Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Wait wait wait. You don't believe in evolution; so how the fuck are they related?
Simple they are of the same kind. But their offspring are the end of the line.
That is not the only creatures that work out that way. As others much earlier in this forum have pointed out. Oh and Sheldon's website he has been promoting. But every one of the offspring are of the same kind!
If horses and donkeys are the same kind; and their offspring are of the same kind. Why can't their offspring reproduce?
I would have to say God made limits. That's why evolution doesn't work. God's rules don't allow it. Think about it with all the research and technology we have today, if evolution were possible it would be easy with test tubes to produce at least some viable evidence. Beside just gnats producing other gnats with slight differences that don't amount to anything more than breading dogs with different characteristics. Common you've got to be smarter than to believe that a reptile with scales all of a sudden popped out a single little feather, which is made of an entirely different chemical make up? To begin the process of becoming a bird. Lol
It has been done, many times over. Worse still you have been provided this many times over the years here on this very forum. Chuck, you are ignorant on purpose.
@Chuck: "if evolution were possible it would be easy with test tubes to produce at least some viable evidence."
You don't need test tubes. Just look at dogs, cats, horses, sheep, pigs, cows, etc. People have been selectively breeding them for millennia to achieve certain results. That's why we have Chihuahuas, pit bulls, and German shepherds, Arabians, Shetland ponies, and Clydesdales, Jerseys and Limousines, Merinos and Romney Marshes.
It's called husbandry, and it's a form of evolution through natural selection. It's affected both animals and plants. In this case, humanity is the agent of natural selection. In most cases it's environmental change, separation of populations due to earthquakes, etc., or diseases.
" if evolution were possible it would be easy with test tubes to produce at least some viable evidence. "
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
Skip to section 5.0 Observed Instances of Speciation.
When you're done chanting to Jesus to make that go away, flip on the news channel, start with CNN, then SKY news, then the BBC world news, please read all the headlines carefully and note that...
NONE OF THEM MENTION YOUR CLAIMS THAT SPECIES EVOLUTION THROUGH NATURAL SELECTION HAS BEEN FALSIFIED.
Creatards are liars, simple as that. I guess telling lies for Jesus makes them "good lies" in their view. People never lie so completely as when they lie to themselves.
"you've got to be smarter than to believe that a reptile with scales all of a sudden popped out a single little feather, "
And considerably smarter than a creatard dishonest enough to think no one will notice yet another straw man claim with the phrase "all of a sudden" in it, used to describe processes that they have repeatedly been told took billions of years. The again anyone moronic enough to believe the world AND THE UNIVERSE were created in their current form 6000 years ago isn't going to grasp these facts any time soon, I suppose his deity made the light from distant stars en route? How else would the we be able to see that light in 6000 years if the stars are billions of light years away? It's a puzzler alright.
@Chuck
Stop saying "kinds". Do not say "kinds" again. Saying "kinds" again would be a very tedious experience. Science doesn't do "kinds", it does species, genus, domain, kingdom, phylum (division is sometimes used in botany in place of phylum), class, order and family. "Kinds" is a YEC bilical term and it has no place in a discussion about science. If you can't speak the language, get out of the Tower: you're part of the problem.
No Latin speaking parent ever gave birth to a child that spoke French or Spanish, yet people claim those languages evolved from Latin? I don't get it.......
Christ creatards are dumb....
Wow! This got a lot of discussion. Interestingly, that which can be asserted without evidence can be simply rejected without evidence. i.e. "I found out that atheism was a religion." Where is the dogma? Where are the rituals? And the fact that new atheists treat it as if it were a belief system does not make it so. (See a previous post of mine referring to new atheists that approach atheism as if it is a religion because they can not shed themselves of seeing the world through a belief system. You seem to fall into that group. )
Next: " I found out that there are so many lies in evolution with nothing to back them up." I seriously doubt it. However; as you are simply making assertions the burden of proof is on your shoulders. Please do share at least one of these evolutionary lies that have no evidence backing them up/
FINALLY: You do understand that citing evolution as if it is somehow connected to atheism is a "Straw Man Argument." Atheism has nothing at all to do with atheism. Evolution is a scientific theory based on the evolution of life through survival and random mutation. Atheism is a lack of belief in God or gods. How are the two things even connected?
The lies are simple. Did you know the first so called missing link that was put into school science books was drawn up from someone who found a single tooth? Yet later when the tooth was scientifically examined, it was found to be a tooth from a pig. And they still use the picture of that fake link.
Another one is the famous Lucy. Did you know they claimed that the head of that ape was found with a human knee cap? Yet after investigating the findings it was found that the knee cap was found over a half mile away. Did you know that the so called lineage of the horse that taught in schools was proven to be false?
Did you know the claim that the Grand Canyon of being carved over thousands of years is a lie and there is evidence in nature to prove it?
Did you know they used to claim that a fetus had gills in it's early stages. Yet that one was so talked about it that as far as I know evolutionists have dropped that one. There are others.
@Chuck
Did you know you know about the times science got it wrong because science scrupulously acknowledges and publicises its errors and hoaxes? Did you know being wrong is not a crime? Did you know being wrong furthers knowledge?
As for your laundry list of "examples": citation needed, please.
All vertebrate embryos have pharyngeal arches (or gill arches). The presence of those arches in human embryos is one of the ways used to estimate the age of an embryo.
No matter what those arches are there for they are not gills. Gills are used for breathing. Embryos get their oxygen through the umbilical cord. And they were not put there for man to count them. Have you been to a doctor's office with a pregnant women to have an ultrasound done? They just measure the length of the fetus. They don't try to count arches. Lol
I didn't say they did, that is nasty strawman.
----------------------------
Did I say they were gills? No Chuck I did not. Why do you need to make shit up?
Science is the advancement of understanding by rational thought and observation. Yes, mistakes have been made, and they will continue to be done. Einstein had a few things wrong, so did Darwin. But the point is that the broad concepts they introduced spurred attention in that realm of science, and not only were any flaws uncovered, new ones offered better explanations.
I doubt if the term "missing link" is presently used in scientific circles, we have moved far beyond that Victorian mind-set.
Your grasping at any mistakes as proof that an entire theory is constructed on lies is cringe-worthy.
Are you aware that if Darwin had not been born, we would still be talking about Evolution? In science, one step leads to another. Many discoveries are built on the foundation of other new technologies. The Wright brothers are rightly credited with the first manned flight, but with the advancement of engine technology, materials, and aerodynamics, others were just a half step behind in creating their own flying machines. Darwin had a competitor in Alfred Russel Wallace, and as far as the grand history of discoveries, they were the same. Both were on the same track, and the only reason why little know about Wallace is because Darwin published first.
"Did you know the first so called missing link that was put into school science books was drawn up from someone who found a single tooth? Yet later when the tooth was scientifically examined, it was found to be a tooth from a pig. And they still use the picture of that fake link."
And we know this was a fraud how exactly?
Do take your time here....I'm sure you can piece this together and see why using a scientific disovery to try and decry science as a fraud is moronic.
--------------------------
"Another one is the famous Lucy. Did you know they claimed that the head of that ape was found with a human knee cap? Yet after investigating the findings it was found that the knee cap was found over a half mile away. Did you know that the so called lineage of the horse that taught in schools was proven to be false?"
It isn't confirmed as belonging to a Baboon, but is the right size and shape, what's your point? The 'Lucy' skeleton doesn't match that of a Baboon? Well why would it?
----------------------
"Did you know the claim that the Grand Canyon of being carved over thousands of years is a lie and there is evidence in nature to prove it?"
No there isn't - Hitchens's razor slash.
--------------------------------
"Did you know they used to claim that a fetus had gills in it's early stages. Yet that one was so talked about it that as far as I know evolutionists have dropped that one. "
Yes I did, human Foetus skulls have hard cartilage around the ears during their development once thought to be gills, now science has shown this to be untrue, again you're implying that science discovering the truth about something somehow discredits it, can you really be this stupid?
Just how many religious frauds would like us to list here that were uncovered despite religions best efforts? This then is the fundamental difference between religion and science, as a method for gathering knowledge and testing claims science admits to errors and corrects them, so our store of knowledge increases year on year, but religion leaves people like you laughably insisting bronze age creation myths that the universe and everything in was created in it's current form, just 6000 years ago, roughly 4000 years after humans started to domesticate feral dogs.
Again if instead of lying about the talk origins site Chuck, you had read it with an open mind as i had urged you to, you'd have seen all these creationist cliches you've spewed out and known they have been thoroughly discredited for the duplicitous propaganda they are. There really is none so blind...
@Cognostic
It’s taken me a long time to think of a reason why some theists are indoctrinated to reject evolution out of hand. It's to do with the omniscience argument. Anyone with any basic knowledge of evolution's spectacular FUBARs knows there ain't no such thing as Intelligent Design, Cog.
Again you have made a wild claim with no evidence what so ever. "Did you know the first so called missing link that was put into school science books was drawn up from someone who found a single tooth?" Where in the hell did you get this idea? Please cite your source and the text book.
I have no idea why I am bothering to wast my time with you. Why don't you go to "TalkOrigins.com and look at the arguments Christians are telling you "NOT TO USE"
Creationists have been making the claim that Donald Johanson found the knee joint of "Lucy," a 40%-complete skeleton of the species Australopithecus afarensis, in a location "Sixty to seventy meters lower in the strata and two to three kilometers away" (Willis 1987). They have sometimes gone on to add the claim that "Only under questioning did [Johanson] admit that the knee was found over a mile from Lucy. To the best of our knowledge this admission has not appeared in print!" (Willis 1987; emphasis in original; Also see Brown 1989a, p. 44) The claim is used by creationists to show that (a) evolutionists are dishonest and (b) "Lucy" did not walk upright. It successfully shows neither of these things, because it is false. (Even if it were true, it would not demonstrate (b), for reasons given in Lippard (1989-90)--the knee joint is not the only evidence of bipedality in A. afarensis.)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
Horse Evolution is well documented: Again you have neither cited your sources or the text book, And even if the horse genealogy was updated to show something different than before, it would have obviously been based on the latest evidence in the field.
According to the theory of evolution, it is possible to follow horse evolution through millions of years: how the horse slowly became larger and stronger (figure 1), lost many of its toes (figure 2), and how its tooth-structure changed when it moved from a diet of broad-leaved plants, shrubs and trees (browsing) to eating hard, dry grass (grazing) (figure 3).
Now, it is true that the fossil evidence provides a lovely picture of horse evolution through millions of years. However, Molen is propagating the false idea that horse evolution was some sort of single, straight-line, teleological progression culminating in the modern form of horses (which, as an aside, is the product of artificial selection).
This supposed straight-line evolutionary path is called orthogenesis. However, scientists have known for some time that horse evolution was not orthogenetic. A 2012 paper entitled "Fossil Horses, Orthogenesis, and Communicating Evolution in Museums" spells this out:
The problem with depicting fossil horses as orthogenetic is that, by the early twentieth century, paleontologists understood that, rather than a simple, straight-line sequence (Fig. 3A), the actual fossil record of horses was a complexly branching tree (Fig. 3B).
Molen consistently refers to horse evolution as a "sequence" or "series", implying orthogenesis. And while this is incorrect, I can't really blame Molen completely, because (as the above 2012 paper points out) many museums still depict horse evolution as orthogenetic. Regardless, Molen misrepresents horse evolution as an orthogenetic sequence. It is not.
http://marmotism.blogspot.kr/2015/07/horse-intelligent-design-fail.html
I'm probably just giving you too much information to read. Why not try and make 'ONE' supported claim. Just one. Instead of wild assertions that you have heard from the pulpit?
There is a differens between The world and the earth GOD SHOUTED OUT LOUD WHILE HE BLEW HIMSELF IN PIECES LIKE a Big Big BANG LET THERE BE enLIGHTment that is why I see god in every living creation
the reason most people believe in a higher power is to comfort themselves,and religions like christianity has caused alot of trouble and hate for example the westboro baptist church.
I'm not wading through this whole sorry tragedy, but judging by the parts I could read without laughing hysterically this has to be the absolute worst argument against evolution since Ray Comfort and his Banana-From-Heaven shtick...
One of my favourite and most hysterically funny creationist videos that, and he could have seen the abject stupidity in his reasoning with a brief examination of a coconut. Which doesn't sit comfortably in the hand, doesn't peal easily, and doesn;t curve toward the mouth when you try to eat it.
wow this thread is still alive...
and its still counting comments and views....38k...oh my fucking god
if god were in a court room....holy shit can you imagine it??
It's honestly amazing that this ignorant liar Chuck keeps coming back to spout off even more of his superstitious nonsense, despite the overwhelming return fire he's getting. What is he trying to prove anyways? All he's doing here is showing what religious indoctrination can do to a persons mind. Is he really that numb to not realize that he's only making things worse for him and his petty death-cult?
Thanks for helping atheism, Chuck. Thanks for being such a wonderful example of yet another deluded, arrogant, ignorant, brainwashed moron. Keep it up!
Conversely, any notion one might have of a creator of some sort is rooted in anthropocentrism.
Prove it.
42,000 views. Woah. Given time the view count of these threads can really grow.
Also what is with all the threads being resurrected from years ago, the bulk of the people that posted in those threads are long gone.
"Why the religion of atheism?"
Well, ya see, it's like this.... I tried the hobby of not collecting stamps for awhile. And though it was interesting, it was not really very fulfilling. And I had to quit the sport of non-football when I didn't damage my knee by being a non-football player. (By the way, folks, the sport of non-football can be brutal sometimes. There are no rules, no safety equipment, and no referees. Usually just a big free-for-all out there on the field.) Anyway, this left an emptiness in my life that needed to be filled. So I started searching for things to not believe in to fill that void.
Oh, sure, I tried many of the common non-belief religions. One of the first was Aclausism, as everybody knows is the religion of not believing in Santa Claus. Unfortunately, that just left me depressed and feeling worse. Then I dabbled a bit in Aleprechism, until I saw the movie "Leprechaun" and realized it was just a fanatical money-hungry cult. Of course there was also Apcottontailism, and Adentalfairyism, and the ever-popular ancient religion of Aunicornism. But all of these religions were so popular and "mainstream" that it seemed people just took them for granted and simply went through the motions of their respective daily rituals. They all just felt soooo.... empty, ya know?
Then one day I heard about the religion of Atheism and how its devoted followers (called "atheists") do not believe in any god or gods. "Hmmmm....", I thought to myself, "This could be interesting." So, here I am. Oh, sure, I still feel the lingering effects of all those other religious cults I followed over the years. For instance, I still don't believe in Santa Claus, or the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy, and so on. But no matter how hard I try, I simply cannot regain those beliefs. Yes, it can be a struggle in coping at times, but I have gradually learned to live with it. Thankfully, the religion of Atheism has helped open my eyes to a whole new world of understanding, and it has given me a peace of mind I have never known before.
Pages