7
   

Every religion proven to be based upon a foundation of lies

 
 
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 1 Oct, 2011 06:19 pm
@reasoning logic,
Christianity is similar to what Churchill said about democracy, i.e. it's the worst religion there could plausibly be except for all those other religions including atheism and evoloserism, which are also religions.

Jesus and his teachings and his own words are real. much of what is written about him has to be taken with salt as also does much of what you read in the old testament. In many cases in the OT, a basic story (e.g. the flood) may be real enough while the religious interpretation of the events needs to be taken with salt. A reasonable God isn't going to punish the entire solar system for anything in the way of conduct.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Sat 1 Oct, 2011 06:48 pm
@gungasnake,
The depths of your delusions are breathtaking. What's hilarious is that with such a goofy belief set, you still want to insist that you deal in reality.
gungasnake
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 1 Oct, 2011 08:17 pm
@Setanta,
Do you find being an idiot painful?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 03:02 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

So you are claiming only people with education switch religions?
Where's your proof? I became an atheist as a young teenager. All my siblings are christians.


I became a cargo cultist when I moved near the airport.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 03:16 am
@gungasnake,
Finding you to be an idiot pains me not in the least. Tell us about the flood story and your evidence for it. I could use a good laugh.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 07:03 am
For the benefit of anybody who might have missed it, a portrait of "setanta"...

I claim this is one of the three or four most dishonest performances I've ever seen on any internet forum since the internet was invented i.e. even before the WWW or private forums existed:


Gungasnake:
Quote:

@reasoning logic,

Quote:
I notice in the video you shared that the speaker says in fact Neanderthals are in fact homo sapiens at 11.30 minutes.



Christians (some of them) like to believe that for theological reasons. Menton is simply wrong on that point; that does not affect his deconstruction of "Lucy".

Neanderthal DNA is roughly halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee, so that in real life there is no way to view Neanderthals as another branch of homo sapiens.


Setanta:
Quote:

@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Quote:
Neanderthal DNA is roughly halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee, so that in real life there is no way to view Neanderthals as another branch of homo sapiens.



This is pure bullshit. Provide a source or be braned a liar.


Gungasnake:
Quote:

@Setanta,
Quote:
Quote:
This is pure bullshit. Provide a source or be braned a liar.



I've provided sources for this one on A2K several times, e.g.

http://www.expressindia.com/fe/daily/19970712/19355423.html

Quote:
Quote:
....He said his team ran four separate tests for authenticity - checking whether other amino acids had survived, making sure the DNA sequences they found did not exist in modern humans, making sure the DNA could be replicated in their own lab and then getting other labs to duplicate their results. Comparisons with the DNA of modern humans and of apes showed the Neanderthal was about halfway between a modern human and a chimpanzee.....




Setanta:
Quote:

@gungasnake,
In the first place, your soucre, Financial Express, is a business journal in the subcontinent, and not a scientific journal. In the second place, it precedes from false premises, too, in that it attempts to blow the same smoke you did, that scientists believe h. sapiens in descended from h. neanderthalensis. That hypothesis has been rejected by mainstream evolutionary biologists for generations.

The quoted article is 14 or more years old. You've already tried to pull that stunt here recently....

blah, blah, blah...


Gungasnake:
Quote:

@Setanta,
Quote:
Quote:
In the first place, your soucre, Financial Express, is a business journal in the subcontinent, and not a scientific journal.....



There are numerous sources for that one, I chose the first one which came up on google.

You challenged me to produce a source for the known fact of Neanderthal DNA being roughly halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee or be branded (by you presumably) a liar; I produced the source and am presently waiting for an apology.


Setanta:
Quote:

@gungasnake,
No, you provided an out-of-date summary article by a financial journalist who is not citing any authority for his remark. You are also attempting to blow smoke because you hope to make it seem as though there were a great deal of difference between h. sapiens and h. neanderthalensis on the basis of a fling about chimpanzees. Of course, that is willfully misleading because there is not a great genetic difference between h. sapies and chimpanzees. You'll get no apology.


Gungasnake:
Quote:

@Setanta,
See if you like this a bit better, Smithsonian article, you know, that bastion of conservative and fundamentalist Christian thought on the mall in NW Washington D.C...

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals

Quote:
Quote:
The Neanderthal mtDNA sequences were substantially different from modern human mtDNA (Krings et al. 1997, 1999). Researchers compared the Neanderthal to modern human and chimpanzee sequences. Most human sequences differ from each other by on average 8.0 substitutions, while the human and chimpanzee sequences differ by about 55.0 substitutions. The Neanderthal and modern human sequences differed by approximately 27.2 substitutions. Using this mtDNA information, the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans dates to approximately 550,000 to 690,000 years ago, which is about four times older than the modern human mtDNA pool. This is consistent with the idea that Neanderthals did not contribute substantially to modern human genome.



27.2 is roughly half of 55.0 or at least it was last time I looked. That is the basis for the claim you read of Neanderthal DNA being roughly halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee and why these quotes are so easy to find.


Setanta:
Quote:

You're hilarious--you accept part of the Smithsonian information because you think it supports your thesis, while rejecting other parts of it because it doesn't accomodate your young earth world view, which you are too dishonest to acknowledge. Leaving aside that that article also uses sources ten or more years old, it is just another example of you blowing smoke.....

blah, blah, blah...



In other words, the guy challenges me to produce a source for a piece of information which is both common knowledge and toxic to his own idiology, and then screams and cries and keeps on calling me names when I produce not one but two such sources, one coming from the Smithsonian itself.

reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 07:48 am
@gungasnake,
From what I seen you were correct about what you said and I should have commented on it then, I apologize for not doing it then.

With that said none of us like to be proven wrong but it is a common thing for us all to be wrong.

I am not trying to be hateful and I find such acts of hatefulness as not being mentally advanced but rather mentally retarded! So please try and understand what I am about to say is not said out of hate!

If I were to see someone who has a bad cough and congestion I might say to them that you seem to have a bad cold! That is only pointing out a physical observations and not trying to poke fun at their physical health.

When I see people that I care about acting out in a way that is delusional I would have to see if I could help them in some way.
I would question if they may have consumed something that may have made them delusional or could their brain have neurological problems or is it something that they have picked up from their environment.

Any time someone is speaking about something { God, Aliens from a different dimension and so on} that can not be proven with a scientific method, logic tells me that they are most likely in a delusional state of mind!

I could only wish that this would make sense and maybe one and a million chances it would to someone who is delusional but the probability is in favor that I may be wasting my time speaking to them about such a subject!


Beware this video makes allot of sense but it has tits and sexy women in it!


gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 08:14 am
@reasoning logic,
Both you and your friend in the vid are assuming that man's relationship with God was always as it is now i.e. entirely via faith. That is not the case.

History can be roughly divided into three periods wrt communication with God and spirits:

1. The antediluvian period during which communication was direct.

2. The period after the flood and the tower of Babel and prior to Alexander during which communication with spirits was via the practices you read about in the Bible and other literature of the same time (oracles, prophets, witchcraft/familiar spirits, idols and rituals associated with them, and electrostatic devices including the ark and pyramids).

3. The present period beginning sometime somewhere prior to Alexander, when all such practices ceased to work and all communication with the spirit realm broke down.

All of the practices in period 2 involved trance states like hypnosis, they all involved obliteration of consciousness as we know it, they all involved static electricity in quantities greater than found on the planet today, and they all stopped working prior to Alexander. Any claim of prophecy since that time is bullshit.

Julian Jaynes was partially right in categorizing the phenomena involved in such practices as "auditory hallucinations", i.e. in the case of idols and their associated rituals there is no reason to think anything else was involved. In the case of oracles and prophets, there is more reason to believe that they worked for a period of centuries after the exodus. Cities and nations ran almost entirely on information from oracles and prophets for centuries before the breakdown.

During the times of period 2., if God told somebody to kill somebody, there were these possibilities:

1. God really did want whoever it was killed for some good reason.
2. Somebody else in the spirit world claiming to be God wanted somebody killed.
3. The system was glitching and the listener thought God was telling him to go kill somebody.

When Israelites ultimately realized that the ark was no longer capable of producing real information or of communicating with Jahveh in a rational manner, they almost certainly took the thing out to some very remote place and buried it, to eliminate any further danger to the world. That would have been a century or two prior to Alexander.






reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 08:26 am
@gungasnake,
I can only guess that you are sincere in your belief and I am fallowing another person that seems sincere in his belief , My question to you is do you think he sincere and maybe a little delusional?

http://able2know.org/topic/178103-1
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 08:43 am
@reasoning logic,
I assume the "he" in your question is a muslim. As I view it, Muhammed was claiming to be something which does not exist i.e. a prophet after Alexander's time. That's like claiming to be an elf or a fairy.

Other than that, Muhammed's resume is basically that of a bandit chieftain, and his religion is one deliberately crafted to control increasingly large confederations of bandit tribes. The main problem with that is that the bandit-tribe model of society has been bypassed by events, several centuries ago in fact.

reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 08:51 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
I assume the "he" in your question is a muslim. As I view it, Muhammed was claiming to be something which does not exist i.e. a prophet after Alexander's time. That's like claiming to be an elf or a fairy.


Are you saying that he seems delusional?
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 08:55 am
@reasoning logic,
No. This is a case of ignorance, not delusions. Delusion means a problem in perceiving reality.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 09:00 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
No. This is a case of ignorance, not delusions. Delusion means a problem in perceiving reality.


Are you suggesting that his beliefs are not reality to him?

Are your beliefs reality to you?

You could ask him and I bet he would tell you what he believes is reality!

If you were born in a different environment, I bet your reality would seem different as well!
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 09:13 am
@izzythepush,
You just got too much education with that move.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 09:17 am
@reasoning logic,
Reality does not vary according to individuals. Everybody is entitled to his own opinions. NOBODY is entitled to their own facts.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 09:21 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
NOBODY is entitled to their own facts.

Is your belief a fact to you?
Is his belief a fact to him?
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 11:37 am
If anyone is looking for reality this may be as close to it as you are going to get!


gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 12:06 pm
@reasoning logic,
Noam Chomsky is a shit4brains communist.

Occasionally I've spoken with Russians who are old enough that their parents or grandparents lived under the tsars and I've asked a few of them this question:

Жизн в России была хуже под царями, или под коммунстами? (was life in Russia worse under the tsars, or under the communists?)

The answer always comes back the same way, i.e. that life under the tsars was so bad that it seemed inconceivable at the time that it could get worse, but that it didn't just get a little bit worse. After ten or twelve years of THAT ****, people were talking about tsarist times as the good old days.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 12:14 pm
@reasoning logic,
I agree, it's amazing how a man can be obviously so reasonable yet branded as an extreme " extremist." It tells us more about the branders than about him
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Oct, 2011 01:01 pm
@JLNobody,
It is very sad that most people just believe rather than search for the truth.

What ever your environment has taught you is what you more than likely will believe! Do you agree with this sentence Gungasnake?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/27/2021 at 06:04:38