ocelot2006:


uuhmmmm.....dude...did you just mention Ogun and Osun states as performing states? Keep in mind that i've lived in these states (more period in tge former tgan the later). You can't even compare the best places in the capitals for these states to the WORST areas in capitals like Calabar and Enugu. Hell, even qiuet Gombe's capital is ahead, yet you dont hear them talk.

ashley86: Please does anyone have any idea how much honeywell pats their graduate trainees?

Monsieur Pete:
U'r welcm dear. Glad i could help
Cheers


Wah abt those travelling 4rm near n narrow

Best of luck to u bro

Originalsly: You protest against a product by not buying it. Did your doctor prescribe Heineken?

Nightshift: I have seen authorities stop lazy youths from collecting unemployment benefits if they refuse to attend job interviews over sometimes. Nobody ever got arrested for refusing to work in a democratic dispensation like ours. We do not have a Gestapo government in Nigeria!

@ Owobokri, if you compare Okorocha with Mbakwe in Aba (even in Owerri), I bet you will get stoned by those who witnessed Mbakwe's government in larger Imo State.

Ola0711: 4uk APC.,4uk tinubu,4uk fashola,4uk buhari,4uk all those who want to make nigerian an islamic state...u tink u can throw out GEJ in 2015 and come and enjoy the niger-delta oil?

mobuch:
Why does these silly topics make frontpage

davidylan:

what difference does it make?[/color]

The difference is quite simple. An atheist utterly rejects the concept/existence of God. I however accept the theory of first cause but reject its perversion by religion, as is.


[color=#990000]That is very true. The problem however is that atheists and gnostics like you have consistently used this trick to hide the fact that you really have no alternative explanation to how the first life form appeared outside of the God hypothesis. You cannot mock others for depending on myths when you yourself wrap yourself in the arms of assumptions that have no proof... when your hypocrisy is pointed out to you, you twist yourself into a pretzel telling us how science is an assumption that requires others to prove anyway.[/color]

What is this God hypothesis you keep going on about?
Provide a simple explanation.

As to assumptions without proof - that is the very definition of religion. Science eloquently proves and improves itself everyday, even in your life. Science is an eclectic mix of provable theories ranging from the simple about how your own very body works to the complex abouy how life began.
It makes no requirement of you, if you feel its unproofable but you ignore it at your peril. For example try stepping off a tall/high building and say to yourself that the theory of gravitation is only an assumption...or deny your body oxygen while insisting that science is only assuming the integral role of oxygen in the Process of respiration!!


[color=#990000] While the above is perfectly true... there is no objective reason why you are not prepared to leave others alone to make the rational choice to hold unto religion. Its not like that choice is a problem to you.[/color]

As i said to Prairie, it is fundamental to respect everyone's right to practice the insanity called religion. But for the growth of out society, the proselytizing of religion by appeal to emotions should not be allowed. Belief or disbelief should be a reasoned personal decision made by every one not something indoctrinated or coerced. (the rationality of holding on to religion is arguable though)



[color=#990000] Depends on who is doing the "criticism". Lab scientists i have worked with allow robust and objective criticism. Atheists here though are not objective but rather blind followers of a science they CANNOT EXPLAIN! [/color][color=][color=#990000][/color]

Explaining principles like evolution is not like telling the comical Genesis myth, these scientific theories are far more complex to be described in a few words. That is why i said 'read up'...

The seeming staunch arguments we make is not because we reject criticism but because religion has made absolutely no objective critism that science does not already implicitly accept. Such criticisms include

- Science is grounded on ever-changing assumptions. Yes, and that is its beauty, it refuses to cloak itself in conceited certainty but accepts our relative ignorance while continually improving its evidence-backed, logical, replicable assumptions.

- Science does not respect religion. Yes, it doesn't, nor does it respect any other disingenious human myths. Religion jas offered little to respect. Is it its strong exception to enlightened criticism we should respect? Or its Crazy, genocidal God who's partiality is legendary, pettiness is ridiculous and wickedness unrivalled we should respect?





Religion is a choice. Feel free to ignore it.

prairie: u heard of ockham right? U were told by textbooks or internet or whatever, u believed it right? Cos u were told its true innit? FAiTH......did i also jus hear u say anything humanly conceived? So u do believe scientists could be wrong dont u? Saying religion is wrong most times isnt for you to say, you leave that for religious people to affirm huh?

kmcutez: Thank you Mr kinkey for answering Davidylan, but your answer was too long. I was just going to ask him to define science. Therein lies the answer.

davidylan:

this is a long-winded way of saying that science has absolutely no clue but since it is constantly changing its assumptions then we should accept it based on the logic of occams razor.

We've been "reading up" on evolution and the big b.ang... exactly how do they explain the emergence of the first life form? another faith-based pseudo-scientific piece of mumbo-jumbo conjured up by atheists when they are backed into a corner. You believe evolution is real... even though you admit it is a hypothesis full of holes that even you cannot successfully defend. Yet you mock christians for believing in fables? Bro i have to take a shower... this is becoming a joke.

davidylan:

Still makes no sense. Occams razor talks about selecting the HYPOTHESIS with the least ASSUMPTIONS.

Note the highlights... a hypothesis doth not a valid truth make... it is still a deduction based on assumptions that could be right or wrong... i.e. you simply believe BY FAITH. Besides... occams razor does not tell us the minimum assumptions required to believe a hypothesis as fact

christians believe in the bible by faith... atheists believe in the alternative by faith... the only difference is atheists believe their version has less assumptions and thus must be the most reasonable. It does not mean it is true.

[color=#990000:
[/color]davidylan]

i will ask you a simple question - how exactly can you scientifically describe the process of how life first appeared on earth? Surely you know or do you believe some story "scientists" told you by faith since you werent there neither were they?