HOLY SHIT ATHEISTS BTFO

ATHEISTFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH m.youtube.com/watch?v=FxBASNmg4AY

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization
youtube.com/watch?v=CjuztN2XjMc
m.youtube.com/watch?v=CjuztN2XjMc
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>HOLY SHIT ATHEISTS BTFO
did somebody prove god exists?

>Feuerstein

Explain the appendix from a creationist perspective

No.

Strawman after strawman.

Evolution is real, we can watch it happen, we can make it happen, we can and have induced speciation (or as you pseudo-science retards call it, macroevolution) in many species, creating our own. Corn, cows, MRSA and I believe sheep are entirely new species that humans have created.

Get the fuck over yourselves, evolution is real and every piece of evidence that should be there, is there.

...

>Feuerstein

His breath probably smells like shit, I'm about to throw up.

So Fred Durst is alive and well eh?

I was thinking he looked like Kevin James.

I don't like this man

Feuerstein lol, first he should learn to film horizontally, then maybe try to disprove Evolution

i did not come from a monkey
i came from my parents
atheists btfo

>The so called science of evolution

>Evolution isn't real!!!
>Excuse me doctor can I please have some antibiotics for my MRSA

They believe in "microevolution" not "macroevolution".

>it's a "Sup Forums dissociates themselves from atheism and pretends to be christian becasue some atheists are assholes" thread

When did Paul Blart get so angry?

>doesn't understand what a scientific theory is as opposed to the plebs daily usage of the word.

>I LOVE 2 THINGS, JESUS AND FRED DURST

>Sola Scriptura fags everyone

Had a patient two months ago that had MRSA in their knees, thought Jesus would heal them, then got a BKA

>mfw

>Evolution was never observed
Evolution is the natural process through which living organisms change over time according to their surroundings. This is observed in laboratories, where bacteria could be cultured onto a tray of antibiotic feeding gel. Most of the bacteria would die, but a few would be resistant against the antibiotics and proliferate. The resulting bacterial culture has evolved into a strain that could resist antibiotics.

>Theory of evolution
Antibiotics are also a theory. The layman's theory would be science's hypothesis. A scientific theory is built upon evidence, but that evidence is not neccessarily perfect. There is always a margin for error, and any conclusions coming from such a research must be considered a scientific theory.

>You expect me to believe it all started with a single cell...
No, abiogenesis is not evolution. Only a retard who doesn't know what he's arguing about would confuse the two. Abiogenesis is about the origin of life, evolution is about the change of already-existing life.

>But what about the Law of Thermodynamics?
Our solar system is not a closed system. Our sun radiates energy, and our planet catches some of that and the life on our planet turns that energy into something else. There is still a net increase in enthropy in our solar system, the change of organisms over time does not conflict with the Law of Thermodynamics. Not even abiogenesis does.

>But the world has order.
And the world has disorder. If there were only order we'd never move and none of our atoms would ever budge an inch, because the perfect state of order could not be broken. If there were only disorder our atoms would immediately disintigrate into energy because no order is keeping them together anymore. A combination of order and disorder allows for change to occur.

>But there's such a small chance that life happened
This is an argument against abiogenesis, not evolution.

>cont'd

>chaos never produces order

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization

cont'd

>Science believes X
No, science doesn't believe anything. In science, one is supposed to collect evidence based upon observations either during or after an event. A conclusion is drawn based on the evidence.

>Everything on Earth is perfect so that we can live
Or maybe we were optimised through evolution to survive on Earth?

>It couldn't have happened by accident
There are thousands upon thousands of planets where the process of abiogenesis followed by evolution could've occured. We only really know of one, which is the one we're on right now. Yes, we won the lottery, lucky us.

>I can't look at all that creation and say it was an accident.
Argument from incredulity. If you're not open to having your mind changed you may as well go back to praying.

>Universe = a spoken statement
Providing the origin of a word doesn't prove your point.

Hilarious. Stopped listening after "mysteriously and magically..." Also, creationists use the word "theory" incorrectly all the time. Most of the time they do it intentionally. In this guy's case, he probably doesn't know any better

For a man who does not believe in a miracle, a slow miracle would be just as incredible as a swift one.

Nobody can imagine how nothing could turn into something. Nobody can get an inch nearer to it by explaining how something could turn into something else. It is really far more logical to start by saying ‘In the beginning God created heaven and earth’ even if you only mean ‘In the beginning some unthinkable power began some unthinkable process.’ For God is by its nature a name of mystery, and nobody ever supposed that man could imagine how a world was created any more than he could create one. But evolution really is mistaken for explanation. It has the fatal quality of leaving on many minds the impression that they do understand it and everything else; just as many of them live under a sort of illusion that they have read the Origin of Species.

GK Chesterton

no fucking fred durst is going to tell me what to believe, this isn't 1999

>posting the fake

Here's the original

youtube.com/watch?v=CjuztN2XjMc

Like how we still have monkeys... They must be to stupid to evolve... Sigh you science guys must really be from monkeys. I'll stick with god.

>atheism
>zeolot

Either way its a non issue. We each have the freedom to choose what we want to beileve.

As an atheist tho. I ask for one piece of evidence and i will also be a zeolot.

>show me the god

If you fail to meet this all other debate is unneeded and unwarrented.

You can nit pick every single atheist and how they live. You can refute every argumebt science creates. No matter what argument you choose, theyre unneeded and unwarrented.

>show me the god.

This is the only piece of evidence that is needed. No need to argue black holes, multiverse, big bangs or any other theory we evolve as we learn more. The only argument you need to figure out a straight forward andwer for it.

>show me the god.

You cannot and will not ever solve this answer. This is because there is no god.

With all that said, ill let you think what you want. Ill think what i want. We both respect eachothers space and we can both live as brothers.

Great attempt at b8 m8.
But a book full of assumptions is bound to ultimately get some things correct. Broken clock is right twice a day etc.

>you believe that somehow one cell sprung and created life?

Yes... Yes I do. It has been done in laboratories all over the world multiple times and has been proven to be possible in nature.

>the tide goes in, the tide goes out

Flagged and saged for obvious troll

nice line of argument

Where's the list of all the things the bible was wrong about? Could an image of that size even be posted here?

>"Science Then"
>none based on empirical observations but rather random speculation

This is an unneeded argument and only muddies the water.

The only answer that needs to be answered by zeolots is

>show me the god

the bible is not a science book stop using it with pic related because some small verse asumes something

Can we please fucking ban "x BTFO" threads?

It's this simple.

> The universe is a cosmic dream where we live out countless scripted lives.

It's been right about EVERYTHING. That's why they are trying to stop the timeline. Stay a pleb.

Name some things.

How do you explain Alexander's land being spit up then? How did the bible know that? Or the harbringer.

But it's the only science book user. You must of not read the book of Enoch yet.

The vermiform appendix is an important GALT and houses beneficial flora. There is only speculation that the appendix was originally intended to produce cellulase enzymes, but just because we share loci with koalas doesn't mean those genes have *ever* been turned on in human beings.

Not a creationists perspective but pick soemthing better like congenital holes in the sternum.

>The bible has been right about everything.
Literally Genesis.
"God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night."
The moon is not a light, but the Bible claims it is. Or is this where "interpretation" comes in?

And what's this about stopping the timeline? How the fuck do you think we'll stop time?

The bible was never wrong... Why dont you name one simple thing that is the bible and isnt true

>reading the bible from a literalist's perspective in English

Ayy lmao

why is Fred Durst yelling at me?

4:1 dislike ratio

>kek

...

not a science book.,should it say the sun reflects the moon for a bunch of goat herders it are 2 lights

So how do you decide what to believe from the Bible?
I get so frustrated with atheists and theists to claim one another is cherry picking.

Can you point me to the right interpretation of the right bible in the right language?

So since we do not know how the first cell life began you have the right to put your magic book as the same level/above science? These are some of the weakest arguments for a god.

Don't know what a concordance is I take it?

And those goat herders were wrong when they thought the moon was its own light.
The previous guy's claim that the bible was right about everything is therefore false.

I don't listen to anybody whose style was inspired by Fred Durst.

Reading it extensively and referencing it against the Latin/Greek is probably your best bet. Though most clergy will say you need someone to read it to you, so to speak.

>autism alarm

You mean an index in the bible?
This does not answer my question.

Why would I need someone to make up an interpretation?
Then they're just giving me their view on it.
So are some things meant to be taken literally and some things aren't?
If it isn't meant to be literal, then it's historically inaccurate, and no more than a story book.
If it's meant to be literal, you can't pick things out of it to believe in, you have to follow the whole thing.
This is why I have such a problem with religion.

>this doesn't answer my question

Yes, it does. Most have a Greek/latin lexicon integrated in with the index.

The bible states that pi=3 exactly. That's a little more than 14% wrong.
So if any of these calculations were used to make the Ark that Noah was on; That's millions of species that wouldn't fit on that mathematical error alone.

It's filled with bullshit.
The light was made before the sun and stars for god sake. Then where was this light coming from?
Infact he made the fucking plants before he made the sun. Does this even make sense? Especially if "one day in God's time is a bazillion in ours"... So the vegetation survived for a bazillion years without a sun.

Leviticus 11:20-23 (NIV):

"All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest."

Not only did they not know science, counting to 6 was apparently too difficult a task.

Not only is this book written by someone that doesn't know modern science. They have a mental level of a 5 year old.

>Anonymous (ID: Mt3mtri1) 05/08/16(Sun)02:27:49 No.73297655▶
4%*

You're not arguing with me, pal.

Just answering your question. The idea is that they have keen understanding that comes with experience, I mean, I'm sure you don't know a lot about how a numerologist reads the bible, for instance. The bible is a little too dense for people with poor literary backgrounds, and often passages are read at face value and the interpretation gets queered as a result. (Not the figurative parts but their actual understanding of the events being portrayed)

A typhoon upon ur house m8

Kevin James laying the smack down on fedoralords

How does this prove which version of the bible is the right version to follow and how to interpret it?

>Not only did they not know science, counting to 6 was apparently too difficult a task.
>Not only is this book written by someone that doesn't know modern science. They have a mental level of a 5 year old.


haha being so stupid to not realise that they did not have modern science then, and called legs hands or what ever

did you just copy and paste that from a amazing atheist site because that argument is weak as shit

Evolution as the belief that everything came from a single common ancestor can never be observed

String "Theory", The Multiverse "Theory", blame science for using theory to describe two different things

Abiogenesis has no evidence

Why does life seem to disobey the entropy rule? Life is becoming more ordered and complex rather then disordered.

But the point is that all order is tending towards disorder, why do humans break that rule

Still a valid argument

>Kevin James

Isaiah 40:22 never calls the earth a sphere but a circle. christfags BTFO again

The scientific community is what he meant

Except most other planets cannot support life and most other physical constants and laws would cause the universe to never be able to form

You can't even prove abiogenesis as a valid hypothesis, so no, you're wrong

Statistically it is impossible for intelligence and order to come through pure chance

He's presenting an alternative hypothesis that actually makes sense

It doesn't, but I think you knew that when you posed this loaded premise.

Obviously any translation is some degree of separation from the original document, being able to go back as far as the latin/Greek is as close as you'll get.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=CjuztN2XjMc

I can't stand the way he fucking talks.

He is trying way too hard to sound like, what I imagine he thinks, a bad ass preacher.

>doesn't fit within the parameters of science because it never been observed
But it has been observed.

>Confusing theory with hypothesis
nigger what are you doing?

>some accidental cosmic bank(bang?)
Miller and Urey experiment

>one cell, and from that all cells
Sort of. Single celled organisms do clone themselves and over time they formed into colonies of cells, sort of like the colony of cells that make up your body.

>different wills
lol wut
>different characteristics and traits
What is genetic diversity?

>MUH THERMODYNAMICS
>clearly doesn't understand thermodynamics
Into the trash it goes.

>evolution has never been observed
But that's not true.

>accidental cosmic bang caused all life
No, that's the theory of the big bang, which is a different topic

>law of thermodynamics
>chaos can never produce order
This nigga has never opened a thermodynamics textbook in his entire life

He's a pretty sad excuse for a polemicist

>He's presenting an alternative hypothesis that actually makes sense
He has no hypothesis, he has no evidence, he has no logic, only strawmen about topics he has no knowledge of

as a christfag i still thought this was hilarious

WTF i hate atheists now

What did he say that is incorrect