Pics or it never happened. It comes to my attention that there must be shadowy posters with names similar to our own which have conversations with you no one else can see. There's only one other explanation for your consistent attempts to place words in other peoples mouths. It couldn't possibly be that you're a bold faced liar.

(you're not going to fix that link are you)

(September 23, 2011 at 5:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Pics or it never happened. It comes to my attention that there must be shadowy posters with names similar to our own which have conversations with you no one else can see. There's only one other explanation for your consistent attempts to place words in other peoples mouths. It couldn't possibly be that you're a bold faced liar.

(you're not going to fix that link are you)

Ah, I see you have gone back and added more material to your post #327 in an edit session, talk about dishonesty. If you didn’t think just saying the word “evidence” was an insurmountable argument then why would you say the following?

(September 23, 2011 at 4:50 pm)Rhythm Wrote: What's the word for evidence in your language? [insert word here]?

Why do you keep saying pictures or it didn’t happen? Do you have pictures of all life on earth evolving from a common ancestor?

Would you like pictures of the results from genetic sequencing, fossils themselves, geological samples used as boundary markers between epochs, the process of cell division (or any other process of living creatures), electron microscope images, atomic decay, the math that supports all of this, or the innovations that came from all of the above?

(I already have a picture of your evidence btw -in it's entirety-)


Seems pretty weak by comparison.

(September 23, 2011 at 4:14 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I thought you took pride in being the “civil atheist” on here? So much for rational integrity I suppose, that’s unfortunate you let these guys rub off on you.

Uhhh no, you must have me confused with somebody else. I don't give a monkey's ass about being civilised. Certainly not towards shitstains. I will always present my case as best I can, but I don't see the need to be polite to people I already know are hit and runners, or people I suspect are being disingenuous. I also have little patience with ramblers or people who display signs of cognitive dissonance.

Surely those people make even you a little embarrassed? When they come in with their blanket statements about how atheists are immoral, if I were you that would embarrass me, because you know what a softball question it is to field.

(September 23, 2011 at 5:01 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: So that constitutes as an argument in your irrational mind? Well this ought to be easy enough then. I will prove creation to you...are you ready?.......EVIDENCE. There, that was easy.

You mean evidence like ASC?

Yep, that was a REAL winner, wasn't it Stat.

I am becoming increasingly convinced that statler is a poe.

No one can be that stupid in real life and be able to string sentences together, Castle I believed but Statler.......Poe.

Statler, evidence of evolution is sneakily concealed in books, written by scientists, who do that for a living. I will not post evidence on here supporting evolution, it is readily available to ANYONE. Go to a museum, read a high school biology book. This is remedial biology. It isn't that complicated.

And you do believe in magic. You believe that some all powerful wizard spoke some incantation and puffed everything into existence. That is fucking magic. It is horseshit. Show me anywhere in the universe where things puff into existence. It doesn't happen, because reality does not function like that.

Furthermore, you worship a god, muslims worship a god, hindus worship several gods, humans have worshipped thousands of gods throughout history. Easy evidence. What is more probable, that out of the thousands of gods, thousands of holy books, thousands of creation stories, only 1 is correct? Or that they are all equally false? It's the latter, and if you believe otherwise then you are delusional. Believing in this mumbo jumbo in this day and age is just juvenile. It is a juvenile notion, and it has been since it's inception, 10,000 years ago we were too stupid to realize how childish it was. Apparently the majority of my fellow man still is.

Meh, it gives him something to feel superior about, and he sorely needed that. One gets the feeling that the train has left him standing at the station. He likes to quote experts from the early 1900's, and most of his "science" appears to belong in the 17 and 1800's

(September 24, 2011 at 1:28 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: I believed but Statler.......Poe.

I'm glad someone said it. I wouldn't want him thinking no one is on to him. Poe or not, he is certainly not here for discussion. Rhythm could be right, though. Perhaps it just makes him feel superior to come on a forum, say what essentially amounts to "lalala, you're irrational and I refute your evidence with the Bible every time."

(September 22, 2011 at 4:19 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:

(September 21, 2011 at 8:25 am)Zen Badger Wrote: You couldn't, because atheism is not a code of morality. It is merely an absence of belief in a god or gods.

You might as well use Aunicornism(an absence of belief in unicorns) to achieve the objective.

False analogy, disbelieving in the universal and transcendent moral law giver can in no way be properly compared to disbelieving in a magic horned horse.

So tell me Statler, did my point make a whooshing noise as it zoomed straight over the top of your head?

I'd like to think it did.