(March 27, 2014 at 6:50 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:48 pm)Tonus Wrote: I thought Ex Nihilo was a professional wrestler?

No you confuse him with Al Priori, that preposteriorous bastard

why no several small explosions???

(March 27, 2014 at 6:52 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:50 pm)Alex K Wrote: No you confuse him with Al Priori, that preposteriorous bastard

why no several small explosions???

Ask MyImaginaryFriend, she's the expert.

(March 27, 2014 at 6:55 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:52 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: why no several small explosions???

Ask ImaginaryFriend, she's the expert.

thats fair i totally agree with you religion is bullshit but why so serious towards my question. what were the properties of the first cell. theres no denying that things would be better with atheism but why can't you answer my question. also what is the origin of the moon. and how did the dinosaurs die. it is well documented that dinosaurs did exist and well that nullifies the bible for me but if atheism is a relationship with reality please explain these things

(March 27, 2014 at 6:56 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:55 pm)Alex K Wrote: Ask ImaginaryFriend, she's the expert.

thats fair i totally agree with you religion is bullshit but why so serious towards my question. what were the properties of the first cell. theres no denying that things would be better with atheism but why can't you answer my question

Not that one has much to do with the other, also I'm not a biologist let alone expert for that question, but let's pretend. So to answer your question, please clarify at what point you start calling an organism a cell. What are your criteria underlying the question?

(March 27, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:56 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: thats fair i totally agree with you religion is bullshit but why so serious towards my question. what were the properties of the first cell. theres no denying that things would be better with atheism but why can't you answer my question

Not that one has much to do with the other, also I'm not a biologist let alone expert for that question, but let's pretend. So to answer your question, please clarify at what point you start calling an organism a cell. What are your criteria underlying the question?

prior to the existence of prokaryotic organisms. germs bacteria viruses ext

(March 27, 2014 at 6:41 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: atheism makes the assertion that god is created the earth ex nihilo or from nothing or outside of time. the same principle applies to the big bang. that dosen't mean either are right we don't know the big band happened. Also ask an atheist what kind of properties the first cell had HE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. In fact he will offer the smug atheistic tone that we atheist are smarter and start critiquing fallacies in the holy book which do exist and god is indeed fake ....but I'm just saying its sort of a red herring.

I think you misspoke, atheism doesn't make that assertion. In fact, atheism makes no assertions at all, being the rejection of theistic claims.

(March 27, 2014 at 7:19 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 6:41 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: atheism makes the assertion that god is created the earth ex nihilo or from nothing or outside of time. the same principle applies to the big bang. that dosen't mean either are right we don't know the big band happened. Also ask an atheist what kind of properties the first cell had HE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. In fact he will offer the smug atheistic tone that we atheist are smarter and start critiquing fallacies in the holy book which do exist and god is indeed fake ....but I'm just saying its sort of a red herring.

I think you misspoke, atheism doesn't make that assertion. In fact, atheism makes no assertions at all, being the rejection of theistic claims.

your right i make a mistake. but god did great the earth ex nihilo and atheism does focus mainly on the three western religions does it not. atheism does not believe nothing religion can be replaced with nationalism patriotism egaliartism or in this case science. just because a person is irreligious or secular does not mean they do not subscribe to some ideology

(March 27, 2014 at 7:08 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Alex K Wrote: Not that one has much to do with the other, also I'm not a biologist let alone expert for that question, but let's pretend. So to answer your question, please clarify at what point you start calling an organism a cell. What are your criteria underlying the question?

prior to the existence of prokaryotic organisms. germs bacteria viruses ext

Well the prevailing hypothesis is that organelles are absorbed organisms, so before procaryotic cells, you have a simpler cell with less sophisticated machinery floating around

---

(March 27, 2014 at 7:23 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 7:19 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I think you misspoke, atheism doesn't make that assertion. In fact, atheism makes no assertions at all, being the rejection of theistic claims.

your right i make a mistake. but god did great the earth ex nihilo and atheism does focus mainly on the three western religions does it not. atheism does not believe nothing religion can be replaced with nationalism patriotism egaliartism or in this case science. just because a person is irreligious or secular does not mean they do not subscribe to some ideology

Of course, but science as ideology, I don't think so

(March 27, 2014 at 7:34 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(March 27, 2014 at 7:08 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: prior to the existence of prokaryotic organisms. germs bacteria viruses ext

Well the prevailing hypothesis is that organelles are absorbed organisms, so before procaryotic cells, you have a simpler cell with less sophisticated machinery floating around

---

(March 27, 2014 at 7:23 pm)jimmyk2190 Wrote: your right i make a mistake. but god did great the earth ex nihilo and atheism does focus mainly on the three western religions does it not. atheism does not believe nothing religion can be replaced with nationalism patriotism egaliartism or in this case science. just because a person is irreligious or secular does not mean they do not subscribe to some ideology

science is being used as an ideology and simple organism lol does no answer my question. I'm not questioning the validity of science but cmon

Of course, but science as ideology, I don't think so

My brain hurts, use moar grammar plz. I asked you for the definition of the threshold you are interested in, that's what you got. Science is used as ideology? How?