What are the evidence for no god?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I hated school really so I didn't pay much attention.

There are also scientific proof that God does exist.  DNA was created by intelligent design.  Really if we came from monkeys enough time has passed to have already had the so called missing link.  Monkeys would have been extinct completely if we actually evolved from them.  Everything we have today was created by intelligent design.  The evolution theory, ice age theory, big bang theory are exactly like they are theories that are excuses for humans not to believe in God and escape responsibility.  This not the entire reason, but for all of these reasons is my reasoning logically to believe in my God.

But yet you are putting your faith in a bunch of theories such as the big bang theory, evolution theory, etc.  Theories are excuses for people not to believe in God and be responsible and accountable for their actions.

If the theories are 100% perfect, why are they still called theories if they are perfect?  Why not intelligent design?  I do think there is micro evolution, but macro-evolution, there is no proof. Monkeys again would be extinct completely if human became from monkeys no.  There is also scientific proof that the universe is younger than what you think based on scientific evidence. There have been rocks proven only to be 40 years old when they were originally thought be hundreds of years old.  Astrologists have found that some stars do not last as long as some of the the other stars and also prove the age of the universe.  [...] Let's look at the definition,  a theory is an educated guess. at best.  There is no proof of the big bang because humans simply didn't exist. [...] Ice Age theory killing dinosaurs but then scientists can't seem to make up their minds if it was the volcanoes, or comets., or whatever. [...]  Your theory of evolution has been dismissed as a deceitful lie that I knew it was.  So what part of your brain did you turn off?

Where is your missing link for macro evolution?  Why are there still monkeys?  Wouldn't all monkeys be extinct since they have no use on earth anymore since their human counter parts are here?

Where is the missing monkey and the still have not explained to me why the monkeys are still here when their according to you counter part is here?

It is impossible for a human to have a monkey.  Why would Mother nature keep them around? [...]  Sounds to me like the scientists and historians need to get their facts straight before the spread a lie.

The monkey example and the common ape.  Where is the common ape?  Where is the proof that we came from a common ape?  Maybe when the common ape is found, then maybe I will come to another conclusion. 

Theories are ideas that come from educated guesses.  Theories will never be science because it was not observed.  For it to be science, it has to be observed.  Theories are human guesses of how we came into existence.  [...]  Evolution will never be proven because it was never witnessed nor can scientists find the common ape ancestor. 

Since it took millions of years as you say, none can witness it, therefore, it is not science or will ever will be.  Excuses to not believe in one thing you can't understand. You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe man's theories when no one was there to witness it.  Man made crap. [...]

That is why they call it mythology.  It is a myth.  Please educate yourself.  Evolution, Big Bang it is all bullcrap.  But hey, your choice to stay stupid.

[...]I can't say it is real no more than you can say that macro-evolution happened because neither me or you was not there to witness to the fact and the missing link that shows the relation of human and monkeys have never been found.  [...] For your info, I did learn about evolution, big bang, and ice age theories in school.  I was never one for English or History.  Science and Math was always my cup of tea. 

I took biology and chemistry.  [...] Pre-med as a Biology major and chemistry minor.  With this being said, I can't be too stupid.

Evolution is irrelevant to me because I really don't care. 

Now what I would like to know exactly is where are the bones or fossils of the common ancestor of human and ape?

I have never heard that they actually have found bones or fossils that actually so there is a link between apes and humans. 

Yeah, just like ya momma.  Ya momma taught you well didn't she fool? She sure did.

This person claims to have been a pre-med biology student at the university level.

[JesusHChrist]

This person claims to have been a pre-med biology student.

Right, doubtful. And this one insists the "Ark" has been found. There's a documentary even! Which it hasn't and there is no documentary.

Something is rotten in the cadaver room.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Blondie, I'd like to request that you watch that video about "Creationist scientists", specifically because they work very hard to give the impression that they are presenting a viable "alternative" to evolutionary biology. The sad truth is, they are not. They simply exist to promote their Biblical inerrancy teachings, and are willing to lie in disastrous ways in order to create the impression that they are also doing science. It simply is not true.

One example, if you wish to see for yourself, is a claim that was made a few years back by the Institute for Creation Research (whom you quoted, now called the "Discovery Institute", as I pointed out before) about a number of scientists who reject evolution and common descent. So a researcher went to look at the list they  claimed was a valid list of anti-evolution scientists. Turned out that very few of the names on the list were people even qualified to make a claim about their position on evolutionary biology, and of those biologists the list did claim, none of them except the guy who made the list were actually saying what the list claimed they were saying, and got angry when they were notified that they were placed on the list.

See for yourself:

[Homeless Nutter]

This person claims to have been a pre-med biology student at the university level.

Didn't graduate, though - because sucking c*ck can only get you so far...

[The Valkyrie]

First of all: theories are already true. Theories are explanatory frameworks composed of a series of different facts; a theory is already as true as we can make it. Does that mean no theory is ever false? No. But you are vastly understating the importance of theories by phrasing them neither true or false yet.

Secondly: creationists don't want evidence for evolution. They want evolution to be false, because they mistakenly think that this will serve as confirmation of their specific brand of biblical creation. That's why they don't bother actually doing any research, they just say the things that you have: oh, we don't have any missing links! Oh, it's just a theory! Let me be clear: it's not possible to argue against evolution both knowledgeably and honestly. If you want to argue against evolution honestly then you need to know nothing about it, and if you want to have comprehensive knowledge of evolution then it's impossible to honestly deny it. Evolution has over a hundred years of scientific evidence supporting it across multiple fields and disciplines; there's no longer any legitimate reason to deny that it happens.

Those that do are either lying or ignorant, for ideological rather than logical reasons.


The thing that makes science and religion incompatible is the complete lack of evidence for religion. Evolution means that we no longer need magic to explain the diversity of life on this planet, but of course it's not directly contradictory to the ideas of religion, because religion's ideas are inherently malleable. The only reason religion has survived the scientific revolution at all was that it can change to fit all of the things it has been proven wrong about, and that adherents of theism are willing to forget all the times they were wrong and still insist that they're right. The Berkeley page is correct, but it misses the point.

I want the plain and simple truth period. Just like many of you, I want to make the decision for myself and not believe something because scientists tell me to or creationists tell me to.

[Losty]

Is this a UK thing to treat single group nouns as plurals?

Are there any evidence?
Are there any news?

In Murica, we use "is" for both of these.

[The Valkyrie]

Is this a UK thing to treat single group nouns as plurals?

Are there any evidence?
Are there any news?

In Murica, we use "is" for both of these.

Yeah, but in Murica you also import creationists from other parts of the world, too.

[JesusHChrist]

Yeah, but in Murica you also import creationists from other parts of the world, too.

We do like them exotic. Not your boring, old, Bible-belt wacko, NO!

Something with an accent. That's the ticket!

[The Valkyrie]

You don't find Comfort's Kiwi accent annoying?

[houseofcantor]

Is this a UK thing to treat single group nouns as plurals?

Are there any evidence?
Are there any news?

In Murica, we use "is" for both of these.

Yeah, but in Murica you also import creationists from other parts of the world, too.

I think we export more bullshit than we import.