Bad news for our resident atheists

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Matthew six has guided my life since I was in the 9th grade.  It recognizes that I do not need the knight or his peers to interpret god, but that God has a direct line with each of us.  I have not physically found a cord or wire connected to my body, nor have I discovered the frequency which allows the same.......it is undetectable.  The Easter Bunny, and Santa are man made fantasy to entertain children, and you argue that religion is the same.  That is the simplistic approach to the same because most of the hypocrites speak the loudest to proclaim their utter ignorance which most rational people observe and with scorn dismiss the belief in God, if for nothing more than the simplicity and superstition displayed by so many.  However, faith is not that simple nor is it defined by those who claim they speak for God.  No man of God has ever shown me the wire or frequency.....yet with certainty they explain they control the same, and only through them can man access god.....but Matthew six clearly does not say this.   The undetectable and the ignorant have no bearing on my faith, none whatsoever.

So when we limit a computer to the known software and hardware, we then limit the possibility of undetected virus, or other unknown capabilities which we do not understand today.   Faith in God is not the same as the Easter Bunny or Santa.  It is the belief in the connection not yet discovered, or defined, and that higher level concept cannot be shackled by the superstition and limitations of the knights of the round table or their peers who edited the King James version of the bible, rather faith is the belief that the connection exists, and I have no problem if you believe that your computer cannot be hacked and that the hardware and software limitiations are finite......they have proven not to be.

Just to clarify, I'm not even remotely suggesting that we have discovered all that there is to discover.  I'm not saying that the existence of things that we can not yet detect is an impossibility.   In fact, the exact opposite is the case.  There are things that we know we don't know.  Take quantum mechanics and the double-slit experiment, for example.  That has been around for over a hundred years and we still haven't a clue as to how that works.  

What I am saying, is that religion presents a roadblock to actually detecting the undetected and discovering the undiscovered.  It has throughout history and it continues to do so today.  The sooner humanity sheds religion, so the sooner we'll be on our way to actually answering many of the questions that we have today.  

It is laughable to believe that - out of thousands of religions - one in particular, more so than science, has the answers to all that we'll ever need.

I'll conclude on this note.  In the past, religion was often looked to as the authority on certain questions about the natural world.  

Why does the sun rise?

Why do seasons change?

Why does it rain?

Why do tides come in and out?

Humanity used to look to religion as the authority on all of these questions and more.  "(Insert god) did that"  The end.  No need to research.  No need to explore and actually explain these phenomenon.  "(Insert god) did that"

Over time, religion has been relieved if its authority on those questions by scientific study and examination.  We know how all of those things work now, and none of them are due to the supernatural.  They all emerge from natural physical processes.

So over time, we have seen a steady trend of religion relinquishing its authority to science on questions about the natural world.

When has science ever relinquished anything to religion?   Has there ever - in the entire history of humanity - been any subject area in which science had to concede authority to religion on any question?

The answer is "no".  And there never will be.

Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrV6exi1WlM

Did your science fail you?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcL---4xQYA

KarlRove wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:Here are some real historical facts about Jesus that real Christians should acknowledge:

Not one of the so-called "gospels" of the New Testament was written by anyone who actually knew or had a personal relationship with Jesus ...

See the following:

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/highlight/author-explores-uncomfortable-facts-about-jesus/51e5aa6e02a760286b00018f?cps=gravity_2598_8109042320138269868

Must really be hard for you to live in Pace with all the churches per square mile.

Vikingwoman wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:God doesn't exist in a world that allows little children to be hurt and gives miracles to undeserving adults. If he does... I don't want any part of him.

Who are you to apply abstract human morals and values to God?

Whether it be free will or fate man lives in a world of infinite variety.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky1nY3jlq1M

STFU,pervert. I don't want you replying to any of my posts. You creep me out.

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Matthew six has guided my life since I was in the 9th grade.  It recognizes that I do not need the knight or his peers to interpret god, but that God has a direct line with each of us.  I have not physically found a cord or wire connected to my body, nor have I discovered the frequency which allows the same.......it is undetectable.  The Easter Bunny, and Santa are man made fantasy to entertain children, and you argue that religion is the same.  That is the simplistic approach to the same because most of the hypocrites speak the loudest to proclaim their utter ignorance which most rational people observe and with scorn dismiss the belief in God, if for nothing more than the simplicity and superstition displayed by so many.  However, faith is not that simple nor is it defined by those who claim they speak for God.  No man of God has ever shown me the wire or frequency.....yet with certainty they explain they control the same, and only through them can man access god.....but Matthew six clearly does not say this.   The undetectable and the ignorant have no bearing on my faith, none whatsoever.

So when we limit a computer to the known software and hardware, we then limit the possibility of undetected virus, or other unknown capabilities which we do not understand today.   Faith in God is not the same as the Easter Bunny or Santa.  It is the belief in the connection not yet discovered, or defined, and that higher level concept cannot be shackled by the superstition and limitations of the knights of the round table or their peers who edited the King James version of the bible, rather faith is the belief that the connection exists, and I have no problem if you believe that your computer cannot be hacked and that the hardware and software limitiations are finite......they have proven not to be.

Just to clarify, I'm not even remotely suggesting that we have discovered all that there is to discover.  I'm not saying that the existence of things that we can not yet detect is an impossibility.   In fact, the exact opposite is the case.  There are things that we know we don't know.  Take quantum mechanics and the double-slit experiment, for example.  That has been around for over a hundred years and we still haven't a clue as to how that works.  

What I am saying, is that religion presents a roadblock to actually detecting the undetected and discovering the undiscovered.  It has throughout history and it continues to do so today.  The sooner humanity sheds religion, so the sooner we'll be on our way to actually answering many of the questions that we have today.  

It is laughable to believe that - out of thousands of religions - one in particular, more so than science, has the answers to all that we'll ever need.

I'll conclude on this note.  In the past, religion was often looked to as the authority on certain questions about the natural world.  

Why does the sun rise?

Why do seasons change?

Why does it rain?

Why do tides come in and out?

Humanity used to look to religion as the authority on all of these questions and more.  "(Insert god) did that"  The end.  No need to research.  No need to explore and actually explain these phenomenon.  "(Insert god) did that"

Over time, religion has been relieved if its authority on those questions by scientific study and examination.  We know how all of those things work now, and none of them are due to the supernatural.  They all emerge from natural physical processes.

So over time, we have seen a steady trend of religion relinquishing its authority to science on questions about the natural world.

When has science ever relinquished anything to religion?   Has there ever - in the entire history of humanity - been any subject area in which science had to concede authority to religion on any question?

The answer is "no".  And there never will be.

Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrV6exi1WlM

Did your science fail you?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcL---4xQYA

No.  Your communication skills failed you.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Matthew six has guided my life since I was in the 9th grade.  It recognizes that I do not need the knight or his peers to interpret god, but that God has a direct line with each of us.  I have not physically found a cord or wire connected to my body, nor have I discovered the frequency which allows the same.......it is undetectable.  The Easter Bunny, and Santa are man made fantasy to entertain children, and you argue that religion is the same.  That is the simplistic approach to the same because most of the hypocrites speak the loudest to proclaim their utter ignorance which most rational people observe and with scorn dismiss the belief in God, if for nothing more than the simplicity and superstition displayed by so many.  However, faith is not that simple nor is it defined by those who claim they speak for God.  No man of God has ever shown me the wire or frequency.....yet with certainty they explain they control the same, and only through them can man access god.....but Matthew six clearly does not say this.   The undetectable and the ignorant have no bearing on my faith, none whatsoever.

So when we limit a computer to the known software and hardware, we then limit the possibility of undetected virus, or other unknown capabilities which we do not understand today.   Faith in God is not the same as the Easter Bunny or Santa.  It is the belief in the connection not yet discovered, or defined, and that higher level concept cannot be shackled by the superstition and limitations of the knights of the round table or their peers who edited the King James version of the bible, rather faith is the belief that the connection exists, and I have no problem if you believe that your computer cannot be hacked and that the hardware and software limitiations are finite......they have proven not to be.

Just to clarify, I'm not even remotely suggesting that we have discovered all that there is to discover.  I'm not saying that the existence of things that we can not yet detect is an impossibility.   In fact, the exact opposite is the case.  There are things that we know we don't know.  Take quantum mechanics and the double-slit experiment, for example.  That has been around for over a hundred years and we still haven't a clue as to how that works.  

What I am saying, is that religion presents a roadblock to actually detecting the undetected and discovering the undiscovered.  It has throughout history and it continues to do so today.  The sooner humanity sheds religion, so the sooner we'll be on our way to actually answering many of the questions that we have today.  

It is laughable to believe that - out of thousands of religions - one in particular, more so than science, has the answers to all that we'll ever need.

I'll conclude on this note.  In the past, religion was often looked to as the authority on certain questions about the natural world.  

Why does the sun rise?

Why do seasons change?

Why does it rain?

Why do tides come in and out?

Humanity used to look to religion as the authority on all of these questions and more.  "(Insert god) did that"  The end.  No need to research.  No need to explore and actually explain these phenomenon.  "(Insert god) did that"

Over time, religion has been relieved if its authority on those questions by scientific study and examination.  We know how all of those things work now, and none of them are due to the supernatural.  They all emerge from natural physical processes.

So over time, we have seen a steady trend of religion relinquishing its authority to science on questions about the natural world.

When has science ever relinquished anything to religion?   Has there ever - in the entire history of humanity - been any subject area in which science had to concede authority to religion on any question?

The answer is "no".  And there never will be.

Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrV6exi1WlM

Did your science fail you?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcL---4xQYA

No.  Your communication skills failed you.

I find it more likely that it's the other way around.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGe8qID9gSs

KarlRove wrote:You think that about everyone who disagrees with you.

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Matthew six has guided my life since I was in the 9th grade.  It recognizes that I do not need the knight or his peers to interpret god, but that God has a direct line with each of us.  I have not physically found a cord or wire connected to my body, nor have I discovered the frequency which allows the same.......it is undetectable.  The Easter Bunny, and Santa are man made fantasy to entertain children, and you argue that religion is the same.  That is the simplistic approach to the same because most of the hypocrites speak the loudest to proclaim their utter ignorance which most rational people observe and with scorn dismiss the belief in God, if for nothing more than the simplicity and superstition displayed by so many.  However, faith is not that simple nor is it defined by those who claim they speak for God.  No man of God has ever shown me the wire or frequency.....yet with certainty they explain they control the same, and only through them can man access god.....but Matthew six clearly does not say this.   The undetectable and the ignorant have no bearing on my faith, none whatsoever.

So when we limit a computer to the known software and hardware, we then limit the possibility of undetected virus, or other unknown capabilities which we do not understand today.   Faith in God is not the same as the Easter Bunny or Santa.  It is the belief in the connection not yet discovered, or defined, and that higher level concept cannot be shackled by the superstition and limitations of the knights of the round table or their peers who edited the King James version of the bible, rather faith is the belief that the connection exists, and I have no problem if you believe that your computer cannot be hacked and that the hardware and software limitiations are finite......they have proven not to be.

Just to clarify, I'm not even remotely suggesting that we have discovered all that there is to discover.  I'm not saying that the existence of things that we can not yet detect is an impossibility.   In fact, the exact opposite is the case.  There are things that we know we don't know.  Take quantum mechanics and the double-slit experiment, for example.  That has been around for over a hundred years and we still haven't a clue as to how that works.  

What I am saying, is that religion presents a roadblock to actually detecting the undetected and discovering the undiscovered.  It has throughout history and it continues to do so today.  The sooner humanity sheds religion, so the sooner we'll be on our way to actually answering many of the questions that we have today.  

It is laughable to believe that - out of thousands of religions - one in particular, more so than science, has the answers to all that we'll ever need.

I'll conclude on this note.  In the past, religion was often looked to as the authority on certain questions about the natural world.  

Why does the sun rise?

Why do seasons change?

Why does it rain?

Why do tides come in and out?

Humanity used to look to religion as the authority on all of these questions and more.  "(Insert god) did that"  The end.  No need to research.  No need to explore and actually explain these phenomenon.  "(Insert god) did that"

Over time, religion has been relieved if its authority on those questions by scientific study and examination.  We know how all of those things work now, and none of them are due to the supernatural.  They all emerge from natural physical processes.

So over time, we have seen a steady trend of religion relinquishing its authority to science on questions about the natural world.

When has science ever relinquished anything to religion?   Has there ever - in the entire history of humanity - been any subject area in which science had to concede authority to religion on any question?

The answer is "no".  And there never will be.

Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrV6exi1WlM

Did your science fail you?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcL---4xQYA

No.  Your communication skills failed you.

I find it more likely that it's the other way around.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGe8qID9gSs

That's because you're also functionally illiterate.  

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

KarlRove wrote:In Pace there are more churches per square mile than anywhere in the USA.

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

Yes.  I must say, Damaged, my neurons simply can't handle this.  Look at all the substantive back and forth posts between myself and 2seaoat, and then you enter with the above sentence fragment that, honestly, I don't even know what you were going for.

That is some seriously deep stuff, right there, Damaged.  Seriously deep.

(exits elevator)

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

Yes.  I must say, Damaged, my neurons simply can't handle this.  Look at all the substantive back and forth posts between myself and 2seaoat, and then you enter with the above sentence fragment that, honestly, I don't even know what you were going for.

That is some seriously deep stuff, right there, Damaged.  Seriously deep.

(exits elevator)

Run Forest run.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9mwELXPGbA

KarlRove wrote:by Wordslinger Today at 3:56 pm
KarlRove wrote:
“
In Pace there are more churches per square mile than anywhere in the USA.
”
And more functional illiterates, too.
-----
Like yourself

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

Yes.  I must say, Damaged, my neurons simply can't handle this.  Look at all the substantive back and forth posts between myself and 2seaoat, and then you enter with the above sentence fragment that, honestly, I don't even know what you were going for.

That is some seriously deep stuff, right there, Damaged.  Seriously deep.

(exits elevator)

Run Forest run.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9mwELXPGbA

Run?  There is nothing to run away from.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

Yes.  I must say, Damaged, my neurons simply can't handle this.  Look at all the substantive back and forth posts between myself and 2seaoat, and then you enter with the above sentence fragment that, honestly, I don't even know what you were going for.

That is some seriously deep stuff, right there, Damaged.  Seriously deep.

(exits elevator)

Run Forest run.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9mwELXPGbA

Run?  There is nothing to run away from.

Except for the demons you create as you wade through the blood and gore of your moral righteousness which you justify with your Darwinist convictions.

Has your Nobel Champion obliterated any more wedding parties of people you believe to be subhuman to get at one or two suspected terrorists?

I'm sure the ethics and morals of a practicing Darwinist can be very comforting to someone like you.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuIkINDV0tg

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why do little girls like butterflies need no reason?

Yes.  I must say, Damaged, my neurons simply can't handle this.  Look at all the substantive back and forth posts between myself and 2seaoat, and then you enter with the above sentence fragment that, honestly, I don't even know what you were going for.

That is some seriously deep stuff, right there, Damaged.  Seriously deep.

(exits elevator)

Run Forest run.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9mwELXPGbA

Run?  There is nothing to run away from.

Except for the demons you create as you wade through the blood and gore of your moral righteousness which you justify with your Darwinist convictions.

Has your Nobel Champion obliterated any more wedding parties of people you believe to be subhuman to get at one or two suspected terrorists?

I'm sure the ethics and morals of a practicing Darwinist can be very comforting to someone like you.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuIkINDV0tg

Practicing Darwinist?  What is a practicing Darwinist?

Regarding the rest of your comment, I'm not even quite sure what it is that you're talking about.  Here again, I can only suggest that you learn to communicate coherently at some point in your life.

Wordslinger wrote:This thread was about a pseudo-scientific claim that God was real.

Will somebody please explain what in hell the use of drones has to do with this premise?

However, considering the weird combination of militaristic aggressiveness with Christian values that seem to propel our resident pretend-hero veteran, his claims that pseudo science supports the case for God's alleged existence has all the credibility of a Christian sect believing that the rattle snake they harass won't bite because Jesus is on their side.

God is great .... LOL