you can thank fundamentalists like fags for the new convert.
# >




Seon the Atheist subsequently claims he believes in God: B^p

#From: "Seon Ferguson" <***@gmail.com>
# Subject: Re: More Atheists Shout It From the Rooftops - OF A CHURCH!
BWAAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA
# Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:09:05 +1000
# Message-ID: <49f79aa8$0$12595$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
#
#
# I am happy believing in God





Seon the atheist has no evidence for his belief in God
and asks himself why he believes without evidence:

# From: "Seon Ferguson" <***@gmail.com>
# Subject: Re: Atheist Ads on Spanish Bus - Proof that Atheists
# Proselytise their Beliefs! And they LIE about it!!!
# Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:38:32 +1100
# Message-ID: <49652ef0$0$28522$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
#
# I have had experiences that have taught me life after
# death is true (but it wouldn't be evidence to you) but no
# evidence of God I'm afraid.
#
# as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?



Getting no sensible answer from himself, Seon the Atheist
decides to ask someone more sensible than himself;


# From: "Seon Ferguson" <***@gmail.com>
# Subject: Re: Is atheism becoming a religion?
# Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 23:09:04 +1000
# Message-ID: <49f45cf5$0$12614$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
#
# Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists


Seon is told to stop being such a gormless prat, but being a gormless
prat Seon continues to ask others to explain his beliefs to himself!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
I don't have any guilt
Because you have no honesty or integrity, you slander people
and then when you are shown to be a malign liar, you run away
and hatch more lies.
Post by Seon Ferguson
I can do what I want, when I want.
You are an idiot, full of piss an wind, signifying nothing.
Post by Seon Ferguson
But I am much happier then
you or any stupid theists ever will be. Well maybe not, you are happy
And so are all those brilliant scientists, because we understand
what is going on, and you are mired in ignorance and lies.
Post by Seon Ferguson
But I am truly happy and truly liberated. I don't need
fairy tales to give me morals or give me "Hope"
"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon

"The only thing laughable is religion and why any grown man would
believe in such hogwash."


Seon: "I am happy believing in God"

Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."

Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"

Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."



BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAH!
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
2010-05-22 01:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
you mean Hawking
"Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." - Stephen Hawking making a liar and a fool out of Seon! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
He has repeatedly used the word "God" (in metaphorical meanings)
[52] to illustrate points made in his books and public speeches.
And yet Seon presumes to call him a fool for speaking of God!? B^D
he wasn't talking about God.
Learn to read, you illiterate moron
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
His ex-wife, Jane, however, said that he was an atheist
during their divorce proceedings.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHA
Yell you what you silly little bitch, you believe his EX-WIFE
and I will believe3 HAWKING HIMSELF!
That way we are continuing to demonstrate which intellect each of
us most closely approximates, and respects!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAAAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the
normal sense"
Who is? B^D Jesus certainly wasn't! B^D
Not religious in the sense that religious people are.
Religious people are religious in a variety of ways, you cretin.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Jesus was Jewish.
How much more religious can you get:

"Hear oh Israel, the Lord thy God, the Lord is One"

The Shema, fundamental article of Jewish faith.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
and he believes that "the universe is governed by the laws
of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not
intervene to break the laws.
Why would the Lawmaker God Hawking is discussing, in a way you have
dismissed as idiotic, you worthless insect, break his own Laws?
Because he wasn't talking about the God of religion
What other God do you think he was referring to when
he said that it's mind could be discerned by examining it's work?

B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
You are clearly not adequately equipped for this discussion, you are
quoting THREE MEN who all, in their lives and actions, rejected your
moron's idiotic opinion that metaphysics is hogwash, and discussed
God at length.
But they were not believers.
Unlike you, they spoke their own mind, including
their views on God, and did not try to pretend
they could speak for others.
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
It's simple, follow your own advice and STFU on a subject, like all
others, about which you are CLEARLY CLUELESS, and leave that discussion
to the GREATEST MINDS OF SCIENCE.. and me!
B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
Sir Issac Neton?
he never made a public declaration of his private faith
So another Great Scientist who was a man of faith, which you
have deemed foolish.
Isaac Newton was a heretic
You speak the language of religious bigots who condemn
the beliefs iof others which they clearly do not understand,
and have NO AUTHORITY to declare 'heretical'

Who do you think you are to damn the faith of others, men
CLEARLY your superiors, deeper thinkers, with greater faith than you!

Run along you sad little tosser.

Take my advice ....Get a life
Post by Seon Ferguson
Thanks
Post by fasgnadh
Thanks for admitting my point and revealing what a COMPLETE FUCKWIT
you are!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Galileo?
Galileo remained a Christian all his life, you MORON! B^D
But he was persecuted by the church
IT DOESN'T MATTER YOU BRAIN DEAD MORON!!!

HE REMAINED A CHRISTIAN ALL HIS LIFE!!!


PROVING THAT YOU ARE A LIAR WHO CAN'T ACCEPT REALITY..


YOU quoted those men as examples and I showed they all
spoke knowingly of God, and in Newton and
Galileo's case were CLEARLY BELIEVERS.. and in Galileo's
case .. despite persecution by BIGOTS LIKE YOU, who dared
to claim the power to declare his beliefs HERETICAL!!
Post by Seon Ferguson
for daring to say something it's leaders disagreed with.
Just as you slander Newton declaring "Newton was a heretic" - Seon

Piss off you moronic hypocrite!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
He prayed to God that the moron, even more stupid than YOU, who
persecuted him, and misrepresented him, as you are doing STILL,
would wake up to the TRUTH!
It took them SIX HUNDRED YEARS for his prayer to be answered,
Have I woken up?
No, what does that make you?
Post by Seon Ferguson
Idiot.
F'kin Aye! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
There is even less chance that you will EVER wake up! B^D
So his prayers went unanswered.
I doubt that he was even aware of your existence, let
alone would pray for such a blathering twonk!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
The guy who was oppressed by your beloved church?
Not my church, you LYING moron, and not relevant because the
Church has apologised for it's idiocy and that just leave YOU
attacking Galileo for believing what you are clearly TOO STUPID
to even begin to grasp.
Oh and that makes it better does it?
It makes you a complete fool without a point to make.

Naturally you are becoming a bit testy! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
he would roll
over in his grave if he knew you were trying to link him with the same
superstitious morons who tried to oppress him.
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.. when both
those cretins AND YOU, are obviously NEITHER!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA
Thanks for demonstrating the 2 major differences between YOU and every
one of those brilliant scientists.
Who were not Christians.
Galileo not a Christian?

Run along you poor deluded pig-ignorant liar!
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by fasgnadh
THEY could THINK, AND they believed! B^]
Run along now and play with your crayons, you have demonstrated
once again, why they are theist geniuses and you are a
sub-epsilon moron.
who stands up for intolerant fools
I will preserve your right to be one with my life! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
who say I will go to hell for not believing what they do.
I give up, who say dat? B^D You are the one declaring people
to be 'heretics' not me. I have no more idea of your beliefs than
you appear to have! B^D

And no man knows the spiritual station of another.

So you are pissing in the wind!
Post by Seon Ferguson
How dare you or anyone says I will go to hell
I don't, you are SIMPLY LYING!

We can all see why, you have lost every logical argument,
every rational point, and now have nowhere to go other than
your perennial forte, bare faced lying, feigned self-righteous
indignation for things I haven't said, and filthy slander...
Post by Seon Ferguson
just because I don't believe what they believe?
Call them 'heretics' like you have done with Newton! B^D

Fucking idiot HYPOCRITE!
Post by Seon Ferguson
And what kind of an idiot would believe anyone would go to hell?
You, apparently,, you seem apoplectic with outrage,
unless it's feigned! B^p
Post by Seon Ferguson
You can have your guilt and fear
only in your imagination, lies and slander. B^]

YOU are the one wailing like a little bitch.
Post by Seon Ferguson
but I am happy not believing in your God.
Who gives a fuck what you think you believe at 11:24 on May 22?

You will change as soon as you read this, you WINDSOCK!

"I'm perfectly happy believing in science and God" - Seon

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHA

Seon, "perfectly happy" as theist or atheist, depending
upon how the moon and tides take him! B^D


"Yes Atheists have beliefs" - Seon

Seon: "Hey fasg I am still waiting for a. evidence God exists"

Seon: "I am happy believing in God"

Seon: "I have had .. no evidence of God I'm afraid."

Seon: "as I said why believe in something despite the lack of evidence?"

Seon "I find it hard to take anything you say seriously when you
use troll tactics like name calling. Troll."


This is Seon, the Atheist convert, who can't keep his story straight,
claims he's happy believing in God, has no evidence for God, admits
he's irrational for believing in something he has no evidence for,
and wants someone else to provide evidence for HIS irrational (PRETEND)
beliefs..

That is Seon, in a nutshell.. where any atheist nut belongs!


"I didn't snip anything" - Seon

"I snip them" - Seon, in the SAME sentence, unable to keep his lies
straight.



# From: "seon" <***@notmyrealaddress.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,alt.bible,
# aus.religion,alt.politics.republicans,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics
# Subject: Re: Seon finally finds a Guru to match his own intellect - a
toaster !
# B^D Re: Atheist states, the lowest form of government humans have
devised.
# Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 12:04:07 +1000
# Message-ID: <4a73a2c4$0$9734$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
#
# I prefer to get my information from actual spirit guides,
# you know advanced souls who have crossed over and guide us
# in our day to day life and help us write the life scripts
# for this life and choose our bodies and family etc.
# You wouldn't know a real spirit guide if he bit your ass
# (or she)
Post by Seon Ferguson
I don't have any guilt
you have misspelled 'integrity.' B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
I can do what I want, when I want.
depending on the windchange, clearly! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
I just have to
accept if I break the law I will go to jail.
and if you lie and slander in public you WILL be mocked!

MERCILESSLY!!! B^]
Post by Seon Ferguson
But I am much happier then you
How do you know?

Do you sleep between silken sheets with a woman of
such sublime beauty that the God's weep with longing? -.-
Post by Seon Ferguson
or any stupid theists ever will be. Well maybe not,
Oh look Seon was caught mid-sentance by a WIND-CHANGE!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAAAAAA
Post by Seon Ferguson
you are happy
ecstatic.

And you are a pathetic little liar
who is trapped in the world of Maya - illusion
Post by Seon Ferguson
But I am truly happy and truly liberated.
and truly DELUSIONAL! B^D
Post by Seon Ferguson
I don't need fairy tales to give me morals or give me "Hope"
Wot a dill! B^D
--
alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source




"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest


"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Virgil
2010-05-22 05:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Fasgnadh being sheepish again!
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Fasgnadh being sheepish again!
Post by fasgnadh
Religious people are religious in a variety of ways
Most of them foolish.
Post by fasgnadh
What other God do you think he was referring to when
he said that it's mind could be discerned by examining it's work?
There are different religions each claiming its own god(s).
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
But they were not believers.
Unlike you, they spoke their own mind, including
their views on God, and did not try to pretend
they could speak for others.
So nonbelief can be honest
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Seon Ferguson
It's simple, follow your own advice and STFU on a subject, like all
others, about which you are CLEARLY CLUELESS, and leave that discussion
to the GREATEST MINDS OF SCIENCE.. and me!
Fasgnadh trying to put himself in the same group as "GREATEST MINDS OF
SCIENCE" is excessively stupid and arrogant, even for Fasgnadh.


We non-theists, by being merely skeptics and not raging dogmatists like
you, avoid any need for supporting proofs of our right to doubt whatever
does not have unequivocal proof of its own truth.

You theists, of whatever dubious flavor, by being raging dogmatists and
not mere skeptics like us, have a dire need for, but singular lack of,
unequivocal proofs of your dogmas.

Over 90% of the worlds top scientists today are openly non-theist and
that percentage is rising. Over 50% of all scientists today are openly
non-theist and that percentage is also rising.

Those who are still trying to sell theism are losing market share,
particularly among the more intelligent.

Virgil
2010-05-07 07:52:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.

Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-07 08:01:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.
Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Exactly and the fact that he was put under house arrests shows that the
religions that fasgandh loves so much have been just as bad as communist
countries.
Free Lunch
2010-05-07 12:11:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.
Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Exactly and the fact that he was put under house arrests shows that the
religions that fasgandh loves so much have been just as bad as communist
countries.
Where do you think Lenin and Stalin got their ideas from?
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-08 00:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.
Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Exactly and the fact that he was put under house arrests shows that the
religions that fasgandh loves so much have been just as bad as communist
countries.
Where do you think Lenin and Stalin got their ideas from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Marx
Free Lunch
2010-05-08 00:30:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.
Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Exactly and the fact that he was put under house arrests shows that the
religions that fasgandh loves so much have been just as bad as communist
countries.
Where do you think Lenin and Stalin got their ideas from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Marx
Show me where Marx advocated totalitarianism.
Seon Ferguson
2010-05-08 00:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Seon Ferguson
Post by Virgil
Post by fasgnadh
You poor simpleminded cretin, Galileo understood the difference
between the God he SAW in the Universe which his brilliant rational
mind explored and a group of men, who could be as wrong as you in
criticising him for being both Brilliant and a believer.
Actually, once Galileo was placed under house arrest, we have no idea
what he really thought, as to stay healthy he had to edit what he said
or wrote to fit the prejudices of his jailers.
Since his time things have improved to the point that now over 90% of
the worlds most productive and creative scientists are openly non-theist.
Exactly and the fact that he was put under house arrests shows that the
religions that fasgandh loves so much have been just as bad as communist
countries.
Where do you think Lenin and Stalin got their ideas from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Marx
Show me where Marx advocated totalitarianism.
I don't know maybe it evolved? I'm not a communist so I don't know much
about the history of communism. Or maybe modern communism has nothing to do
with Marxism.
Thommy M.
2010-05-06 14:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
So you say that a god created us? Can you tell us why he/she/it was so
stupid that the eye was created inside out then? Now the photons of
light has to travel through blood vessels and different cells before
they reach the lightsensitive rods and cones. All the blur created then
has to be taken care of by the brain working as PhotoShop on steroids to
create a correct picture.

Wouldn't it be better to create thinks correct in the first place?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---
Kilmir
2010-05-07 11:35:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by old man joe
simply put, as omj posted dozens of times, you can't get blood out of a rock.
and you can't get a living thing out of something that isn't alive.
You mean like the Abrahamic story of Adam being formed from dust? Yeah
I agree it's total nonsense.
Post by old man joe
the Atheists make the claim that Darwin's idea of Evolution does not need a starting point is
exactly where the fun begins.  to promote Evolution as something all living things have in common
requires a starting point.  this, they studiously avoid.
The Theory of Evolution deals with the diversity of life after it
started.
Abiogenesis deals with the origin of life.

For a nice comprehensive description of current theories how life
probably started, try the "Origin of.." series bij cdk007 on youtube:
http://youtu.be/U6QYDdgP9eg

They start off with debunking typical creationist arguments, but
eventually go into a lengthy description of how it all works via
chemical processes.
Post by old man joe
the Atheists default immediately to cursing man and God when required to show from their brand of
science exactly how life came from elements that are not alive... after all, for Evolution to be
true, the second living thing had to evolve out of the first living thing.  Evolution doesn't want
to say they have no answer of how the first living thing came into existence.
Atheists don't do that. Don't lie.
And again, misrepresentation of evolution. Are you honestly this
ignorant?
Post by old man joe
here we have their science giving us what is called The Periodic Table.  nothing in it is alive.
yet, our physical bodies comprise amounts of certain of these elements.  botta-bing... a dead human
being has exactly the same elements as does a living person but one is dead and the other is alive.
Components are the same, structure is different.

There are structural changes, mostly in the brain. Without electricity
and continuous supply of oxygen the network of neurons breaks down
rather fast. Restarting is only possible if it's very soon after
cessation of activity (hence, defibrillators work sometimes if applied
fast enough). After that the deterioration is too severe to be able to
be rebooted.

Of course, all the details are still unclear, but that is the general
concept and quite logical really.
In theory, if we were able to manipulate neuron structure and place it
in a position that it can actually work again and we shock it with
electricity it might be possible to revive a dead person. Technology
like that is at least a century away from us though, if even at all
possible.
Post by old man joe
no elements of the Periodic Table are alive... ya get it, boys ?  no elements of the Periodic Table
are alive.  these elements constitute our physical beings but we are alive and the dead person is
dead.  life comes from the Living God, not Darwin; the Atheist explanation starts on the second
floor... no foundation.
Incorrect. Abiogenesis is getting quite decent theories, and several
parts are already experimentally verified.

The deity concept is actually the one that starts on the second floor.
It assumes some living superbeing already exists, but doesn't explain
how it got there in the first place.
Post by old man joe
before my Thanksgiving turkey evolved out of a dinosaur, as the Atheists once said on a Natgeo
program aired 2 years ago, the dinosaur had to evolve out of something alive, and it, from something
alive... all the way back to the very first living thing which these Atheists, at this point, go off
on a tangent.
at this point, the starting point, nothing on earth is alive.
Define alive. Before genetic code structures like DNA and RNA there
were structures of molecules (cells if you will) that could self-
replicate. Before that there were the first molecules that could self-
replicate. And before that there were chemical processes that could
produce molecules capable of self-replication.

At which point do you draw the line of "this is life"?
Post by old man joe
botta-bing !  non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave life to itself.  this
is all made possible from the early earth environment other geniuses have concocted, not Darwin.
molten, poisonous gaseous early earth, absolute sterility talk, cooled off over time, which is not
alive either, and lo and behold, non-living elements came together in just the right way and gave
life to itself which makes Atheists very happy and able now to think that don't have the wrath of
God and Judgment Day hanging over their head's.
Atheists don't believe in your fairy tales. We're not afraid of your
god or supposed apocalypses because we don't think any of it is real.
The same way we are also not afraid of Darth Vader or Sauron.
Post by old man joe
dream on, boys.
now, watch the cursing of God and man begin since they can not refute that God is the Giver of life,
which they already know because He made Himself evident to them, rendering them " without excuse "
as we read in Ro. 1:18-20.
Total insanity.
Loading...