Organic Molecules Found 400 Light Years From Earth

[brewer]

Why don't you man up now and put forward what your presuppositions are? Or are you afraid as it might make you feel uncomfortable for someone else to evaluate your line of thinking? So instead...you put forth nonsense like "Superman is real, OK, go". How does one provide an explanation of where the laws of logic come from with Superman as your presupposition? Etc, Etc.  There you go. Now...why don't you look real deep into yourself and explain what yours really are?

You seem too content just to sit immersed with those who agree with you instead of trying to actually understand another point of view. You can say my presuppositions are a non-starter for you and never go through the mental exercise to determine if it is a logically consistent position to see where I am coming from. That is your prerogative. As for me, I like to see how others think as it helps me hone my own position.

My presupposition is that your belief is fantasy and that there is no god.

Superman can provide as much logic as your god, probably more and better. 

Demonstrate your logically consistent position. I'm sure that for any god position you put forward I can make the same or very similar position for Superman. 

How do you hone your position? Change the fantasy so that it side steps any challenge?

[Brian37]

Why don't you man up now and put forward what your presuppositions are? Or are you afraid as it might make you feel uncomfortable for someone else to evaluate your line of thinking? So instead...you put forth nonsense like "Superman is real, OK, go". How does one provide an explanation of where the laws of logic come from with Superman as your presupposition? Etc, Etc.  There you go. Now...why don't you look real deep into yourself and explain what yours really are?

You seem too content just to sit immersed with those who agree with you instead of trying to actually understand another point of view. You can say my presuppositions are a non-starter for you and never go through the mental exercise to determine if it is a logically consistent position to see where I am coming from. That is your prerogative. As for me, I like to see how others think as it helps me hone my own position.

My presupposition is that your belief is fantasy and that there is no god.

Superman can provide as much logic as your god, probably more and better. 

Demonstrate your logically consistent position. I'm sure that for any god position you put forward I can make the same or very similar position for Superman. 

How do you hone your position? Change the fantasy so that it side steps any challenge?

[rjh4 is back]

No idiot, when it comes to pursuit of scientific fact YES any claim a scientist might make CAN BE independently tested and falsified. 

Wasn't it you that said evolution (meaning common descent) is a scientific fact? Please tell me how evolution (common descent), something that began in the distant past, can be tested and falsified/confirmed. Evolution (things change) can but not the other. At best, for things that happened in the past, not repeatable in the here and now, one can interpret things in terms or probabilities. That is quite different from what you are talking about.

I wonder...would you agree with the following statement:

There is no absolute truth.

---

Why don't you man up now and put forward what your presuppositions are? Or are you afraid as it might make you feel uncomfortable for someone else to evaluate your line of thinking? So instead...you put forth nonsense like "Superman is real, OK, go". How does one provide an explanation of where the laws of logic come from with Superman as your presupposition? Etc, Etc.  There you go. Now...why don't you look real deep into yourself and explain what yours really are?

You seem too content just to sit immersed with those who agree with you instead of trying to actually understand another point of view. You can say my presuppositions are a non-starter for you and never go through the mental exercise to determine if it is a logically consistent position to see where I am coming from. That is your prerogative. As for me, I like to see how others think as it helps me hone my own position.

My presupposition is that your belief is fantasy and that there is no god.

Superman can provide as much logic as your god, probably more and better. 

Demonstrate your logically consistent position. I'm sure that for any god position you put forward I can make the same or very similar position for Superman. 

How do you hone your position? Change the fantasy so that it side steps any challenge?

You know the last time I was here, there were some atheists that were actually willing to discuss their positions. I guess that time is gone. Sad.

[brewer]

You know the last time I was here, there were some atheists that were actually willing to discuss their positions. I guess that time is gone. Sad.

Boo fuckin Hoo.

[Brian37]

No idiot, when it comes to pursuit of scientific fact YES any claim a scientist might make CAN BE independently tested and falsified. 

Wasn't it you that said evolution (meaning common descent) is a scientific fact? Please tell me how evolution (common descent), something that began in the distant past, can be tested and falsified/confirmed. Evolution (things change) can but not the other. At best, for things that happened in the past, not repeatable in the here and now, one can interpret things in terms or probabilities. That is quite different from what you are talking about.

I wonder...would you agree with the following statement:

There is no absolute truth.

First off you moron, you DON'T have to be a witness to the past to figure things out. How the fuck do you think cops catch murderers? It is very rare law enforcement witnesses a crime when it happens. They get called after the fact and find GASP clues you fucking idiot!

Fingerprints, blood, DNA, computer searches, weapons,  cell phone records ect ect. 

Evolution is proven fact in much the same way because of DNA and fossil findings. 

Even out side of evolution, we also know the age of the universe using the same principles a traffic cop uses AFTER they arrive at the scene of a car crash they DID NOT WITNESS, and that principle is FUCKING MATH. They can figure out who was at fault using basic measurement and interviews of those involved, without having seen it live. 

And again, if you are going to ignore that other humans with different religious clubs and different god claims ALSO make the same argument you are with me right now, I cant help you. It is up to you to figure this out on your own. But if you chose to continue to stay here and peddle your mythology, don't expect me to coddle it.

[Rhondazvous]

So Minimalist provides this article stating that scientists have found a sugar molecule and methyl isocyanate in a distant star system and that this is a clue as to how life formed and nobody here thought to push back at this at all??? Amazing!!

Maybe the following question would be appropriate:

Given that sugars and methyl isocyanate already exist here on earth and still no scientist that I know of has come up with a natrualistic mechanism for forming life from non-life, how does finding these materials in a distant star system provide any more clues to how life formed than anything that we already know?

Or maybe simply:

Scientists have found a sugar molecule and methyl isocyanate in a distant star system...so what?

Perhaps no atheists wanted to push back as doing so might highlight the lack of any known naturalistic mechanism for forming life from non-life????

C'mon, Minimalist, explain the significance of the finding such that any story whatsoever would be needed from a creationist or anyone else.

Have at it guys!!

There are a lot of things scientists haven't found yet. But when scientists have found what was previously attributed to god, Christians lack the sense to take heir feet out of their mouths. Case in point, you still argue that the earth is flat and believe in a book that says god created the grass and trees before he created the sun and moon.

[Brian37]

Certainly there is no "absolute truth" in regards to the future.

But looking at our modern data today, there are certainly claims we can safely discard without the needless fear of missing something, like Apollo, or Thor or Poseidon. How is it you rightfully accept those claims as bunk, because if you think the people who invented those claims back then didn't truly believe it them, you are a fool.

The ancient Egyptians falsely believed for 3,000 years that Ra and Osiris and Isis and Horus were real deities, but even after all that success, it turned out those gods were not real.

[The Valkyrie]

Certainly there is no "absolute truth" in regards to the future.

But looking at our modern data today, there are certainly claims we can safely discard without the needless fear of missing something, like Apollo, or Thor or Poseidon. How is it you rightfully accept those claims as bunk, because if you think the people who invented those claims back then didn't truly believe it them, you are a fool.

The ancient Egyptians falsely believed for 3,000 years that Ra and Osiris and Isis and Horus were real deities, but even after all that success, it turned out those gods were not real.

Wait!

What??

[Godscreated]

---

The reply was "naturalistic process," No one has said God used natural processes to "make" the human body. Yes the term is "make," God made the human body from the materials of the earth and then created a soul (breath of life). Read the creation story God created three times and made things from the created things.

GC

---

---

---

Been trying to tell you this for years, glad to see you are beginning to understand.


Yes you are, you follow the likes of Dawkins and others.


Yes you are you've proven that in this thread. Since I've been back the same people are following me from thread to thread, just to harass for the most part.


You follow the religion of Darwin, Dawkins and others, you all parrot Dawkins every chance you get.


  I'm betting most atheist here are liberal democrats.

GC

---

 

No we are not a gang, nobody is holding you hostage, we are not blackmailing you for money, we are not threatening you like the mafia. You are free to leave and you don't even have to pay money to post here. No, you do not have to leave, but if you stay you have known what we do here. You are not going to falsely play victim with us.

Yes some atheist here are, they gang up on the Christians trying to overwhelm us. We see it in almost every thread. One the other hand the Christians here do not resort to such tactics and try and have a good conversation. I'm not playing the victim game, I do not feel like a victim but what I see is the insecurity of many atheist here.

When we talk about the Adam and Eve or the flood story, you get offended sure, we know that. But you choose to get offended rather than to try to understand why your logic is flawed. And you also refuse to consider many of us here were once on the side you hold now.

I do not get offended, I'm not sure what made you think that other than wishful thinking. I am not as childish as some atheist here by choosing to get offended. Choosing to get offended is dishonest and a mark of immaturity. My logic is not flawed, just because you do not believe in God doesn't give you the right to question my logic. You know as well as I do that I can't prove God to you to your satisfaction and you also know you can't begin to disprove God.

I do get tired of people hiding behind their religion. There are real victims in the world, like Kurdish and Coptic Christians. There are Sunni Muslims whom are victims of Shiite Muslims and Shiite Muslims whom are victims of Sunnis. There are gays and atheists whom are also victims. You having your claims picked on on a website you are not forced to post on does not make you a victim nor does it make us the bad guys.

I'm not hiding behind Christianity, I live it and there is a huge difference in the two. I didn't say you were the bad guys and I've never complained about being victimized. I do see you are playing the victim card for atheist though. You just don't like others differing from what you thinks the truth, to bad, that's life and Christians have long understood this.

You not liking our responses merely means you feel uncomfortable. Guess what? Many of us felt the same thing when we did believe. Instead of assuming we are out to harm you, you need to consider we are merely throwing cold water on your face in the hopes you wake up.

I do not like some of your responses but that doesn't make me uncomfortable. That was your problem then, no one that knows Christ will feel uncomfortable, we are taught that in the scriptures, something you seem to have missed. I've been wide awake for a long time now and see the truth and it ain't your beliefs.

But if you chose to stay, stop trying to falsely slur us with the word "gang". You should know by now if you have read enough threads, not even the members here all like each other. I have had plenty of public fights with atheists on this website, so no, we are not a gang.

You were the one who brought up the word "gang," if you had not I wouldn't have even posted on this thread. Denying what takes place here to Christians has been well tolerated by us. Yes we point out what happens from time to time to let you know you're not fooling us, then we go on with happy hearts. I've seen you all fighting among yourselves (something that's rare between Christians) says to me the Christians have something going for us that you lack. Again you are the one who brought up "gang" not me and I certainly did not characterize all atheist here as a gang, that's your discomfort that's making you edgy.

This website provides you with the tool to block individuals so if you get that offended by them, you don't have to read their posts. A "gang" in reality would not do that. A "gang" like the mafia or street gang, real criminals, would force you to pay them protection money and beat you if you didn't submit. A "gang" would not let you on their turf unless you submitted to them and not challenge them. Nobody here not even the admins are going to prevent you from trying to make any argument you want.

I've used it, for one person and that was because I as other Christians here tire of his language and super harsh characterization of us as something lower than animals. You can use that same tool or just ignore my posts. I didn't characterize the atheist here of being any sort of gang as you mentioned, I said that some atheist gang up on Christians just to harass us, it's not hard to see as long as you remove those biased blinders. Did I ever say that anyone was preventing me from making an argument, NO, so you need to get over what ever is bothering you. I have seen some atheist here who want to ban all Christians from this site, by your definition that would constitute a "gang." I on the other hand ignore such childish ranting and go on about my way.
 

You not liking our responses only means you don't like our responses. It does not make us the bad guys.

I have every right to dislike some of the things posted here and exercise that right mostly to myself. I have never said you were bad guys, misguided yes but that doesn't make you bad guys.

---

So many atheists are democrats but you used the word gang. You must cherry pick the threads you read because you would know we have GOP and Libertarian Ayn Rand type atheists. No, I am not one of them, but you don't get to decide for every single atheist what their political party is.

I did not characterize all atheist as democrats, my atheist brother is a republican so you see I know better. I didn't decide anything, I made a statement about most atheist here being democrats because they make it obvious and have chosen that for themselves and that's fine with me. I have voted for democrats and especially for some of our governors who have been excellent.

But I hate to burst your bubble, even our GOP voting atheists who value the same "fuck you I got mine" economics, would also reject the mythology of Adam and Eve and the flood story. Why? Because one is about economics, and the other is about mythology. Just because we might agree on rejecting mythology does not mean we agree on economic views.

I didn't even have economics on my mind. I do not believe in the kind of economics you posted about republicans and most republicans do not agree with that either.

 Evolution in scientific reality does not favor incest. The bible writers couldn't have had any clue when they wrote those stories, and first people mythology is also not unique to Christianity. You do not get to blame atheists for the writings of antiquity we were not around to write.

All people who do not believe in the only God are atheist, that's something you can't seem to comprehend and incest now is not good with the Christians or with God. The gene pool was perfect and did not present a problem with genetic adnormalities, once the gene pool became corrupted enough God gave man a law about incest.

I have said it many times and I would say this to anyone of any religion. When people make claims about how true the claims of antiquity are, I hear, "The New England Patriots beat the Chicago Cubs in the Stanley Cup". Now what would you do if you had a brother or sister or parent or friend or co worker who constantly repeated that? It would bother you.

Sure it would be irritating because I could disprove that statement as false, you on the other hand can't disprove God, period. Note the fact that I said I could disprove their statement, yet you will insist on the opposite from Christians. By your statement and my answer you should be willing to bring proof that God doesn't exist, instead you rely on a Dawkins statement. 

Your logic bothers us, not your human rights. Your rights are not in danger so please stop playing false martyr and falsely calling us a gang. Either you have facts to defend your position, or you dont. If you don't, fine, we wont murder you for not having facts, but we are also under no obligation to remain silent and never challenge you.

  My logic is sound, just because you have differences with it doesn't mean I'm wrong. I would never consider myself a martyr and it was you that brought up the "gang" terminology. I just showed how it was used here by some and it's okay if they continue, they only show the childish attitude they have in life. What they expose here is done in their lives, which is rather unfortunate. This site has so many tweeny weenies who have no idea about life that real adults here have a more difficult time in good conversation. If you think all this is pointed at you, you would be wrong and if some of it makes you uncomfortable about yourself then the shoe must fit.

GC

---

The reply was "naturalistic process," No one has said God used natural processes to "make" the human body. Yes the term is "make," God made the human body from the materials of the earth and then created a soul (breath of life). Read the creation story God created three times and made things from the created things.

GC

---

Been trying to tell you this for years, glad to see you are beginning to understand.


Yes you are, you follow the likes of Dawkins and others.  BZZZ WRONG


Yes you are you've proven that in this thread. Since I've been back the same people are following me from thread to thread, just to harass for the most part.    BZZZ WRONG


You follow the religion of Darwin, Dawkins and others, you all parrot Dawkins every chance you get.   BZZZZ WRONG


  I'm betting most atheist here are liberal democrats.

GC

I'll take that bet and set up a poll to ask them but first what does that have to do with anything?

Secondly, You managed to be wrong about nearly everything you typed, It's apparent you fail to understand the concept that Atheism is a position on one singular question. You made several strawmen and played a victim card and then you followed up with a non sequitur.

In conclusion I will pray FSM heals your broken mind.

Hey gang member.

GC

[Brian37]

Certainly there is no "absolute truth" in regards to the future.

But looking at our modern data today, there are certainly claims we can safely discard without the needless fear of missing something, like Apollo, or Thor or Poseidon. How is it you rightfully accept those claims as bunk, because if you think the people who invented those claims back then didn't truly believe it them, you are a fool.

The ancient Egyptians falsely believed for 3,000 years that Ra and Osiris and Isis and Horus were real deities, but even after all that success, it turned out those gods were not real.

Wait!

What??

DAMN YOU SCOOBY DOO, YOU CAUGHT ME IN ANOTHER FAKE NEWS LIE!

You got me, Ra, Osiris, Isis and Horus really exist. I'm just getting pissed that not everyone likes ABBA like I do.