Total Posts:662|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Absurdity of Atheism and Agnostics

Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 5:23:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

Depending on the particular scenario there could be a strong change that the individual just performed the experiment badly. Jumping to the conclusion that "the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific" is a bit extreme and unwarranted.


With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

Materials form crystalline patterns without "choosing to", that's a repeating pattern. Why do you keep saying that we can't do things without choosing to? That sounds like it may be sort of begging the question.


So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

"**you** cannot create a repeating pattern without choice". You keep on talking about sentient beings not being able to affect their environment without choosing to; begging the question. It's about if causation can produce patterns, which it can.


Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

God of the gaps? I know in mathematics you can prove something by showing that the alternative is impossible, but doing so here is dubious at best.


The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 5:29:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 5:23:48 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

Depending on the particular scenario there could be a strong change that the individual just performed the experiment badly. Jumping to the conclusion that "the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific" is a bit extreme and unwarranted.


With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

Materials form crystalline patterns without "choosing to", that's a repeating pattern. Why do you keep saying that we can't do things without choosing to? That sounds like it may be sort of begging the question.


So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

"**you** cannot create a repeating pattern without choice". You keep on talking about sentient beings not being able to affect their environment without choosing to; begging the question. It's about if causation can produce patterns, which it can.


Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

God of the gaps? I know in mathematics you can prove something by showing that the alternative is impossible, but doing so here is dubious at best.


The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

.Response: You are not making any sense. The best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself. Can you create a repeating pattern without choice? No. So you have no basis to conclude it can occur when the best form of evidence shows it cannot occur. Thus the patterns in the universe and life clearly originates from a choice, proving God exist.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 5:30:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 5:23:48 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

Depending on the particular scenario there could be a strong change that the individual just performed the experiment badly. Jumping to the conclusion that "the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific" is a bit extreme and unwarranted.


With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

Materials form crystalline patterns without "choosing to", that's a repeating pattern. Why do you keep saying that we can't do things without choosing to? That sounds like it may be sort of begging the question.


So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

"**you** cannot create a repeating pattern without choice". You keep on talking about sentient beings not being able to affect their environment without choosing to; begging the question. It's about if causation can produce patterns, which it can.


Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

God of the gaps? I know in mathematics you can prove something by showing that the alternative is impossible, but doing so here is dubious at best.


The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

Response: You are not making any sense. The best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself. Can you create a repeating pattern without choice? No. So you have no basis to conclude it can occur when the best form of evidence shows it cannot occur. Thus the patterns in the universe and life clearly originates from a choice, proving God exist.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 5:40:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 5:29:15 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:23:48 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

Depending on the particular scenario there could be a strong change that the individual just performed the experiment badly. Jumping to the conclusion that "the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific" is a bit extreme and unwarranted.


With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

Materials form crystalline patterns without "choosing to", that's a repeating pattern. Why do you keep saying that we can't do things without choosing to? That sounds like it may be sort of begging the question.


So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

"**you** cannot create a repeating pattern without choice". You keep on talking about sentient beings not being able to affect their environment without choosing to; begging the question. It's about if causation can produce patterns, which it can.


Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

God of the gaps? I know in mathematics you can prove something by showing that the alternative is impossible, but doing so here is dubious at best.


The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

.Response: You are not making any sense. The best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself. Can you create a repeating pattern without choice? No. So you have no basis to conclude it can occur when the best form of evidence shows it cannot occur. Thus the patterns in the universe and life clearly originates from a choice, proving God exist.

Why did you reply in that way? lol

I decide what the best evidence is. I reckon a group of scientists can do their job better than I can, and in most cases I'll put my trust in them. Can I create a repeating pattern without choice? I wouldn't say it matters so much what I can do, but what can be done that creates repeating patterns. Asking if I can do so is begging the question I believe. Even if the universe required "choice" and a being to make it, that wouldn't "prove God". It may prove an overmind or overminds, but not your god.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 5:50:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 5:40:27 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

Why did you reply in that way? lol

I decide what the best evidence is. I reckon a group of scientists can do their job better than I can, and in most cases I'll put my trust in them. Can I create a repeating pattern without choice? I wouldn't say it matters so much what I can do, but what can be done that creates repeating patterns. Asking if I can do so is begging the question I believe. Even if the universe required "choice" and a being to make it, that wouldn't "prove God". It may prove an overmind or overminds, but not your god.

Response: You are not addressing the premise as to what is the best evidence. What is better evidence:

what you can test and observe yourself, or relying on someone's words that it has been tested and observed?
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 5:50:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:40:27 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

Why did you reply in that way? lol

I decide what the best evidence is. I reckon a group of scientists can do their job better than I can, and in most cases I'll put my trust in them. Can I create a repeating pattern without choice? I wouldn't say it matters so much what I can do, but what can be done that creates repeating patterns. Asking if I can do so is begging the question I believe. Even if the universe required "choice" and a being to make it, that wouldn't "prove God". It may prove an overmind or overminds, but not your god.

Response: You are not addressing the premise as to what is the best evidence. What is better evidence:

what you can test and observe yourself, or relying on someone's words that it has been tested and observed?

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 6:09:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:50:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:40:27 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

Why did you reply in that way? lol

I decide what the best evidence is. I reckon a group of scientists can do their job better than I can, and in most cases I'll put my trust in them. Can I create a repeating pattern without choice? I wouldn't say it matters so much what I can do, but what can be done that creates repeating patterns. Asking if I can do so is begging the question I believe. Even if the universe required "choice" and a being to make it, that wouldn't "prove God". It may prove an overmind or overminds, but not your god.

Response: You are not addressing the premise as to what is the best evidence. What is better evidence:

what you can test and observe yourself, or relying on someone's words that it has been tested and observed?

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Even competence aside, I think of it like this; I can't repeat the tests thousands or millions of times myself, so I can't observe it for myself. Without a suitably large sample size and proper controls, methodology etc. I'm not capable of verifying things in the way that the scientific method as practiced by 'science' can and does. However, I can test the method and indeed do on a very regular basis.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Response: Wow. Then this is self-admission of being brainwashed. You would trust others for truth before your own self. That means that if you were bouncing a ball, and a group of scientists came along and said that the ball you are bouncing doesn't bounce, you would agree with them, despite the fact that you are bouncing the ball yourself.

This is self-admission of delusion. And further shows the absurdity of atheism. Making my point that atheism is absurd, and absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God.

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
bulproof
Posts: 25,238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/1/2014 8:15:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Response: Wow. Then this is self-admission of being brainwashed.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 12:44:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Hearsay evidence? And I suppose the word of a pedophile in a cave is more believable than modern scientists? LOL

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

And, of course, the words recorded by the pedophile muhammed was peer-reviewed by...?

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

Please show me one instance where you can verify that this happened. This is an absurd claim.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

You really are a deluded idiot.

With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

And would you please tell us how much of the qur'an you have personally witnessed?

So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

Let's all worship the god that leads people to mass murder! That's real proof! I'm sold. Where do I sign up?

Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

Logical proof? You couldn't be further from it, if you actually mad a concentrated effort...

The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

Whereas the retardation of islam and christianity has been self-evident to people with brain stems, for centuries.

Debunked.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 12:58:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 12:44:38 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 5/1/2014 4:28:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The claims made by atheists and agnostics to support their disbelief or lack of belief in God has always been unique, but there is one that has to be the most extraordinary of them all. That is their hypocritical stance of choosing hearsay evidence over evidence they can test and observe themselves.

Hearsay evidence? And I suppose the word of a pedophile in a cave is more believable than modern scientists? LOL

Response: You would know. Just ask the pedophile next to you. Or rather, the person next to you should look to you.

Atheists and agnostics love to claim that what they read from science books and articles are facts. Why? Because scientific papers are peer-reviewed. That the information in them have been tested and observed as facts. In other words, the best evidence is what you can test and observe yourself.

And, of course, the words recorded by the pedophile muhammed was peer-reviewed by...?

Response: Don't know. But the Qur'an challenge by Prophet Muhammad is a hands-on eyewitness account of observable and testable evidence that it is true. Debunked.

However, when they themselves test and observe what is alleged in science papers and it comes out differently, they reject what their own eyes have tested and observed and still claim a science article is true.

Please show me one instance where you can verify that this happened. This is an absurd claim.

Response: You yourself is the evidence. A repeating pattern cannot originate from a non-choice. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choice? No. Now watch. Did the universe originate from a non-choice. You say yes. Dummy. Just proved my point.

What??? How can it be true? If you tested and observed yourself something differently, and science is based on observable and testable evidence, then that means that the papers and claims by scientists are lies and unscientific.

You really are a deluded idiot.

Response: Your weak rebuttal says otherwise. Debunked.

With that said, scientific theories such as natural selection, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are based on creation originating from a non-choice. That the repeated patterns in life and the universe originated from these theories of non-choice. But when you actually put a non-choice to the test, it does not produce a repeating pattern. This can easily be tested. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choosing to do so? No. Can you create any repeating pattern without choosing to do so? NO. So you are a witness yourself that a non-choice cannot create a repeating pattern, yet you accept a science paper, which is hearsay since you are not a witness, that it can or has occurred. You just chose hearsay evidence over a hands-on eyewitness account after stating the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself. Sheer absurdity.

And would you please tell us how much of the qur'an you have personally witnessed?

Response: All of it. Through observable and testable evidence and deductive logic based on such evidence. Debunked.

So since atheists and agnostics say that science is the best evidence because it is observable and testable evidence, then the fact that you can observe yourself that you cannot create a repeating pattern without choice proves that every theory by science that the patterns in the universe and life originated from a non-choice is false.

Let's all worship the god that leads people to mass murder! That's real proof! I'm sold. Where do I sign up?

Response: Ask your science Gods. They should know.
Hence, an Intelligent Designer is the only logical proof for how the universe and life itself came to be. Thus God does exist, and your own evidence shows it.

Logical proof? You couldn't be further from it, if you actually mad a concentrated effort...

Response: Yet your weak rebuttals show otherwise.
The absurdity of atheism and agnostics exposed.

Whereas the retardation of islam and christianity has been self-evident to people with brain stems, for centuries.

Debunked.

Response: Yet the fact that you failed the Qur'an challenge shows otherwise and Islam as the truth. While your retarded concept of accepting evidence contrary to what you see and test yourself is a clear sign of mental idiocy on the part of atheism. Debunked as usual.
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 1:35:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
An intelligent designer you say?
The design, universe and life, which you refer to contains fundamental flaws. How does an "intelligent" designer account for this?

You derive the existence of a God because of your justification of an inability to create a repeating pattern without choice. How is that logical?

How do you know that an intelligent designer or God can create repeating patterns?

What verifying evidence can you provide to demonstrate that a God does exist?

From my worldview, the universe exists because it is permitted to do so, not because it it is chosen to.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 1:57:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 1:35:28 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
An intelligent designer you say?
The design, universe and life, which you refer to contains fundamental flaws. How does an "intelligent" designer account for this?

You derive the existence of a God because of your justification of an inability to create a repeating pattern without choice. How is that logical?

How do you know that an intelligent designer or God can create repeating patterns?

What verifying evidence can you provide to demonstrate that a God does exist?

From my worldview, the universe exists because it is permitted to do so, not because it it is chosen to.

Response: There is no flaw in the design since everything is as it is supposed to be. Just because you do not like the way it is does not make it a flaw.

As for the rest, the evidence that God exist is in the design. For we can test and see that a repeating pattern cannot come into existence without choice. The fact that you cannot draw a simple checkerboard without choice is proof. Thetefore, the repeating patterns in the universe clearly originate from Intelligent design.
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 2:00:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 1:57:49 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 1:35:28 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
An intelligent designer you say?
The design, universe and life, which you refer to contains fundamental flaws. How does an "intelligent" designer account for this?

You derive the existence of a God because of your justification of an inability to create a repeating pattern without choice. How is that logical?

How do you know that an intelligent designer or God can create repeating patterns?

What verifying evidence can you provide to demonstrate that a God does exist?

From my worldview, the universe exists because it is permitted to do so, not because it it is chosen to.

Response: There is no flaw in the design since everything is as it is supposed to be. Just because you do not like the way it is does not make it a flaw.

How do you know everything is supposed to be as it is?
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Response: Wow. Then this is self-admission of being brainwashed. You would trust others for truth before your own self.

Under certain circumstances. Do you think anecdotal experience is the highest form of evidence? If that's so, is that why you believe in Allah?

That means that if you were bouncing a ball, and a group of scientists came along and said that the ball you are bouncing doesn't bounce, you would agree with them, despite the fact that you are bouncing the ball yourself.

Nope.


This is self-admission of delusion. And further shows the absurdity of atheism. Making my point that atheism is absurd, and absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God.

It may show my absurdity, but it doesn't show the absurdity of atheism. You guys are really desperate, aren't you? "absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God" - just lol.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 2:18:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/1/2014 6:09:52 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:50:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 5:40:27 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

Why did you reply in that way? lol

I decide what the best evidence is. I reckon a group of scientists can do their job better than I can, and in most cases I'll put my trust in them. Can I create a repeating pattern without choice? I wouldn't say it matters so much what I can do, but what can be done that creates repeating patterns. Asking if I can do so is begging the question I believe. Even if the universe required "choice" and a being to make it, that wouldn't "prove God". It may prove an overmind or overminds, but not your god.

Response: You are not addressing the premise as to what is the best evidence. What is better evidence:

what you can test and observe yourself, or relying on someone's words that it has been tested and observed?

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Even competence aside, I think of it like this; I can't repeat the tests thousands or millions of times myself, so I can't observe it for myself. Without a suitably large sample size and proper controls, methodology etc. I'm not capable of verifying things in the way that the scientific method as practiced by 'science' can and does. However, I can test the method and indeed do on a very regular basis.

Yeah, it can be tested repeatably. Also scientists have to place trust in other scientists also,
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 2:23:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 12:58:05 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: You yourself is the evidence. A repeating pattern cannot originate from a non-choice. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choice? No. Now watch. Did the universe originate from a non-choice. You say yes. Dummy. Just proved my point.

First you beg the question by asking if a conscious being can do something and then you stretch an overmind into Allah, you do this repeatedly even when people point out the flaws. Why would you think this idiocy would convince rational people?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 2:51:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 2:00:08 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 5/2/2014 1:57:49 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 1:35:28 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
An intelligent designer you say?
The design, universe and life, which you refer to contains fundamental flaws. How does an "intelligent" designer account for this?

You derive the existence of a God because of your justification of an inability to create a repeating pattern without choice. How is that logical?

How do you know that an intelligent designer or God can create repeating patterns?

What verifying evidence can you provide to demonstrate that a God does exist?

From my worldview, the universe exists because it is permitted to do so, not because it it is chosen to.

Response: There is no flaw in the design since everything is as it is supposed to be. Just because you do not like the way it is does not make it a flaw.

How do you know everything is supposed to be as it is?

Response: Because Allah says so. For more, you can refer to the Ask Allah thread.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Response: Wow. Then this is self-admission of being brainwashed. You would trust others for truth before your own self.

Under certain circumstances. Do you think anecdotal experience is the highest form of evidence? If that's so, is that why you believe in Allah?

That means that if you were bouncing a ball, and a group of scientists came along and said that the ball you are bouncing doesn't bounce, you would agree with them, despite the fact that you are bouncing the ball yourself.

Nope.


This is self-admission of delusion. And further shows the absurdity of atheism. Making my point that atheism is absurd, and absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God.

It may show my absurdity, but it doesn't show the absurdity of atheism. You guys are really desperate, aren't you? "absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God" - just lol.
Response:
You have acknowledged that you do not trust yourself for thet truth. So you have no rational argument to give.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:05:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 2:23:32 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 12:58:05 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: You yourself is the evidence. A repeating pattern cannot originate from a non-choice. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choice? No. Now watch. Did the universe originate from a non-choice. You say yes. Dummy. Just proved my point.

First you beg the question by asking if a conscious being can do something and then you stretch an overmind into Allah, you do this repeatedly even when people point out the flaws. Why would you think this idiocy would convince rational people?

Response: It's not begging the question when it is agreed that the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself so asking someone to do just that is intelligence. Those like you who have acknowledged that they don't trust themselveswith the truth and rely on oothers is the idiocy. So why are you posting as if no one can see that?
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:

I'd rely on the scientific community's words over my own personal experiments in nearly all cases tbh. I've performed loads of awful scientific experiments which didn't come out with the right answer, not because scientists are liars and unscientific, but because my methods were flawed. I'd trust a group of pros over myself.

Response: Wow. Then this is self-admission of being brainwashed. You would trust others for truth before your own self.

Under certain circumstances. Do you think anecdotal experience is the highest form of evidence? If that's so, is that why you believe in Allah?

That means that if you were bouncing a ball, and a group of scientists came along and said that the ball you are bouncing doesn't bounce, you would agree with them, despite the fact that you are bouncing the ball yourself.

Nope.


This is self-admission of delusion. And further shows the absurdity of atheism. Making my point that atheism is absurd, and absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God.

It may show my absurdity, but it doesn't show the absurdity of atheism. You guys are really desperate, aren't you? "absurdity does is not disproof or a lack of proof for God" - just lol.
Response:
You have acknowledged that you do not trust yourself for thet truth. So you have no rational argument to give.

I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:12:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:05:27 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:23:32 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 12:58:05 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: You yourself is the evidence. A repeating pattern cannot originate from a non-choice. Can you draw a checkerboard pattern without choice? No. Now watch. Did the universe originate from a non-choice. You say yes. Dummy. Just proved my point.

First you beg the question by asking if a conscious being can do something and then you stretch an overmind into Allah, you do this repeatedly even when people point out the flaws. Why would you think this idiocy would convince rational people?

Response: It's not begging the question when it is agreed that the best evidence is what can be tested and observed yourself so asking someone to do just that is intelligence.

Yes it is intelligence. You start your premise with intelligence and use that to end your conclusion with intelligence; begging the question.

Those like you who have acknowledged that they don't trust themselveswith the truth and rely on oothers is the idiocy. So why are you posting as if no one can see that?

Humans are not the start and end of the universe and Earth is not the center of the universe. We can not only look inward to find answers we must also look outwards. We must also admit that all humans make mistakes easily and often, no matter how vulnerable that makes you feel. If are truly claiming to be infallible then you have outed yourself as arrogant and ignorant.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:13:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:



I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?

Response: Not at all. I am fallible as well.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:16:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:13:39 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:



I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?

Response: Not at all. I am fallible as well.

Then why do you so vehemently condemn me for admitting my fallibility?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 3:31:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:16:42 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:13:39 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:



I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?

Response: Not at all. I am fallible as well.

Then why do you so vehemently condemn me for admitting my fallibility?

Response: That is not what you admitted to. You admitted to not trusting yourself for truth and rely on others.
bulproof
Posts: 25,238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 6:03:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The poor man doesn't understand the English language. Not his native tongue apparently, well we hope so. LOL
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 7:19:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 3:31:00 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:16:42 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:13:39 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:



I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?

Response: Not at all. I am fallible as well.

Then why do you so vehemently condemn me for admitting my fallibility?

Response: That is not what you admitted to. You admitted to not trusting yourself for truth and rely on others.

Not (always) trusting myself for (certain specific) truth(s) and (sometimes) relying on others (for those specific truths). You somehow manage to ultra-generalise anything I say until it's unreasonable, either you do that by accident or on purpose.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 7:56:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 7:19:22 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:31:00 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:16:42 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:13:39 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:06:50 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/2/2014 3:02:24 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/2/2014 2:17:27 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:12:29 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/1/2014 6:05:57 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:



I have readily acknowledged that I'm fallible. So are you claiming to be infallible?

Response: Not at all. I am fallible as well.

Then why do you so vehemently condemn me for admitting my fallibility?

Response: That is not what you admitted to. You admitted to not trusting yourself for truth and rely on others.

Not (always) trusting myself for (certain specific) truth(s) and (sometimes) relying on others (for those specific truths). You somehow manage to ultra-generalise anything I say until it's unreasonable, either you do that by accident or on purpose.

Response::Rather it is your redundant tactic to give dubious responses to a direct question to hide the fact that a direct answer exposes your arguments. And when your dubious answer still points to a specific answer, you try to wiggle out as if you never said it.

The question I asked was clear. I asked which is the best proof:

What you can test and observe yourself
or
what someone says they tested and observed.

No where did I ask you to refer to what you cannot trust or cannot do yourself. No where. The question clearly implies what you see as a fact, since I am asking what is the best proof. So I am referring to what you can test and observe yourself as a fact. You responded by saying the best proof is referring to others, which means you do not trust yourself for truth. Thus exposing the absurdity of atheism.
bulproof
Posts: 25,238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/2/2014 8:02:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/2/2014 7:56:38 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response::Rather it is your redundant tactic to give dubious responses to a direct question to hide the fact that a direct answer exposes your arguments. And when your dubious answer still points to a specific answer, you try to wiggle out as if you never said it.

The question I asked was clear. I asked which is the best proof:

What you can test and observe yourself
or
what someone says they tested and observed.

No where did I ask you to refer to what you cannot trust or cannot do yourself. No where. The question clearly implies what you see as a fact, since I am asking what is the best proof. So I am referring to what you can test and observe yourself as a fact. You responded by saying the best proof is referring to others, which means you do not trust yourself for truth. Thus exposing the absurdity of atheism.

Can anyone translate this into "understandable"?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin