Sunday, February 23, 2014

Following blindly

" so you follow science blindly. Thats why we have GMO 's in the food." 
-Anthony Johnson 

Please pay attention this time, I have told you 50 times already. It is the job of every scientist to suspect every other scientist is a liar. That is the opposite of following blindly.

Monday, February 17, 2014

equivocating on the word "god"

the reason you THINK you are being rational is that you are equivocating on the word "god". You are assuming a definition and because of that dogmatic assumption, you think you can proceed logically from that point.

However, if you ever try to define this dogmatically assumed god concept, you will see it is an irrational concept itself and thus not subject to logic. So basically god concepts are abusing human ability for abstract thought.

faith is bad

Rishika Kaur Patel faith is always bad - there are no redeeming qualities and if you tried to show there was a redeeming quality you would need evidence. If you ever try to claim that faith is good you are providing evidence and thus demonstrating that faith is useless.

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Atheists in Foxholes

No Atheists in Foxholes?  Then it is undeniable that religions starts and perpetuates all war.

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

You are against learning.

"The other point why I refuse to believe man over the bible is, the bible doesn't change it's ideas when confronted with new information. " Paul Hanson this is the opposite of learning. Learning is the processes of understanding new information which changes your mind. You are against learning.

Faith is an attempt to exclude evidence.

"why does having faith equal my being an idiot, gullable and whotnot?" Kim Kimm The only path to knowledge is through evidence. Faith is an attempt to exclude evidence. Therefore faith is an attempt to exclude knowledge.


Monday, February 10, 2014

Why does spell check know about Darth Vader?

Why does spell check know about Darth Vader, but not Chewbacca?  Because computers are made by atheists.

a degree of uncertainty

"Yes. There's a degree of uncertainty to it" Paul Hanson a degree of uncertainty? You have yet to be able to identify actual science apart from preachers lying to you about science.

Hitler's heart

"He did a great job in changing Hitler's heart ?"

-Lets not forget, Yahweh changed Pharaohs heart and the result was Yahweh had to slaughter innocent babies.  Given that track record, it looks like Yahweh DID change Hitler's heart.

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Team Yahweh



I think it is best to always refer to the god depicted in the Bible as Yahweh.  I do this on every possible occasion because this character is such an abhorrent monster he thinks that murdering babies will make you happy (Psalms 137:9).  Christians purposefully try to ignore Yahweh and pretend he doesn't exist and there is good reason for that which I try to capitalize on.

Thus, my new label for anyone who promotes the bible in anyway is Team Yahweh.  For example people from Team Yahweh will say that Psalm 137:9 is just a song, but they forget, it is a song approved for anyone on Team Yahweh to sing.  People from Team Yahweh will say Psalm 137:9 is talking about a time of war, but even in a time of war murdering babies with your hands does not make you happy.  Psalm 137 is a song about the Jews defeating Babylon, and part of the joy in the song is killing the infants of Babylon.

In short, Team Yahweh is brainwashed to think it is fun to murder babies for Yahweh, like when Yahweh hardened Pharaoh's heart so he could murder Egyptian babies - having no other reason to harden Pharaoh's heart.  And Yahweh murders every baby on the planet in the flood, but Team Yahweh says that was glorious and they market this massacre with children's toys.

It goes on and on and on and on.

Friday, February 7, 2014

murder babies in Egypt

" There's lots of sin in the bible, it doesn't mean God condones any of it." Paul Hanson actually, Psalm 137:9 is a song about team Yahweh having fun murdering babies, but lets not forget Yahweh hardening Pharaoh's heart so Yahweh could murder babies in Egypt. Does Pluto orbit the Sun?

Thursday, February 6, 2014

a creation story is an illogical paradox

" If there is just one true creation story" Kelly Piersall in the context that you mean, a creation story is an illogical paradox and so it cannot exist in reality.

What is proof?

"Do you even understand what Proof is?" Brian Davis "proof" is a stupid word, $1 under a pillow is "proof" of the tooth fairy for children and idiots. Science goes by evidence. There is no evidence for gods because something has to be logically coherent before it can have evidence and gods are not logically coherent.

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

All scientific evidence

All scientific evidence shows that evolution is a fact as signed by all the worlds top scientists. Either all of science is wrong or creationists do not have a high school education.

cure the disease

"Besides, I am one of the Christians that is changing the ways of Christianity" Nell Lewis no matter what you try to do to change Christians, the Bible is still going to say that homosexuals must die. The only thing you can hope to do is cure the disease of irrational thinking in the first place, then no one will be religious at all and at least if we kill each other it will be for rational reasons like to stop people from  murdering.

prayer is not more effective then carrying a security blanket.

"There IS power in prayer, and the Almighty is WORKINGGG!!" Pantz-Aka Da-Beautiful Thinker for those people too lazy to get a high school education - this is a lie.  It is a scientific fact prayer is not more effective than carrying a security blanket.  People who pray are children who are too embarrassed to carry a security blanket.

never a context

The bible says murdering babies is glorious Psalms 137:9 - the bible is lying. Murdering babies is not glorious and there is never a context where it is glorious.

Sunday, February 2, 2014

You are trying to show that learning is bad.

Michal Haris you are very confused about the implications of anything you happen to get right in this list. What you are showing is that science continually attacks and refines its own theories until they either collapse or get better. It is the very definition of learning. You are trying to show that learning is bad. That is a stupid position.