Question for Atheists/Agnostics with Kids

[Neosutra]

The exact same thing she stated in every other Ivve post, using her perspective that validity of an argument has nothing to do with the argument itself and ranting on.

Not even going to bother with you this time, as all you did is repeat things youve already said while ignoring the counters.

Kuya:

You say that i am being more antagonistic then another debate you had with MF_Perm, could you yeild that perhaps the scope/realm/topic is slightly different and the method of engagement is thus relatively altered as well? I stated already I was intentionally antagonistic in a few responses to motivate certain people to give everyone the same respect we are giving them. To add to that, Blarg brought up a very good point that regardless of the nature of my response, even insuating that any diety is infact a fallacy is offensive to many of the people within this discussion and a defensive response from them is to be expected.

Ivve can flail her arms as wildly as she wants, but that doesnt change the fact that validity of theories is infact relevant to this discussion.

You can play the "your an asshole" game all you want, but that doesnt change the fact that the only thing I am doing is posting counters to your debate points, as I/others disagree with them. Im getting tired of reiterating for you and Ivve that I dont give a rats ass what you believe, but if you bring it in here, back it up.

And if your only response is "god is not proveable" then you have nothing to add, since this is a logical discussion of validity of theories, and as you states, Logic + God does not work.

Or you can just continue to call me mean in an attempt to belittle my argument and hope others jump on the bandwagon.

Example of whats going on:

OP: How should atheist/agnostic teach children about god?
Me: They should be very weary, as there is no evidence for religion and teaching children fictitious reasons for physical occurances can alter then perception and approach to problem solving later in life.
AngryTheist: HOW DARE YOU CALL IT FICTITIOUS! Your assuming you know everything by saying god doesnt exists! Your an asshole!
Me: "No, im just presenting an argument to the validity of a belief system before it is taught to children"
AngryTheist: Asshole! I believe in god!
Me: "Ok, but why do you belive?"
AngryTheist: "What right do you have to question!, Thats such an asshole thing to do!"
Me: "Restates validity of argument"
AngryTheist: "I have no evidence, but I just wanted to post what I believe, not to support it, but just to let everyone know, cause I know you care"


It pretty much goes on like this. Good grief.

[Ivve]

This may be true for some people but I would think that most theists believe that the bible is proof of god, and inerrant, therefore facts and figures discounting the bible, and the beliefs teachings and stories therein, do counter theistic ideas.

That is not necessarily true. I live in the Bible belt in the south, and I would be willing to say that about 95% of the people I know personally do not accept every single word in the Bible as infallible, as law. You'd be talking about a fundamentalist Christian in that case, which comprises a relatively smaller portion of the Christian whole. Many people accept that the Bible was written by man and has been interpreted by man, and is therefore open to mistakes, mistranslation, misinterpretations, and all manner of errors.

Example of whats going on:

OP: How should atheist/agnostic teach children about god?
Me: They should be very weary, as there is no evidence for religion and teaching children fictitious reasons for physical occurances can alter then perception and approach to problem solving later in life.
AngryTheist: HOW DARE YOU CALL IT FICTITIOUS! Your assuming you know everything by saying god doesnt exists! Your an asshole!
Me: "No, im just presenting an argument to the validity of a belief system before it is taught to children"
AngryTheist: Asshole! I believe in god!
Me: "Ok, but why do you belive?"
AngryTheist: "What right do you have to question!, Thats such an asshole thing to do!"
Me: "Restates validity of argument"
AngryTheist: "I have no evidence, but I just wanted to post what I believe, not to support it, but just to let everyone know, cause I know you care"


It pretty much goes on like this. Good grief.

Except for the part where I'm neither angry nor a theist.

Also, when has antagonistic behavior every brought out the best in people? I'm pointing out that you're working pretty hard to piss people off specifically so that they will respond in a manner that you can pick apart and attribute to anger instead of actually addressing anything that is said.

You're preaching to the choir here and you don't even realize it. If you continue to act like you have no idea why someone would believe something as ridiculous as God and then ignoring me when I explain it to you, then of course the discussion isn't going to move anywhere. I'm spelling out pretty clearly why it's not moving anywhere. Ignoring that doesn't make it any less true, nor does it make you any more correct.

[Blarg]

This may be true for some people but I would think that most theists believe that the bible is proof of god, and inerrant, therefore facts and figures discounting the bible, and the beliefs teachings and stories therein, do counter theistic ideas.

That is not necessarily true. I live in the Bible belt in the south, and I would be willing to say that about 95% of the people I know personally do not accept every single word in the Bible as infallible, as law. You'd be talking about a fundamentalist Christian in that case, which comprises a relatively smaller portion of the Christian whole. Many people accept that the Bible was written by man and has been interpreted by man, and is therefore open to mistakes, mistranslation, misinterpretations, and all manner of errors.

I should have addressed this in the last post as I knew the many different interpretations of the bible make some parts of it 'untrue' as it were. However, I believe 40%, (or some number around there) of Americans are creationists, creationists mostly being fundies as well. Those that don't believe every single word, the parts they don't believe usually being disregarded due to current scientific knowledge but thats besides the point. Still, non fundies believe many parts of the bible, but these beliefs can also be refuted. A Christian who only believes the parts of the bible which don't go against science and reason and tosses out the parts that do create a conflict would be left holding just a few pages of the bible, and would really be no longer a Christian in the religious sense, but some offshoot of Christianity that is unique to themselves. These 'pickers and choosers' of the bible have essentially created their own unique god to conform to their own views, and will continue to take out parts that don't conform as they learn more.

Faith is very important to theists but their belief has to be first formed from what they think are facts about the earth on which they live, otherwise their faith is nothing but wishful thinking and under personal scrutiny would show it as such making it nothing more sacred than the wishful thinking someone does hoping they get that job they applied for, or that their sports team wins.


I've probably strayed a bit from addressing the points in your quote, but I find theism terribly interesting and sometimes end up linking my thoughts together and getting off topic.

[Ivve]

I should have addressed this in the last post as I knew the many different interpretations of the bible make some parts of it 'untrue' as it were. However, I believe 40%, (or some number around there) of Americans are creationists, creationists mostly being fundies as well. Those that don't believe every single word, the parts they don't believe usually being disregarded due to current scientific knowledge but thats besides the point. Still, non fundies believe many parts of the bible, but these beliefs can also be refuted. A Christian who only believes the parts of the bible which don't go against science and reason and tosses out the parts that do create a conflict would be left holding just a few pages of the bible, and would really be no longer a Christian in the religious sense, but some offshoot of Christianity that is unique to themselves. These 'pickers and choosers' of the bible have essentially created their own unique god to conform to their own views, and will continue to take out parts that don't conform as they learn more.

Faith is very important to theists but their belief has to be first formed from what they think are facts about the earth on which they live, otherwise their faith is nothing but wishful thinking and under personal scrutiny would show it as such making it nothing more sacred than the wishful thinking someone does hoping they get that job they applied for, or that their sports team wins.


I've probably strayed a bit from addressing the points in your quote, but I find theism terribly interesting and sometimes end up linking my thoughts together and getting off topic.

I have to agree with most of what you said. I don't understand how people's heads don't explode from the fucking cognitive dissonance of some of the shit in there. PEOPLE RODE DINOSAURS! Wut?

Personally, I think there are a couple of good messages in the Bible. The whole thing with Jesus preaching love your neighbor and be peaceful is decent. Some of the commandments are pretty good. I can live with not killing, stealing, or cheating on people. We'd all probably be happier if we never took the time out of our day to envy shit that other people have. Respecting your parents, unless they're total fucking irrational morons, that's a pretty decent one. It's just sad that relatively decent messages like that are hidden in a book that is, by all accounts, to some degree intolerant, misogynistic, irrational, and blatantly ripped off from other works that predate it.

[Neosutra]

Except for the part where I'm neither angry nor a theist.

Also, when has antagonistic behavior every brought out the best in people? I'm pointing out that you're working pretty hard to piss people off specifically so that they will respond in a manner that you can pick apart and attribute to anger instead of actually addressing anything that is said.

You're preaching to the choir here and you don't even realize it. If you continue to act like you have no idea why someone would believe something as ridiculous as God and then ignoring me when I explain it to you, then of course the discussion isn't going to move anywhere. I'm spelling out pretty clearly why it's not moving anywhere. Ignoring that doesn't make it any less true, nor does it make you any more correct.

Im sorry, but I have to point out the antagonistic responses are two way. I may be "aggressive" in the fact that I openly dismiss the concept in god and thus offend some people, but I believe yourself and Kuya have responded in kind with insults of smugness and the implications that I just want to be correct. Do you not think I find that offensive as well? You get to state your opinion and why you believe something, but I dont w/o being an asshole? You also get to call me an jerk in the process and Im the antagonistic one?

And im not acting like I have no idea why someone would believe, as stated before I was indeed a theist at once time. I am just asking people that post here to justify it since they are using those beliefs as a weight for theist view in this debate. And so far, you havent explained it to me, though you say you have, what evidence/reason there is to believe in god(s). You have explained to me how you think I cant ask that question, and how im an asshole for examining things logically, but you havent given me one solid reason to believe, not one logical statement, not one piece of evidence, nothing.

Try to be a bit more civil in your responses and Ill do the same, but remember to stop beating around the bush and give your belief AND reason for believing, as just stating that you believe X theory doesnt really mean much to me if I dont know why. And dont post a response if you dont want me to examine it critically.

Examining your response critically means Im actually thinking about what you said and reasoning through it. Its giving you the respect of valuing your opinion, do the same for me.

[Tristam]

Nice post buddy, interesting perspective and correllation between the decline in math and science aptitude and the emphasis on religion. Is there a study supporting this? It sounds plausible.

There aren't any direct studies supporting it, but there is a strong inverse correlation between strength of religious conviction and acceptance of fundamental tenets of biology, i.e. evolution. I was paraphrasing a Nature editorial that showed on a state-by-state basis that the percentage of religious believers corresponded with failure to understand evolution, but I don't wanna hijack the figures as it's copyright violation. I don't want to make this an evo-devo-ID debate, but for religion to have such a dramatic effect on understanding of basic biology, and evolution is pretty basic, it's tempting to jump to the conclusion that religion plays a role in declining scores, especially when there are christianity based schools that specifically indoctrinate faith based education into the classroom, a quick google search will come up with such schools. Browsing their websites can be horrifying.

The anecdotal evidence is probably there, I would be interested to see a study that simply compared the percentage of strong religious believers state-by-state with standardized test scores. But you can imagine how incensed that would get people regardless of the outcome!

Again, the emphasis is not on people that believe in god but are reasonable and yield to experts about important issues. But the real world scenario is that people are all too happy to be misled. There are so many quacks out there, selling 'natural antioxidant blah blah blah.... spiritual healing garbage' that it makes me sick. The political aspect is frightening. And I will absolutely not respect religion as a political organization, regardless of how effective it is. Politically, it's garbage that does nothing for the country but drive wedge issues, poison classrooms, and potentially set us back scientifically for decades. Personally, it can do good, but that's as far as I will go.

[Kaelan]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You believe it because you want to believe it for whatever reason that may be, and that's that. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

[Blarg]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

There is perceived logic behind religion.

What exactly makes God and Religion exclusive? Religions (most of them) are based around a creator (God), God 'writes' a book and religions teach from this book.

[Neosutra]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You believe it because you want to believe it for whatever reason that may be, and that's that. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

No theory is above examination.

[MF Perm]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You believe it because you want to believe it for whatever reason that may be, and that's that. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

No theory is above examination.

The funny thing about you Neo, is that all you're doing is getting your rocks off pitting your perception against someone elses. You can't prove there isn't a God, you can only work to try and prove that someone else's perception or written word of their god doesn't exist.

So while you think you're debating away hard fact and infallible truth, all you're doing is perpetuating another belief system that fits your realm of thought. You're trying to convince people that love chocolate ice cream that strawberry is better because it's pink not brown, fruity not chocolatey, etc etc.


The entire debate is a worthless attempt to paint this issue black and white, which it is not. You cannot ever prove whether there is or isn't a god, you can only prove your belief system to why there is or isn't. As much as theists are getting spun up at your counters, you taking your time to respond with an essay each time only shows that their responses are riling you up just as much because they aren't conforming to your belief system.

Just let it go, it's a pointless debate when it gets into the realm of personal belief because you can't tell someone they're wrong when you won't admit you could be wrong.

[Ivve]

Except for the part where I'm neither angry nor a theist.

Also, when has antagonistic behavior every brought out the best in people? I'm pointing out that you're working pretty hard to piss people off specifically so that they will respond in a manner that you can pick apart and attribute to anger instead of actually addressing anything that is said.

You're preaching to the choir here and you don't even realize it. If you continue to act like you have no idea why someone would believe something as ridiculous as God and then ignoring me when I explain it to you, then of course the discussion isn't going to move anywhere. I'm spelling out pretty clearly why it's not moving anywhere. Ignoring that doesn't make it any less true, nor does it make you any more correct.

Im sorry, but I have to point out the antagonistic responses are two way. I may be "aggressive" in the fact that I openly dismiss the concept in god and thus offend some people, but I believe yourself and Kuya have responded in kind with insults of smugness and the implications that I just want to be correct. Do you not think I find that offensive as well? You get to state your opinion and why you believe something, but I dont w/o being an asshole? You also get to call me an jerk in the process and Im the antagonistic one?

And im not acting like I have no idea why someone would believe, as stated before I was indeed a theist at once time. I am just asking people that post here to justify it since they are using those beliefs as a weight for theist view in this debate. And so far, you havent explained it to me, though you say you have, what evidence/reason there is to believe in god(s). You have explained to me how you think I cant ask that question, and how im an asshole for examining things logically, but you havent given me one solid reason to believe, not one logical statement, not one piece of evidence, nothing.

Try to be a bit more civil in your responses and Ill do the same, but remember to stop beating around the bush and give your belief AND reason for believing, as just stating that you believe X theory doesnt really mean much to me if I dont know why. And dont post a response if you dont want me to examine it critically.

Examining your response critically means Im actually thinking about what you said and reasoning through it. Its giving you the respect of valuing your opinion, do the same for me.

The point is, there is no concrete proof for religion and we all know it. It's faith-based. That's why you come off as an asshole. Everyone in this discussion already fully understands that, so there's really no point in critically examining it unless you enjoy beating a dead horse. If you follow a religion or accept that there is a God, then you have to accept that the idea has flaws and doesn't hold up when you look at it from an objective, scientific point of view. There's nothing else to be said about the subject.

You're also the first person to use inflammatory statements about religion and the other people participating in the discussion. Don't be surprised when people respond in kind. I tried to explain that to you initially without making any sort of condescending remarks, but you respond to every post in an equally nasty way. This is something you even admit to doing in order to try to goad a "better" response out of people.

As for what I would personally teach my own children, I have said it again and again. Please refer to my first three posts in the thread, all of which at least made some attempt to directly address the question asked. The difference between us seems to be that I really wouldn't care if my children decided to go with a belief system. If it suits them and it's not hurting anyone else, it's really none of my business anyway.

[Kaelan]

I don't think you got what I meant. I'm not saying Religion "gets a free pass" from logic. I'm saying religion has nothing to do with logic. Trying to attribute logic to religion i's like trying to figure out what sound yellow makes or what fun tastes like.

The reason I separate God and Religion is because they're often put together even though they're different things. You've probably heard plenty of people say before "well I was raised Christian but I don't really believe in any of the Bible. I still believe in some kind of order in the universe, or a God of sorts though"(or in other words, believe in the concept of God but don't believe in what's said by religions in general). Another example would be how several religions are completely different in every way, except for the fact that they all believe in the same exact God, with the same exact attributes. Yet they have completely different customs, stories and rules. The belief in a God and the belief in a specific Religion are different things, that address different subjects, for different reasons.

Religion isn't God and God isn't Religion.

Religion is a set of stories, customs and practices. It's also how one group approaches of the idea of God(is there one, are there many, what can and can't they do, etc.). Religion has absolutely nothing to do with logic or critical thinking. This is where belief comes in.

God is a hypothesis. It's a metaphysical statement about the nature of the universe. It has nothing to do with individual stories or practices and very much does have to do with logic(albeit bad logic) and critical thinking. In other words, God by itself is strictly a subject of academic discussion. It is exactly like your view on Economics or Politics, has absolutely nothing to do with religion and shouldn't be treated or viewed as such.

If that isn't clear enough, it's the difference between believing in God and believing in Jesus. One is a general believe about the nature of the universe, the other is a belief in a story about one guy as explicitly stated in one book, not much different from, say, believing in Hercules.

When you're talking about how the universe works, you get into science and when you get into science, you're working with logic. When you're talking about religion(using the example again, belief in the story of Jesus), you're talking about stories and practices. It has nothing to do with logic. If you try to apply logic to anything religious, it will completely fall apart instantly and that fact will not matter at all whatsoever to someone who believes in it, because they have no concern whatsoever whether it's logical, likely or even makes sense. They don't believe in it because it makes sense to them, they believe in it because they want to believe in it.

No theory is above examination.

Religion isn't a theory. I'd say it's closer to an opinion.

[Neosutra]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You believe it because you want to believe it for whatever reason that may be, and that's that. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

No theory is above examination.

The funny thing about you Neo, is that all you're doing is getting your rocks off pitting your perception against someone elses. You can't prove there isn't a God, you can only work to try and prove that someone else's perception or written word of their god doesn't exist.

So while you think you're debating away hard fact and infallible truth, all you're doing is perpetuating another belief system that fits your realm of thought. You're trying to convince people that love chocolate ice cream that strawberry is better because it's pink not brown, fruity not chocolatey, etc etc.


The entire debate is a worthless attempt to paint this issue black and white, which it is not. You cannot ever prove whether there is or isn't a god, you can only prove your belief system to why there is or isn't. As much as theists are getting spun up at your counters, you taking your time to respond with an essay each time only shows that their responses are riling you up just as much because they aren't conforming to your belief system.

Just let it go, it's a pointless debate when it gets into the realm of personal belief because you can't tell someone they're wrong when you won't admit you could be wrong.

Do we have to reiterate the "complete lack of evidence IS evidence enough agaist a theory" again? Im not talking about personal beliefs, Im talking about real, testable theories, and since there doesnt appear to be one here, there is nothing to talk about.

Me: There is no evidence for god.
You: Lies! there is no evidence for god!

...


And lol Ivve, keep reiterating that religion is faith based and above examination and Ill keep reiteratng that no theory is above examination.

Your banter repeats the same thing over and over ignoring its huge flaws. And your assertation that I come off as an asshole because "religion is faith based" is because you continue to miss the point that it is indeed a theory and thus is up for testing. Keep assuming im an asshole for saying this, and Ill keep assuming your an idiot for missing it. See how that goes?

[Kuya]

since there doesnt appear to be one here, there is nothing to talk about.

No shit Shirlock.

And your assertation that I come off as an asshole because "religion is faith based" is because you continue to miss the point that it is indeed a theory and thus is up for testing.

You have never proven it to be a theory, and most people in the creatonism vs. evolution debate always argue that creatonism is not a theory, not in the scientific sense and most scientist will say the same.

[MF Perm]

There is no logic behind Religion, that's the whole point. You believe it because you want to believe it for whatever reason that may be, and that's that. You don't justify it.


You're still mixing up God and Religion by the way.

No theory is above examination.

The funny thing about you Neo, is that all you're doing is getting your rocks off pitting your perception against someone elses. You can't prove there isn't a God, you can only work to try and prove that someone else's perception or written word of their god doesn't exist.

So while you think you're debating away hard fact and infallible truth, all you're doing is perpetuating another belief system that fits your realm of thought. You're trying to convince people that love chocolate ice cream that strawberry is better because it's pink not brown, fruity not chocolatey, etc etc.


The entire debate is a worthless attempt to paint this issue black and white, which it is not. You cannot ever prove whether there is or isn't a god, you can only prove your belief system to why there is or isn't. As much as theists are getting spun up at your counters, you taking your time to respond with an essay each time only shows that their responses are riling you up just as much because they aren't conforming to your belief system.

Just let it go, it's a pointless debate when it gets into the realm of personal belief because you can't tell someone they're wrong when you won't admit you could be wrong.

Do we have to reiterate the "complete lack of evidence IS evidence enough agaist a theory" again? Im not talking about personal beliefs, Im talking about real, testable theories, and since there doesnt appear to be one here, there is nothing to talk about.

Me: There is no evidence for god.
You: Lies! there is no evidence for god!

...


And lol Ivve, keep reiterating that religion is faith based and above examination and Ill keep reiteratng that no theory is above examination.

Your banter repeats the same thing over and over ignoring its huge flaws. And your assertation that I come off as an asshole because "religion is faith based" is because you continue to miss the point that it is indeed a theory and thus is up for testing. Keep assuming im an asshole for saying this, and Ill keep assuming your an idiot for missing it. See how that goes?

All you're repeating is that you have a hard time understanding concepts outside of your realm of awareness. You didn't understand a single word of my post, yet you were still compelled to reply. That speaks volumes of what you're trying to accomplish here.

You cannot prove nor disprove the existence of a creative force or sentient will beyond our perception of life on earth. All you can prove is things that man has written are not true. I made it very simple for you, so get your letter magnets and put that up on the fridge exactly like I said it and enunciate each word clearly, then maybe you'll start to pull together a rational thought inside that massive yet empty dome of yours we like to call a head.


In more subtle terms, there are species of animals that are found each year that were never known to exist. Does this mean they didn't exist ever until we saw them? For all of this logic your try to proffer up in your search for truth you fail to grasp the basic tenets of scientific method and power of failure.


You don't know, you are only guessing. That is the best the next person can do, guess. Just because you haven't seen it, heard it, felt it, touched it, or tasted it does not mean it isn't there. But since you're a simple man I'll go one level higher, who's to say that any creative force that resulted in our existence is even remotely interested in our existence? Every argument you've made shows the same dogmatic intelligence level of a religious fundamentalist, because all your arguments are only based on countering their asinine belief structure.


I tried to be polite but you flipped a bitch in the Ignorance Tour Bus, and now all your shits about to fall out. Tread wisely, this is your last chance.

[Ivve]

And lol Ivve, keep reiterating that religion is faith based and above examination and Ill keep reiteratng that no theory is above examination.

Your banter repeats the same thing over and over ignoring its huge flaws. And your assertation that I come off as an asshole because "religion is faith based" is because you continue to miss the point that it is indeed a theory and thus is up for testing. Keep assuming im an asshole for saying this, and Ill keep assuming your an idiot for missing it. See how that goes?

It's not a scientific theory. There's no way to test it. It's not a hypothesis that is open to revision. If you believe it, then you know that it is based on faith and not able to be backed up by facts. You accept that and you believe it anyway for any number of reasons. I don't know what else to say. It's not that it's above scrutiny, it's that you can't use science and logic to disprove it because it's not a scientific theory. Belief in God is an opinion.

[Neosutra]

And lol Ivve, keep reiterating that religion is faith based and above examination and Ill keep reiteratng that no theory is above examination.

Your banter repeats the same thing over and over ignoring its huge flaws. And your assertation that I come off as an asshole because "religion is faith based" is because you continue to miss the point that it is indeed a theory and thus is up for testing. Keep assuming im an asshole for saying this, and Ill keep assuming your an idiot for missing it. See how that goes?

It's not a scientific theory. There's no way to test it. It's not a hypothesis that is open to revision. If you believe it, then you know that it is based on faith and not able to be backed up by facts. You accept that and you believe it anyway for any number of reasons. I don't know what else to say. It's not that it's above scrutiny, it's that you can't use science and logic to disprove it because it's not a scientific theory. Belief in God is an opinion.

Continue riding the line between holding your faith in a category that is unexaminable and calling it justifiable through faith based evidence. And if belief in god is an opinion, then what do you base that opinion on, other then ignorance and fear?


MF_Perm:
You basically stated:
1. Apparently i cant concieve of things "outside my realm of existance". Oh snap, and you can?
2. Youve missed this point 50 times, but no evidence for something is evidence in itself against something.
3. You compared finding god to unfound biological species, ya... thats a fair comparision
4. God is a theory, a bad one, with no evidence. Get over it.

Ivva:

I dont have to prove it to be a theory. It is an idea for how something is, otherwise called a theory. The only difference here is the you dont have any reason to justify your theory.

You 3 can tag team this all you want, your still repeating the same bullshit over and over.

God is a theory, a bad theory, whom of which neither of you have any evidence. And it antagonistic ones here are you 3, so grow up. Dont be offended when I call your bullshit for what it is, just put some more thought into your posts.

http://pic4.picturetrail.com/VOL782/.../274159043.jpg

[Kuya]

God is a theory, a bad one, with no evidence. Get over it.

OH SNAP YOU SURE PROVED THAT POINT

I dont have to prove it to be a theory. It is an idea for how something is, otherwise called a theory. The only difference here is the you dont have any reason to justify your theory.

Hmmm, you don't have to prove it's not a theory. Sounds kinda like how Theists have to prove God exists, or else stfu.

God is a theory, a bad theory, whom of which neither of you have any evidence. And it antagonistic ones here are you 3, so grow up. Dont be offended when I call your bullshit for what it is, just put some more thought into your posts.

You seem to be mistaken here. It's ironic, because none of us 3 are religious at all. What we have here is an example of a arrogant atheist playing pseudo-science. The only person who's offended here is yourself, because you can't prove a thing you say, much like an overzelous theist, and the whole scientific community, appalled by your lack of understanding of what a mother fucking scientific theory is.

I am literaly laughing at my chair at your sheer ignorance, you seem to think you're arguing with theists. You Atheist are so much like theist, it's almost like a cosmic joke.

[Neosutra]

Hmmm, you don't have to prove it's not a theory. Sounds kinda like how Theists have to prove God exists, or else stfu.

Defintion of a theory:
In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.

Looks like a theory to me, lets try the next one.

You seem to be mistaken here. It's ironic, because none of us 3 are religious at all. What we have here is an example of a arrogant atheist playing pseudo-science. The only person who's offended here is yourself, because you can't prove a thing you say, much like an overzelous theist, and the whole scientific community, appalled by your lack of understanding of what a mother fucking scientific theory is.

WOW, so calling god a theory is pseudoscience? Wow, you caught me. Your not just attacking and being abrasive atm, your arguing with logic and reason, just wow, Im blown away by your debating skills. Looks to me like you need to read a dictionary, because according to the above defination, god is a theory.

A bad one.

A bad one that you have no evidence for.

A bad one that you have no evidence for that you continue to argue the validity of.

Idiot, if you think your the only one laughing, think again. At the moment your just arguing to argue. You have no premis your trying to prove, other then debating the meaning of the word "theory". At the moment your just trying to be insulting, and you inability to even debate anymore signifies the weakness of your stance. I appreciate you yielding defeat, and respect your submission.

[Intense]

I tried to be polite but you flipped a bitch in the Ignorance Tour Bus, and now all your shits about to fall out. Tread wisely, this is your last chance.

Oh shit, ghetto Perm is about to resurface after being away so long..