Ben Stein vs. Sputtering Atheists

[AKIron]

So...

The evidence needed to believe... will reveal itself... once you believe...

OK.

Once again logic and faith are not adequate to prove each other.

I don't think you can believe until you hear the knock and answer. Cause and effect are logical. Can you even have logic without cause and effect? Is it illogical to believe the universe was created if everything we see within it is the result of cause and effect?

[SirLoin]

 I was asking that if you reject the Christian God now would you change your mind should you find him to be a reality after you die?

..But at the perverbial gates of Heaven,i would say..

"Yes,my Lord...But you didn't present enough.. may i say.... evidence."   .

[storch]

..But at the perverbial gates of Heaven,i would say..

"Yes,my Lord...But you didn't present enough.. may i say.... evidence."   .

yes he has, we choose to ignore it though.

[Torque]

if you're senile heaven sounds like a great place... the quintessential nanny state clubhouse.

[Mustaine]

and this thread has pretty much made the point.

If you bothered to read the article and the origin of the discussion: atheists, or non-believers vehemently argue their position, so much as to attempt and discredit in any way possible someone who does not agree. They don't care about beliefs of another, they believe in the beliefs of their own and anyone who disagrees is something to be stomped on.



Pot meet kettle, you claim medieval Christians attempted to stomp out non-believers in unjust and unright ways, here you do the exact same. don't think it is any different. That by the way was the point of the whole movie, but guess you just either didn't evolve enough to understand it or ignore it.

[AKIron]

if you're senile heaven sounds like a great place... the quintessential nanny state clubhouse.

I think you have no idea what "my heaven" is like. Imagine living in the presence of a being that created time and space and all contained therein and you've just begun to glimpse the adventure awaiting us.

[kamilyun]

you claim medieval Christians attempted to stomp out non-believers in unjust and unright ways, here you do the exact same. don't think it is any different.

Dude, it's not like anyone is getting thrown to the lions.  There's a wee bit of difference between an intardnet fight and being burned at the stake.

[storch]

Dude, it's not like anyone is getting thrown to the lions.  There's a wee bit of difference between an intardnet fight and being burned at the stake.

sources?

[kamilyun]

sources?

for?

Edit:  Maybe I didn't pick up sarcasm, if so, my apologies.

[moot]

Storch, Kamilyun can back up what he said with evidence, you can't.  Making a joke out of your arguments being as well founded as sand castles is possibly the closest you'll get to having a point..  You could still post evidence for your earlier assertions.

[storch]

for?

Edit:  Maybe I didn't pick up sarcasm, if so, my apologies.

 

[Mini D]

I'm sorry, moot. Who's the evolutionist being burned at the stake these days? Or, are you saying that no christain has ever been tourtured, crucified or persecuted at any time in history? I'd be very curious to see what kind of "evidence" you come up with to support that lie.

You (and others) seem to have a very clear veiw of the atrocities of religion and somehow use it to vilify it, while maintaining that "science" is somehow pure. This is a load of crap. Any group will ban together to restrict/resist/persecute another group. Religion is not needed. It's the irony of what is being called science today. It is the irony of "science" such as global warming that insisted there was no argument against it then changed their fight to "climate change" because, erm, they were wrong about the whole GW thing. These are all religions with the same social ramifications.

[storch]

Storch, Kamilyun can back up what he said with evidence, you can't.  Making a joke out of your arguments being as well founded as sand castles is possibly the closest you'll get to having a point..  You could still post evidence for your earlier assertions.

there is no evidence to prove the big bang actually occured.  the scientific community has to rely solely on speculation and interpretation on this one.  as far as evolution is concerned the scientific community has even further mocked science with outright fraud in many instances.

I have yet to take the time to chase myelo's examples but I speculate (the same thing you brainy scireligious types do)  that it will be stuff akin to miller-urey, the homology of vertebrate limbs, haeckle's embryos, darwin's finches, the four winged fruit flies thing, the peppered moths and lastly but certainly not least archaeopteryx.

in short I am firmly convinced by my completely objective way of analyzing stuff that your examples are all probably hog wash, hooey, baloney, bullshirt and that you faithful of the scireligion cult have been bamboozled by their high priests.

personal interest and objectivity compells me to read whatever I get my hands on concerning this topic but since I'm not adherent and therefore susceptible to the wiles of either side of this argument I remain a believer with an open mind.

and before I forget, Jesus saves.

[SirLoin]

You (and others) seem to have a very clear veiw of the atrocities of religion and somehow use it to vilify it, while maintaining that "science" is somehow pure.

That does not happen without reason..For example,i think it can be safe to say that the "suicide bombing community" are all faith based.

[myelo]

I have yet to take the time to chase myelo's examples but I speculate (the same thing you brainy scireligious types do)  that it will be stuff akin to miller-urey, ...
in short I am firmly convinced by my completely objective way of analyzing stuff that your examples are all probably hog wash, hooey, baloney, bullshirt and that you faithful of the scireligion cult have been bamboozled by their high priests.

personal interest and objectivity compells me to read whatever I get my hands on concerning this topic but since I'm not adherent and therefore susceptible to the wiles of either side of this argument I remain a believer with an open mind.

For those scoring at home, let's summarize Storch's method of objective analysis.

1. Claim evolution is hooey because there's no supportive evidence.

2. When confronted with such evidence, don't get around to reading it but just dismiss it.

3. Claim evolution is hooey because there's no supportive evidence.

Yep, hard to see any flaws with that approach.

and before I forget, Jesus saves

He's Jewish, what do you expect?