Fvcknames:

"I" am saying the fact that we didn't observe that a tree fell does not change the fact that it fell in the 1st place if it fell at all.
If we don't 'see' or 'hear' unicorns, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I'm just trying to say that it goes both ways

Don't for a second think they don't understand what you're saying, they actually do but are just pretending to be obtuse so you can say something they can latch on lol

butterflyl1on:


Two of them above who are hopeless and and a salamander have already started with the black holes and dark matter jargon. Did you see how they were ignored?

We know their games already.

OMG ! My heart goes out for them. It is impossible to challenge a team that knows your game. They came totally unprepared
into this dynamic 2018.

Atheists need another coach, Richard Dawkins and Harris has failed again.

ScienceWatch:
OOOps. Did I really do that. Na, please be kind enough to show me the error of my ways.

I believe u can scroll up to ur post at 9:25

Fvcknames:

"I" am saying the fact that we didn't observe that a tree fell does not change the fact that it fell in the 1st place if it fell at all.
If we don't 'see' or 'hear' unicorns, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I'm just trying to say that it goes both ways

Again I say we are talking about God and not unicorns. (stop trying to shift my gaze).

The comment does not go both ways for an atheist. It goes in a one way fashion. He says one does not need sensory perception to prove the existence of anything YET is demanding for objective evidence for the existence of God. Such a self refuting statement!

Since that was their stand then it's sheer hypocricy and deception to demand for objective evidence in the light of that declaration.

It's shameful to say the least. They shot themselves in the head with their own gun and realizing this are now trying to derail the thread by engaging in idle banter with each other while throwing ad hominems around.

Been there, done that! Their game is up!

Fvcknames:

"I" am saying the fact that we didn't observe that a tree fell does not change the fact that it fell in the 1st place if it fell at all.
If we don't 'see' or 'hear' unicorns, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I'm just trying to say that it goes both ways

Awesome, it does go both ways. Why did you not say that in the first place?
Did you not say earlier that you THINK IT goes both ways ?

hopefulLandlord:


Don't for a second think they don't understand what you're saying, they actually do but are just pretending to be obtuse so you can say something they can latch on lol

I've totally wasted my time so far

Fvcknames:

I've totally wasted my time so far

You don't say!

butterflyl1on:


Again I say we are talking about God and not unicorns. (stop trying to shift my gaze).

The comment does not go both ways for an atheist. It goes in a one way fashion. He says one does not need sensory perception to prove the existence of anything YET is demanding for objective evidence for the existence of God. Such a self refuting statement!

Since that was their stand then it's sheer hypocricy and deception to demand for objective evidence in the light of that declaration.

It's shameful to say the least. They shot themselves in the head with their own gun and realizing this are now trying to derail the thread by engaging in idle banter with each other while throwing ad hominems around.

Been there, done that! Their game is up!

I am just trying to use unicorns to prove a point as to why evidence is needed.
At this point I think I give up
Apparently, u only hear what u want to hear and filter the rest.

Fvcknames:

I've totally wasted my time so far

NO no, take it easy now ! You have done your best for now. They all appreciate your efforts, but they are a bit stressed that Now that the secret is out, that Atheism is a religion, Atheist evengelists here wont answer simple questions, such as "WHAT IS A CHAIR.?

While you take a break, will you help with a few questions?

Fvcknames:

I am just trying to use unicorns to prove a point as to why evidence is needed.
At this point I think I give up
Apparently, u only hear what u want to hear and filter the rest.

Wow really? Doesn't it go both ways anymore? Do atheists not see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear and filter the rest?

Honestly speaking, the atheist lost this argument.....

Budaatum surprise me ....
Hopefullandlord dodge my question


Let me repeat it here again



.is there anything that we all assume is the same thing? Is there anything that no one has a question about?
(

Fvcknames:

I am just trying to use unicorns to prove a point as to why evidence is needed.
At this point I think I give up
Apparently, u only hear what u want to hear and filter the rest.

It is good that you used Unicorns, but I must tell you that if anyone tried to entertain those ideas, it would derail the Thread.
I will advise you to rather use fallen trees or even use NO-god to prove a point here. Never give up. Timing is important.

Fvcknames:

I am just trying to use unicorns to prove a point as to why evidence is needed.
At this point I think I give up
Apparently, u only hear what u want to hear and filter the rest.

Please dont give up ! Look at what happened to me earlier, I tried to prove my point using something far worse than Unicorns Sir. I used Dark Matter but the stubborn dim witted Atheists would have none of that.

vaxx:
Honestly speaking, the atheist lost this argument.....

Budaatum surprise me ....
Hopefullandlord dodge my question


Let .e repeat it here again



.is there anything that we all assume is the same thing? Is there anything that no one has a question about?
(

Yes Sir you have been better than the best scientist, dissecting the inner most beliefs and faulty thoughts of the most proud Atheist. I have learned much. Thanks also to Butterflyl1on the SS interrogator.

I have one question that remains unanswered Sir. Could you ask these Atheists on my behalf, "WHAT DO THEY OFFER HUMANITY."

Fvcknames:

I believe u can scroll up to ur post at 9:25

OK I did that. There is a small misunderstanding. That comments was reserved only for Hopefullandlord.
I do humbly apologize if my comments upset you.

ScienceWatch:
Yes Sir you have been better than the best scientist, dissecting the inner most beliefs and faulty thoughts of the most proud Atheist. I have learned much. Thanks also to Butterflyl1on the SS interrogator.

I have one question that remains unanswered Sir. Could you ask these Atheists on my behalf, "WHAT DO THEY OFFER HUMANITY."

i am sure this question will remain unanswered, the answer to this question will discredit atheist philosophy .....

hopefulLandlord:


General acceptance of a phenomenon does NOT make it objective

If the whole world says the earth is cone shape, it does not make it the objective shape of the earth, it seems I'll need Kingebukasblog here to explain further to you cuz I observe the other theists here are simply lapping up your posts without even thinking it through

Why not even google the meaning of objective and see how wrong you are?

In science, when there is general acceptance or agreement, those shitbags behave as if they have objective evidence.

Atheist dont hesitate to believe it when scientists say that Mars has no Ozone layer. What is the superstitious beliefs based on. What objective proof do Atheists have? Only general acceptance, yet they idolize theories as evidence of facts.

I am going for coffee break.
Atheists will love me when I get back with Molecules and DNA. Dark Matter and Black Holes can be left for another day. They have been humbled enough for one day.

hopefulLandlord:


General acceptance of a phenomenon does NOT make it objective

If the whole world says the earth is cone shape, it does not make it the objective shape of the earth, it seems I'll need Kingebukasblog here to explain further to you cuz I observe the other theists here are simply lapping up your posts without even thinking it through

Why not even google the meaning of objective and see how wrong you are?

kindly take your time and read....http://www.iep.utm.edu/objectiv/

Fvcknames:

I am just trying to use unicorns to prove a point as to why evidence is needed.
At this point I think I give up
Apparently, u only hear what u want to hear and filter the rest.

At this time no one wants to make me coffee. So meanwhile I am banking on you to help me with answers Sir.
There is good reason why the world wants to know what Atheism has to offer.

I received this email below a few days ago. These Atheist girls begged me, “Do you want to spend Valentine’s day in a company of beautiful student-girls? We need a wealthy Atheist lover and we do like filthy sex, group sex and anal sex. We will swallow your sperm for extra fee.”
From what I have seen, Religion saves young girls from this disaster.

What does your NO-god offer these girls?

vaxx:
i am sure this question will remain unanswered, the answer to this question will discredit atheist philosophy .....

This is indeed very sad. It means that Atheism is dying even though at this late stage they have decided to reveal their secret, that they are in actual fact a religion.

Why did they use trillions of bytes to deny that they are a religion?

hopefulLandlord:


Don't for a second think they don't understand what you're saying, they actually do but are just pretending to be obtuse so you can say something they can latch on lol

Lol. It must interest yo to know that FSM is the acronym for an Atheist group called the “Flying Spaghetti Monster” after having existed in secrecy for hundreds of years; They came back into the mainstream just a few years ago.

I asked them the same question that you guys can NOT answer, What does Atheism offer humanity especially now that it is clear that it is a religion? Can you answer ?

JacksonD7:
02. Faith[/b]

[b]All religions require faith, atheism included. Despite what the atheists wants us to believe, it does require a great deal of faith to believe that in the beginning nothing exploded and created something. And something expanded and one day created the Earth.

And someway, somehow for no reason whatsoever, the Earth happened to be in the right spot for life to thrive. And later on, non-living materials have birth to the first living cell. And this cell, mysteriously rearranged itself, became more complex and reproduced. And one day, these complex cells turned into fishes.

And one day these fishes decided to live on land. In time, the amphibious offspring of these fishes gave birth to reptiles, and these reptiles gave birth to mammals.

The whole must be eternally grateful to you JacksonD7. The truth has set them free!

budaatum:

Hmm. I think I might have not been as wise as you've just been.

Just look at what this esteemed gentleman have to say about you. "Atheism, for all of its proud boasting of scholarly adequacy, is a kind of intellectual adolescence which refuses to think hard, face the facts, and be tough minded.

Atheists live, when all is said and done by blind and contradictory faith about how we know what we know and what the nature of reality is. Atheism is arbitrary and irrational all the while dressing up in the costume of rationality." - Greg Bahnsen

butterflyl1on:


Wow really? Doesn't it go both ways anymore? Do atheists not see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear and filter the rest?

Grrrr ! They are ducking. Let them consider something else to refresh them.
How does mind make the miraculous leap from a physical to a non-physical immaterial entity like sensation ? How can mind testify to the existence of anything outside itself?

Has an Atheist ever been conscious of the mind taking tfiis distinct step of attending to and interpreting the activity in the grey matter of the brain. To say that we are never aware of the process whereby a sensation is born and to say that the nerve-vibration is
converted into unconscious thought is to take a leap in the dark and to land on entirely different territory.

I am certain that with this new info, they will get back and challenge you and Vaxx again.

vaxx:
Honestly speaking, the atheist lost this argument.....

Budaatum surprise me ....
Hopefullandlord dodge my question

It is a sad day to see Atheists lose because they have worked so hard for nothing. They spent trillions of dollars on denying that Atheism is a religion, only to shy admit it now. They could have taken the money and bought millions of Scuba diving outfits and go deep sea fishing and also be at home with their cousins the FISH.

On the other hand all is not lost, the fallen tree will awaken the sleeping Cobra in them. They will be asking what is the connection between mind/spirit and phsical matter and what made a simple fallen tree so hard to comprehend.

Only religion, Nobody else, No scientists has ever adequately explained the facts of psychology by the phenomena of physiology. All such efforts have failed because they failed to understand the connection between mind/spirit and matter.

Those Atheists who complacently assert that the crowning function of the nervous system is to "produce" thought beneath the bony rind of the skull assert a miracle more marvellous than any Dark Hole. Let them take up a measuring-rod and mark the distance between one idea and another, between one conscious thought and another.

They cannot do it. For science dont know where the mind begins or ends. Is it not foolish to imply that in nodding their visible heads men nod their invisible minds at the same time ? For under no conceivable circumstances can the mind be seen to reside in the
head. Yet materialistic Atheists accept unthinkingly the vague belief which regards the mind in the same way as it regards material objects.

Scientists cant bring an immaterial presence [b][/b]like mind/spirit together with a material place like the head, for there is no point and no surface in mind to meet any point or surface in the head.

Now that Atheists admit that they are a religion, they will have to come to grips with the fact that they have an invisible spirit/mind.

JacksonD7:
04. The Presence Of Spiritual Leaders

Every religion, has it's great philosophers or spiritual leaders whose ideas shaped the religion. In some cases, the religion would not exist or enjoy mass appeal without that particular leader.

Christianity has Jesus

Islam has Mohammed

Judaism has Moses

Buddhism has Siddharta Gautama (the Buddha)

Scientology has L. Ron Hubbard

Atheism has Richard Dawkins

Most Atheists must be relieved by the truth in the OP. Absolutely true.

Atheism has the Satanist Richard Dawkins !!!

This thread gave me cancer!

butterflyl1on:

First you say Gods CAN EXIST WITHOUT ANYONE SEEING, FEELING HIM, ETC

Butterflyl1on, you are discussing with buda. I do not write what I do not mean. Read carefully.

Gods can exist without the acknowledgement (by which I mean you aboves) of human beings.

I will repeat that so we are clear.

Gods can exist without the acknowledgement of human beings.

butterflyl1on:

then from saying THEY CAN EXIST you jumped eons forward and declared THE FACT IS THAT THOUGH THEY CAN EXIST THEY CATEGORICALLY DO NOT EXIST

The fact is, gods categorically do not exist. And just so we do not quibble, I mean god, and Gods.

butterflyl1on:

If one does not need to have a sensory perception of something before that thing would exist why they is God an exception? Is he not also seen as an object in our objective world? (according to you)?

How can God not categorically exist when you said and I quote


Can God not stand in His own right and have nothing to do with the eye of the beholder?

Good. Please do not leave sight of the aboves.

The fact that things exist with humans knowing nothing of there existence abounds. Examples are, the number zero, which did not exist in human consciousness until the Arabs discovered it and informed the rest of the world about it. Another is the notion that the sun, and not the earth, was the centre of our universe until Copernicus educated us otherwise. And a third, is Yahweh, who did not exist until the Israelites formulated it into an idea and it swept the world. Do note that these are random examples. I believe you can think of many more things humans discovered which before discovery were not known to exist.

So, just so you get me clearly. God (and gods, and zero, and unicorns, and the notion that I am a pig feed frauder) can exist regardless of anyone's opinion. However, the empirical evidence does not support their existence. And the fact that I or anyone says a thing exist or not in ones subjective right does not make that thing exist objectively.

(Please, study that last sentence carefully. There is a trap for me in there!)

I am now leaving my meeting. Will read other posts and respond to the worthwhile ones. Sw's though, are not worth the bother!

vaxx:
Honestly speaking, the atheist lost this argument.....


Is there anything that we all assume is the same thing? Is there anything that no one has a question about?

There is one thing that they assume is the same, The brain and the mind/spirit. They still talk as though mind/spirit were definitely
located at the brain terminals of the sensory nerves. For the sake of convenience in common talk we may perhaps must continue to speak of the mind as though it were in one's head, but for truth purposes it is reprehensible to do so.

Perception is a mental process, [/b]i.e. thought, and reason demands that the thought be referred to some subject to which it occurs, to some consciousness where the process happens. We must not mistake the movements of material molecules in the fleshly brain for conscious thoughts. Those who cannot grasp the difference between both can never grasp the meaning of sensation —which is the most elementary fact of psychology.

[b]And the first steps in psychology are inescapable steps in philosophy/spiritual truth. No microscope has ever discovered consciousness, and no opening of the skull has ever done it either. It is not observable. It must be treated for what it is—a separate and distinct fact. To treat the physical brain as identical with full consciousness is to deal in pure fancy.


The attempt to explain perception away as being merely a matter of nervous functioning is nothing less than to beg the question.

budaatum:
I am now leaving my meeting. Will read other posts and respond to the worthwhile ones. Sw's though, are not worth the bother!

I agree !!!!