Chrisbenogor:

Ok, shoot which issues?

u can also join the main intentions of the thread.

tell us why dont believe in creationism or the bible. . . . .why u believe in evolution.

No one will crucify u for whatever u say. . . .u are simply educating us all on ur beliefs, even if we disagree with u. but at least be original.

Sure why not, you can open the thread.

i thought that was what this thread was meant for?

noetic2:

i thought that was what this thread was meant for?

No this one is meant for you to explain why genesis is more credible than science.

Chrisbenogor:

No this one is meant for you to explain why genesis is more credible than science.

rather than create another thread for the atheist wolves. . . I would prefer u state ur case here. . . or better still create a new thread urself.

noetic2:

rather than create another thread for the atheist wolves. . . I would prefer u state ur case here. . . or better still create a new thread urself.

LOL ok no problem I will bend, but you have to compromise too by asking me the questions you want answers to specifically. I am not in court sha?

Chrisbenogor:

LOL ok no problem I will bend, but you have to compromise too by asking me the questions you want answers to specifically. I am not in court sha?

There honestly would not be much questions . . . . .cos u are simply stating ur beliefs and why u have them.

originality and NOT copy-paste would be effective and simple analysis centered around. . .why u dont believe in creationism and why u subscribe to evolution.

To put it all in one short statement,

I trust most academics more than I trust most pastors.

Ok Noetic, I will try and keep this as simple as possible.
The truth is that I can perceive honesty in the way the scientists go about their business, there is little room for putting in hunches and personal thoughts, the peer review process has got to be one of the most grueling tests any theory can pass through. Furthermore, I do not think the writers of the genesis were out to deceive people, I think they wrote from their understanding of the world they could see and frankly the more and more I read it I just feel that it is more likely we got here through evolution than through the biblical creation.
I see no reason to believe there is a God as the various religions have portrayed.

Chrisbenogor:

Ok Noetic, I will try and keep this as simple as possible.
The truth is that I can perceive honesty in the way the scientists go about their business, there is little room for putting in hunches and personal thoughts, the peer review process has got to be one of the most grueling tests any theory can pass through. Furthermore, I do not think the writers of the genesis were out to deceive people, I think they wrote from their understanding of the world they could see and frankly the more and more I read it I just feel that it is more likely we got here through evolution than through the biblical creation.
I see no reason to believe there is a God as the various religions have portrayed.

1. so u perceive that scientists cannot be wrong. . . . .do u understand that this called FAITH?

2. I genuinely want to understand why u see no reason for a God as religions have portrayed?

noetic2:

1. so u perceive that scientists cannot be wrong. . . . .do u understand that this called FAITH?

2. I genuinely want to understand why u see no reason for a God as religions have portrayed?

Of course scientists can be wrong, they are humans after all, what I am saying is, recall also that there are varying degrees of being right or wrong and scientific theories work well in nature.
I cannot prove a negative, my position for the dismissal of God stems from the religions argument for a God. There is really none out there that is not vacuous.

Chrisbenogor:

Of course scientists can be wrong, they are humans after all, what I am saying is, recall also that there are varying degrees of being right or wrong and scientific theories work well in nature.
I cannot prove a negative, my position for the dismissal of God stems from the religions argument for a God. There is really none out there that is not vacuous.

ur positions are very dogmatic. . , .u leave no room for comprehension. . do u?

conclusion. . .

Noetic2 = Abuzola.

what the hell was i thinking

noetic2:

ur positions are very dogmatic. . , .u leave no room for comprehension. . do u?

Please explain further, do you need me to throw more light anywhere?

light? 


hahahahah. . . I swear that is about the funniest post i ever read on nairaland. How you wan put light for area wey no dey wired for electricity? na lantern u wan use?

Chrisbenogor:

Ok Noetic, I will try and keep this as simple as possible.
The truth is that I can perceive honesty in the way the scientists go about their business, there is little room for putting in hunches and personal thoughts, the peer review process has got to be one of the most grueling tests any theory can pass through. Furthermore, I do not think the writers of the genesis were out to deceive people, I think they wrote from their understanding of the world they could see and frankly the more and more I read it I just feel that it is more likely we got here through evolution than through the biblical creation.
I see no reason to believe there is a God as the various religions have portrayed.

this is laughable and is a clear indication many of you dont really understand the core of science.

1. Honesty in science? I challenge you to get 10 science journals, you will be extremely lucky to be able to repeat all the experiments exactly in only about 5-10% of those papers.

2. Gruelling peer review process? Yeah only if the investigator is an unknown. If the journal editor is your friend/colleague or you're well known publishing in the journal you get a very easy pass. I know journals where my boss can submit a paper and get accepted under a few hours. Do you know that many journals even ask you to suggest your reviewers?

I reviewed my first paper last yr, it took me less than 2 weeks . . . and i didnt even have to repeat a single experiment. I talked my way through the bottlenecks!

Enough of the nonsense about scientists having more integrity than the bible writers!

noetic2:

1. so u perceive that scientists cannot be wrong. . . . .do u understand that this called FAITH?

i'm sure he understands . . . many of them just pretend. they accuse creationists of believing Genesis without proof while their entire belief in science is based solely on the same faith they ridicule.

davidylan:

this is laughable and is a clear indication many of you dont really understand the core of science.

1. Honesty in science? I challenge you to get 10 science journals, you will be extremely lucky to be able to repeat all the experiments exactly in only about 5-10% of those papers.

2. Gruelling peer review process? Yeah only if the investigator is an unknown. If the journal editor is your friend/colleague or you're well known publishing in the journal you get a very easy pass. I know journals where my boss can submit a paper and get accepted under a few hours. Do you know that many journals even ask you to suggest your reviewers?

I reviewed my first paper last yr, it took me less than 2 weeks . . . and i didnt even have to repeat a single experiment. I talked my way through the bottlenecks!

Enough of the nonsense about scientists having more integrity than the bible writers!

Yeah we know you are a very very poor biologist, you have to talk your way through bottlenecks. David will you ever learn, everything is not a me against you issue, I really do not know anymore what you tend to achieve with posts like this, seriously what do you want to achieve?

Chrisbenogor:

Yeah we know you are a very very poor biologist, you have to talk your way through bottlenecks. David will you ever learn, everything is not a me against you issue, I really do not know anymore what you tend to achieve with posts like this, seriously what do you want to achieve?

the usual hubris i have come to expect. Did you even make an attempt to go through my points which had nothing to do with you but science in general? Dont put yourself on a pedestal biko, i would have responded in the same fashion if another person had made such an ignorant post.

You people say a lot about science but you indirectly expose the fact that you really dont know anything about it.

good night. As a poor biologist i am far better than you can ever aspire to me.

davidylan:

i'm sure he understands . . . many of them just pretend. they accuse creationists of believing Genesis without proof while their[b] entire belief in science[/b] is based solely on the same faith they ridicule.

As some one said this is the lie that deluded fundamentalist tell themselves so that they can sleep at night. . . , 

davidylan:


I reviewed my first paper last yr, it took me less than 2 weeks . . . and i didnt even have to repeat a single experiment. I talked my way through the bottlenecks! 

Enough of the nonsense about scientists having more[b] integrity than the bible writers[/b]!

No Journal will ever ask a fool like you to review any of their articles reason is that you are NOT a scientist enough of your deluded LIES. FOOLS and liars talk around when asked to do actual work. See his lying mouth like "last year I reviewed my first paper", when has going through your project with friend become reviewing scientific paper for publishing? , Scientist call on each other to review their materials they don't call on pseudo scientist to help them in any way. Am sure you know that most of the bible writers remain UNKNOWN.

davidylan:


You people say a lot about science but you indirectly expose the fact that you really dont know anything about it.

good night. As a poor biologist i am far better than you can ever aspire to me.

What does this fool know about science other than crying on nairaland that i am a "scientist". You don't know anything about science. . . . .you have never and will never contribute anything to the scientific process. . . . . . .crying I am a "scientist" on nairaland does not make you one.

By the way is this not the same fool  that was talking about hubris?. . . . . . .

Dear christian, how can you worship a god, a weak god for that matter. Genesis 2:1-3, God finished all his work and rested on the 7th day, poor christian god. Mathew 26:67 'jesus was struck, spat, beaten and spat, mathew 27:46 jesus cried with agony making senseless talk 'myself myself, why thou forsake me forsake myself'
john 8:28 jesus said 'i do nothing of myself'



Quran 40:68
It is He (ALLAH) who gives life and causes death. And when He decides upon a thing He says to it only 'BE' and it is'


knowledge hath come to you, be wise and choose the right path of the Almighty

Abuzola:

Dear christian, how can you worship a god, a weak god for that matter. Genesis 2:1-3, God finished all his work and rested on the 7th day, poor christian god. Mathew 26:67 'jesus was struck, spat, beaten and spat, mathew 27:46 jesus cried with agony making senseless talk 'myself myself, why thou forsake me forsake myself'
john 8:28 jesus said 'i do nothing of myself'



Quran 40:68
It is He (ALLAH) who gives life and causes death. And when He decides upon a thing He says to it only 'BE' and it is'


knowledge hath come to you, be wise and choose the right path of the Almighty

Tell allah that i say he is a fool. . . .he should say BE and let my life end the next minute. . . maybe that will convince some of you muslims that he is a "living" god. . . . . stupid retard. . . . . .

davidylan:

this is laughable and is a clear indication many of you dont really understand the core of science.

1. Honesty in science? I challenge you to get 10 science journals, you will be extremely lucky to be able to repeat all the experiments exactly in only about 5-10% of those papers.

2. Gruelling peer review process? Yeah only if the investigator is an unknown. If the journal editor is your friend/colleague or you're well known publishing in the journal you get a very easy pass. I know journals where my boss can submit a paper and get accepted under a few hours. Do you know that many journals even ask you to suggest your reviewers?

I reviewed my first paper last yr, it took me less than 2 weeks . . . and i didnt even have to repeat a single experiment. I talked my way through the bottlenecks!

Enough of the nonsense about scientists having more integrity than the bible writers!

Is this pathetic empty headed barrel comparing the way scientist write their articles to the way the mostly unknown writers of the bible wrote the bible ? Is this not the same fool that said that most of the bible claims have to be accepted by FAITH ALONE because most of them can not be explained and make little or no sense at all?

Why then is this deluded and pathetic goon that believes he is in a "persona relationship" with an imaginary deity comparing what he himself says makes no sense( something he says he accepts purely based on faith and not on reason because what his fiath claims makes sense even to him) to the scientific process? Some times you wonder who gives this deluded fools access to the internet to come and keep embarrassing themselves.

@mazaje. Many did worst than you did. For every matter there is a decree, Allah left you so that you increase in your mischiefness and disbelief, what you ask is too easy for Allah. So that you can increase in disbelief after a warner has come to you and being arrogant Quran 9:51, 3:178

I invite you all to religion of true monetheism. The religion of your first father and mother

Abuzola,

I don't know why you pop up and post topics that derail the thread? You are a muslim and thats fine. What do you achieve by running down other peoples religion or God? What if in the Last day, they are correct and you are wrong?

I assume that you are still a young boy, but sometimes it is better to listen than to speak all the time especially if it is against the thread.

I hope we will see fantastic Islamic threads from you, that encourages unbelievers to become believers, but don't go about it as if you are fighting a Jihad on the web.

Chrisbenegor, Noetic, davidylan etc, can we resuscitate this thread? I have been reading with interest (sure lots of other people too) but resisted the urge to comment untill lately when the thread was completely derailed. I agree with Noetic on keeping the reasoning simple rather than longish. Can we also have an active moderator? I mean someone who can delete posts from known rable rousers?

Marlbron:

Chrisbenegor, Noetic, davidylan etc, can we resuscitate this thread? I have been reading with interest (sure lots of other people too) but resisted the urge to comment untill lately when the thread was completely derailed. I agree with Noetic on keeping the reasoning simple rather than longish. Can we also have an active moderator? I mean someone who can delete posts from known rable rousers?

I dont think u should expect too much from this thread. . .cos it was started for mischievous reasons.

you can however raise issues pertaining to the thread. . . I am sure there would be meaningful responses.

Marlbron:

Chrisbenegor, Noetic, davidylan etc, can we resuscitate this thread? I have been reading with interest (sure lots of other people too) but resisted the urge to comment untill lately when the thread was completely derailed. I agree with Noetic on keeping the reasoning simple rather than longish. Can we also have an active moderator? I mean someone who can delete posts from known rable rousers?

Yeah I am always ready, how do you suggest we continue?

noetic2:


I dont think u should expect too much from this thread. . .cos it was started for mischievous reasons.

you can however raise issues pertaining to the thread. . . I am sure there would be meaningful responses.

I thought we were out to find common ground, it seems every time david comes along to spoil everything and I have a feeling that maybe because you are a christian you feel obliged to take his side, we were about to understand each others positions and I think  you have a habit of dismissing people's positions. It feels like I am stretching a hand so we can both understand where we are coming from and the reasons why we see things the way we do and then we can move on to other issues, are you still interested or you are you going to toll davids line because you are on top of a tree that is under a mountain?

Marlbron:

Abuzola,

I don't know why you pop up and post topics that derail the thread? You are a muslim and thats fine. What do you achieve by running down other peoples religion or God? What if in the Last day, they are correct and you are wrong?

I assume that you are still a young boy, but sometimes it is better to listen than to speak all the time especially if it is against the thread.

I hope we will see fantastic Islamic threads from you, that encourages unbelievers to become believers, but don't go about it as if you are fighting a Jihad on the web.

sorry i cant wait

Chrisbenogor:

Yeah I am always ready, how do you suggest we continue?I thought we were out to find common ground, it seems every time david comes along to spoil everything and I have a feeling that maybe because you are a christian you feel obliged to take his side, we were about to understand each others positions and I think  you have a habit of dismissing people's positions. It feels like I am stretching a hand so we can both understand where we are coming from and the reasons why we see things the way we do and then we can move on to other issues, are you still interested or you are you going to toll davids line because you are on top of a tree that is under a mountain?

1. David did not spoil anything as far as I am concerned. please go back to read my reaction to mazaje and toneyb's first posts directed at me. I dimissed both posts within the flip of a finger. The reasons are obvious. . .both of them constitute unnecessary nuisance on every thread. They are intellectually lazy and debauched. They only come into threads to make a fool of themselves. . they cannot sell an idea or present a rational analysis of their beliefs or ideas.

In retrospect, David did not spoil anything. . . . .quite unlike David, I would have dismissed them both immediately.

2. you have stated ur position on these issues. . . .I should simply have said ok. But because I am also stretching a hand of comradeship, I truthfully told u that ur positions are dogmatic and probably as guilty as the religionists u criticise simply because u did not state how u arrived at ur positions.

state for instance:
a. if the basis of ur subscription to evolution is honesty, why does the same not apply to creationism. why do find creationism dishonest? why do u find evolution honest?
b. there are several religionist postulations of God, which of them is the basis of ur disbelief in God?

You would recall that I have repeatedly defined atheism as an irrational state of mind, where the object of one's disbelief cannot be substantiated. . .my definition is largely due to the fact I am yet to come across an atheist who can objectively define his belief/disbelief system.

noetic2:

1. David did not spoil anything as far as I am concerned. please go back to read my reaction to mazaje and toneyb's first posts directed at me. I dimissed both posts within the flip of a finger. The reasons are obvious. . .both of them constitute unnecessary nuisance on every thread. They are intellectually lazy and debauched. They only come into threads to make a fool of themselves. . they cannot sell an idea or present a rational analysis of their beliefs or ideas.

In retrospect, David did not spoil anything. . . . .quite unlike David, I would have dismissed them both immediately.

2. you have stated ur position on these issues. . . .I should simply have said ok. But because I am also stretching a hand of comradeship, I truthfully told u that ur positions are dogmatic and probably as guilty as the religionists u criticise simply because u did not state how u arrived at ur positions.

state for instance:
a. if the basis of ur subscription to evolution is honesty, why does the same not apply to creationism. why do find creationism dishonest? why do u find evolution honest?
b. there are several religionist postulations of God, which of them is the basis of ur disbelief in God?

You would recall that I have repeatedly defined atheism as an irrational state of mind, where the object of one's disbelief cannot be substantiated. . .my definition is largely due to the fact I am yet to come across an atheist who can objectively define his belief/disbelief system.

Because I question the motives and the capabilities of the people who wrote those books. Scientists would not be propounding evolution just to control people no? But I feel that religion has been used and is still being used by a smart few who have realised what most people fear.
Maybe my disbelief in God will clear things up for you to understand why I said I feel it is being used as a tool to control people.
Yes I read the thread where you talked about atheists being irrational and I did not quite understand why? For me this is the syntax of events, just imagine I am chris of the jungle
Noetic2: Hi Chris how are you and the jungle
Chris: I am fine brother, and you
Noetic2: Oh yes I am, thanks be to God
Chris: God?
Noetic2: yes God, you know the creator?
, cut and this is where you place your argument for the creator so the conversation can continue.
My point is I cannot PROVE A NEGATIVE, so the burden of proof lies on you to show me the overwhelming evidence that there is a God and then I will tell you just how I see that evidence.