Media

[chimp3]

When I was a teen I rejected Christianity. I had read the Old and New Testament and that sealed Christ's fate in my life. Damned books. In my early twenties I was dabbling in eastern new age religion. I was initiating into a Sufi order. Of course , for all of it's inclusiveness Sufism is still Islamic. I read Yusef Ali's translation (the one Harris likes). That damned book sealed god's fate in my life for good. The Koran is a bloody horror show.

[bennyboy]

My question remains unchanged:

Were the scientific ideas conceivable without the universe?

Nope.

“Not Knowing” is neither a good excuse for making fairy tales nor a good excuse for rejecting the existence of God. Quran is the guidance for those who seek truth by means of Logic and by pondering over their own conscious beings and on their environment. Quran is not a guidance for the dolts who are blindly running after their wild desires.

There are 3 possible answers to mysterious questions, like "Where did existence come from."
1) I don't know.
2) I don't know, but maybe it could have been X, Y or Z.
3) I definitely know, because somebody told me so / my favorite sand-people text says so.

(1) is the simplest. (2) is fine, too. (3) is a failure of basic logic-- authorities cannot tell you the truth, unless they can demonstrate that they have access to it.

Your problem is that the Quran cannot be shown to come from Allah, not can the Universe be shown to be created by Allah, nor can Allah be shown to exist at all, except by special pleading and other logic fails that your average 5 year-old would jump on if his IQ was okay. All you have is super-weak logic: "It must have come from SOMEWHERE. . . so Allah."

If someone thinks that universe has no cause and no purpose and that universe came into being out of Nothingness and argue against the Prime Cause for being the cause of all causes with the argument of infinite regression and by overruling the fact that infinite regression leads nowhere but back to Nothingness then that is an utter absurd which is insanely against the principles of Logic and Science. To me that is the most deluded self-deceiving person. The purpose of this ridiculously deluded idea is only one and that is to support the subjective hedonistic desires.

Again, you've chosen (3). The fact is that we do not KNOW where the Universe came from, but there's nothing special about a sentient Allah that solves any philosophical problem. Consider:
(1) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a sentient deity, Allah, which is uncaused.
(2) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a magic space monkey, which is uncaused.
(3) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a philosophical yin/yang symbol, which is uncaused.

It doesn't matter what we put at the end, because it is special pleading. We are using an uncaused causer to solve the problem-- that everything must be caused. We are saying "Everything must be caused, but one special thing." That is the literal and exact definition of special pleading, and it is a logical fallacy. Given any of (1) through (3), we can arrive at:

(4) In order for the Universe to exist, SOMETHING must be uncaused. Since something may be uncaused, then the Universe would violate no rules of causality if IT were uncaused. Therefore, given no evidence for Allah, magic space monkeys, or philosophical yin/yang symbols, the simplest explanation is that the Universe itself is eternal and uncaused.

Give only one rational and intelligible reason to show that Harris is beneficial for humanity. I can name many homosexuals who have contributed greatly to society. I cannot find that you have contributed anything except hot air and spite.

Please do not throw my question behind the person of Harris or some homosexual. You are advocating for homosexuality therefore, it is fair to request you for an explanation on how homosexuality is beneficial for humanity. I would keenly wait for a “rational and intelligible” explanation.

Freddie Mercury, the singer in "Queen," inspired millions. You have not.
Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, has helped bring many technological wonders into the world. You have not.
Tchaikovsky, the great composer, changed the face of music forever. You have not.
Marlon Brando, the actor, inspired millions. You have not.

There are also very many who had no women around them, and whose correspondence strongly indicates that they were gay:
Shakespeare.
Da Vinci
Plato and Aristotle

But you have refused to answer my question. Demonstrate that YOU provide any value to society. What have you achieved, other than grumping about Jews on an internet forum? Reveal your greatness to us all! *holds breath*

Seriously, though, what benefit do you bring to humanity? Because it seems to me you are doing everything you can to insult rather than to inspire, to spite rather than to love, to blame rather than to accept. I think you are a cancer to society, and that you have little good to offer it. Prove me wrong.

But just for fun, why don't YOU give one rational and intelligible reason to show that pedophiles who have sex with 9 year-old girls should be allowed to explain reality, and why anyone would take them seriously.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zauvfaGzyzQ

That's a lot of work required to validate the non-pedophilia of a fairy-tale's founder. There's a simpler solution-- don't bother with the fairy tale, since Allah cannot be shown to exist, nor to have any influence in our lives.

[The Valkyrie]

Your ignorance is quite literal-- you are ignoring direct comments. I've said that I'm perfectly fine saying fuck the Talmud, fuck its doctrines, and fuck anyone who follows them.

Thank you for the comment “FUCK THE TALMUD, FUCK ITS DOCTRINES, AND FUCK ANYONE WHO FOLLOWS THEM” which is the first and perhaps the last comment of its nature in atheist forum. This privilege has made me the most honoured member of atheist forum.

You've repeatedly ignored my comments that the reason we don't criticize the Jews much is that there aren't any of them here making arguments that need to be refuted.

Jews cannot preach the inhuman laws of Talmud against non-Jews to non-Jews. They cannot argue in favour of their Talmud that preaches hate and insanity against non-Jews. By nature, no criminal wants to expose his evil tricks. Their primary interest is to control Gentiles by means of crooked tyranny and Talmud teaches how to achieve that target through deception.

Based on the nature of comments and articles of other members I have no doubt that Jews have structured atheist forum to defame religions and morality. Being the constructors they would never put Judaism in the showcase alongside Christianity and Islam to mock it.

Why do you find it hard to understand that we think your religion-- AND that of the Jews-- is a ridiculous fairy tale? We are atheist because your idea of God is without evidence or reason, and is based in the superstitious ramblings and prejudices of ancient desert dwellers. We feel that science, or even just plain common sense, can do better than your religious doctrines can.
Let's clarify this. Christianity is a stupid fairy tale. Islam is a stupid fairy tale. And. . . since you insist, Judaism is a stupid fairy tale.
See the pattern here? It's not an organized subversion of culture in favor of Jewish puppet masters. It's a belief that religions-- pretty much ALL of them-- are stupid fairy tales.
And you, believing in one of them and wasting your life's energy supporting it, are stupid.

And why it is difficult to understand that effect cannot occur without a cause. This is the most fundamental and rudimentary principle behind the existence of universe, a temporary home for self-conscious beings such as you and me.

If someone thinks that universe has no cause and no purpose and that universe came into being out of Nothingness and argue against the Prime Cause for being the cause of all causes with the argument of infinite regression and by overruling the fact that infinite regression leads nowhere but back to Nothingness then that is an utter absurd which is insanely against the principles of Logic and Science. To me that is the most deluded self-deceiving person. The purpose of this ridiculously deluded idea is only one and that is to support the subjective hedonistic desires.

Secondly, you have put Science above God. Tell me:

Does science created universe or universe created science? Can there be any Donkey Science without having a live braying donkey?

“Were they created of nothing, or were they themselves the creators?”
Ath-Thuur (52)
-Verse 35-

---

No, the lowest form of vermin in human form are those who deride a whole community of people.  Who spread lies, misinformation, and propaganda about them.

Who claim they know the "truth", usually with a capital "T", despite the overwhelming evidence against their claims.

And when they do it and belong to a group that claims to have the moral high ground, that makes them an even lower form of scum.

This statement can be taken as a good description of Jews who have disdainfully defamed 99.80% humans of the world.

“Only Jews are human. [Gentiles] are animals.”
Talmud (1935) Soncino Edition (Baba Mezia 114a-114b.)

---

When I was young, I thought gay guys were pretty gross and strange; I might, if I'd ever met a gay man, avoided him or even shouted an insult at him.  That's because I lived in a small town with a bunch of factory workers, loggers, and so on, and there was not yet an internet.  However, as the internet has evolved, and I've been able to see the real people and their contributions, their vital personalities, and so on, I've come to value them all.  Many are right here, and I've come to respect them-- for their uniqueness, and for their similarity to the rest of us.

It is amazing to me that people like Harris, who have access to ALL the information on the internet, could manage not to evolve their opinions in the same way I have-- in part because I'm a stubborn person and naturally very resistant to changing my ideas.  How powerful is that particular brand of ignorance which, when presented with almost all the ideas and information that have occurred to mankind in many decades, can still manage to keep itself in the dark.

Give only one rational and intelligible reason to show that homosexuality is beneficial for the humanity.

Tell me why Jews, who are the key supporters of atheism, the leaders in the porn industry, open supporters of sexual freedom who endeavour for the promotion of gay marriage in Europe, Americas, and in fact all around the world have hypocritically put a ban over gay marriage in Israel?

http://www.advocate.com/world/2016/2/29/...ghts-bills

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/...recognized

No.

To me my comment is a good description of what ANYONE who acts that way is, not just a handful of hard-line Jews.

It's a good description about what a piece of shit you are for coming here and pushing your hateful bullshit, all the while lying repeatedly to us about a whole section of humanity, and about us, somehow comparing us to the same group you so loathe (or at least you claim).

Personally, seeing you come onto this site and, knowing what the members here are like, making claims that you KNEW would cause controversy, claims that would have been welcome at many sites such as stormfront  or any other piece of shit site like it, indicates to me that you're simply here trolling.

So, I will say this as my final comment before I put you on my ignore list:  If this is TRULY your opinion, Go fuck yourself.  You are a despicable piece of shit that doesn't deserve to live in the world of decent people.  If you love the Nazis and their shit so much, I honestly hope you end up as many of them did.

I have to go have a shower now.  Even dealing with scum like you over the 'net makes me feel dirty.

[bennyboy]

Personally, seeing you come onto this site and, knowing what the members here are like, making claims that you KNEW would cause controversy, claims that would have been welcome at many sites such as stormfront  or any other piece of shit site like it, indicates to me that you're simply here trolling.

I've sometimes said that I think Harris should be banned for proselytizing and for hate speech. Here we are in the philosophy forum section, which he has hijacked for his bullshit rant about Jews and homosexuals. At the very least, his type of drivel should be dumped in one of the religious sections, as there's nothing philosophical about it.

[Isis]

Move his threads to R'lyeh.

Problem solved.

[Harris]

Harris Wrote:My question remains unchanged:
Were the scientific ideas conceivable without the universe?

bennyboy Wrote: Nope.

Is not the Cause of Universe greater than all scientific ideas?

There are 3 possible answers to mysterious questions, like "Where did existence come from."
1) I don't know.
2) I don't know, but maybe it could have been X, Y or Z.
3) I definitely know, because somebody told me so / my favorite sand-people text says so.

(1) is the simplest. (2) is fine, too. (3) is a failure of basic logic-- authorities cannot tell you the truth, unless they can demonstrate that they have access to it.

Your problem is that the Quran cannot be shown to come from Allah, not can the Universe be shown to be created by Allah, nor can Allah be shown to exist at all, except by special pleading and other logic fails that your average 5 year-old would jump on if his IQ was okay. All you have is super-weak logic: "It must have come from SOMEWHERE. . . so Allah."

Indeed, Universe has come from “SOMEWHERE.” Is not it? Do you disagree?

"It must have come from SOMEWHERE. . . so Allah" is a plausible logic compared to "It must have come from SOMEWHERE. . . so Nothingness” which is nonsensical.

Again, you've chosen (3). The fact is that we do not KNOW where the Universe came from, but there's nothing special about a sentient Allah that solves any philosophical problem. Consider:
(1) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a sentient deity, Allah, which is uncaused.
(2) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a magic space monkey, which is uncaused.
(3) Since everything needs a cause, the Universe, which cannot have caused itself, must have been caused by a philosophical yin/yang symbol, which is uncaused.

It doesn't matter what we put at the end, because it is special pleading. We are using an uncaused causer to solve the problem-- that everything must be caused. We are saying "Everything must be caused, but one special thing." That is the literal and exact definition of special pleading, and it is a logical fallacy. Given any of (1) through (3), we can arrive at:

(4) In order for the Universe to exist, SOMETHING must be uncaused. Since something may be uncaused, then the Universe would violate no rules of causality if IT were uncaused. Therefore, given no evidence for Allah, magic space monkeys, or philosophical yin/yang symbols, the simplest explanation is that the Universe itself is eternal and uncaused.

POINT ONE:
According to the most credible cosmological model of physics “The Big Bang Model,” Universe has a BEGINNING. Physicists have developed this model based on the concept that Universe is EXPANDING which Hubble has discovered by means of “Redshift method” for which he earned a Nobel prize. On top of that the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation put the BEGINNING concept on an unequivocal empirical footing. So, Science says that Universe has a BEGINNING and Logic says that anything that has a BEGINNING has a CAUSE so Universe has a CAUSE and it is not UNCAUSED. LOGIC also says anything that has a BEGINNING has an END therefore, Universe is not ETERNAL either.

“We are therefore fairly confident that we have the right picture, at least back to about one second after the BIG BANG.”

Chapter 8
The origin and fate of the universe
A Brief History of Time
Stephen Hawking

“Everyone (with the exception of certain school boards in the United States) now knows that the universe is not static but is expanding and that the expansion BEGAN in an incredibly hot, dense BIG BANG approximately 13.72 billion years ago.”

CHAPTER 1
A COSMIC MYSTERY STORY: BEGINNINGS
A Universe from Nothing:
Why there is something rather than nothing
Lawrence M. Krauss

POINT TWO:
Universe came into being not by means of some happy accident inside Nothingness. The idea of Accident inside Nothingness is in itself an absurd, worse than any imaginable FAIRY TALE and worse than MAGIC.

“In the past, most physicists (including me) have chosen to ignore the elephant—even to deny its existence. They preferred to believe that nature’s laws follow from some elegant mathematical principle and that the apparent design of the universe is merely a lucky accident. But recent discoveries in astronomy, cosmology, and above all, String Theory have left theoretical physicists little choice but to
think about these things.”

Preface
The Cosmis Landscape
"String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design"
Leonard Susskind

"If you equate the probability of the birth of a bacteria cell to chance assembly of its atoms, eternity will not suffice to produce one...”
Page 356, volume 2
A Guided Tour of the Living Cell

POINT THREE
Nothing in the universe is happening randomly and spontaneously.

“Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?”
A Brief History of Time
Chapter 12 Conclusion
Stephen Hawkins

Quote
Look at the five “words” below, knowing that they were written with an alphabet of 20 letters:

ILDIGDASAQELAEILKNAKTILWNGP
GLDIGPDSVKTFNDALDTTQTIIWNGP
GLDVGPKTRELFAAPIARAKLIVWNGP
GLDCGTESSKKYAEAVARAKQIVWNGP
GLDCGPESSKKYAEAVTRAKQIVWNGP

If I were to tell you the words were typed separately by five different monkeys, would you believe me? Not if you have taken more than a passing glance at them. “All five words end with WNGP,” you would point out to me, “and for monkeys hitting keyboards independently, this cannot be.” Actually it can. But the probability of such a coincidence is one in 655 billion billions. You would need a pretty large number of monkeys for five of them to have a reasonable chance of coming up with the same word ending. Surely, a more likely possibility is that the monkeys cheated. They copied! … If you look more closely, you will see that four other letters, in addition to the terminal four, are the same in all five words (LD in position 2 and 3, G in position 5, and I in position 2

This lowers the odds of a fortuitous coincidence to one in 429,500 billion billion billion billions. Trillions of planets like ours could not possibly provide enough monkeys. And this is not all. Five other letters are the same in four out of the five words (G in position 1, S in position 8, A in position 13, and AK in positions 19–2

Even more striking, the two last words have 25 out of 27 letters in common; they differ only in positions 6 and 17. There can be no doubt. If monkeys there were, they most certainly did not hit their typewriters’ keys at random.

The words shown are not inventions. They represent real things, fragments of molecules called proteins, which are very long chains of up to several hundred units called amino acids, of which 20 different kinds are used in the assembly of the chains. Each word represents the sequence of a 27-amino acid piece (each letter standing for a given kind of amino acid) present somewhere in the heart of a large protein molecule containing more than 400 amino acids. This protein is an enzyme, or biological catalyst, known as phosphoglycerate kinase, PGK for short. PGK is a key participant in one of the most fundamental processes that take place in living organisms, the conversion of sugar to alcohol (or lactic acid), which occurs in virtually all forms of life, whether microbes of various sorts, plants, molds, or animals (including humans).

Now comes the central piece of information, which explains why the words serve as an introduction to this book. The five structures shown belong to the PGKs of five widely different organisms. The first one belongs to Escherichia coli, or colibacillus, a common microbe that we all harbor in our gut. The others are from the wheat, fruit-fly, horse, and human PGKs, respectively:

Colibacillus:------ILDIGDASAQELAEILKNAKTILWNGP
Wheat:-----------GLDIGPDSVKTFNDALDTTQTIIWNGP
Fruitfly:----------GLDVGPKTRELFAAPIARAKLIVWNGP
Horse:-----------GLDCGTESSKKYAEAVARAKQIVWNGP
Human:---------GLDCGPESSKKYAEAVTRAKQIVWNGP

What our monkey parable has brought to light is that the similarities among the PGKs of our sample organisms could not possibly be due to chance. A possibility could be—this, no doubt, would be the “creationist” view—that the similarities betray the intervention of a “hidden hand.”

End Quote

Life Evolving: Molecules, Mind, and Meaning
Pages 3-4
Christian de Duve

POINT FOUR:
All events and actions are intelligently controlled by mysterious coding system that are embed within the bodies and forces involved in those controlled events.

“The six feet of the DNA coiled inside every one of our bodies 100 trillion cells contain a four-letter chemical that spells out precise assembly instructions for all proteins from which our bodies are made … No hypothesis come even close to explaining how information got into biological matter by naturalistic means.”
Lee Strobel

POINT FIVE:
Coding (a law to control and exploit certain actions) is a high end intellectual act which is specific only to humans. However, presence of code in each and every object in nature is beyond comprehension of human intellect. Every event from subatomic level to a level of galaxies is an extremely precise action. This fact reflects the presence of another Intelligent Being who is hidden from direct human sight but visible in all controlled and guided actions in the Universe. We theists call this Being “God.”

“A code system is always a result of a mental process (it requires an intelligent origin or inventor). It should be emphasized that matter as such is unable to generate any code. All experiences indicate that a thinking being voluntarily exercising his own free will, cognition, and creativity, to produce a code. There is no known law of nature, no known process, and no known sequence of events which can cause information by itself in matter.”
In The Beginning Was Information,
Pages 4, 67, 79, and 10
Dr. Werner Gritt

“… If you look at the details of biochemistry and molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer. And that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe.”
Richard Dawkins
The R. Dawkins Foundation
R. Dawkins Answers Questions

“… the special properties of the physical universe are so surprisingly fine-tuned that they demand explanation.”
Preface
The Cosmis Landscape
"String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design"
Leonard Susskind

“… we really do have a big problem to explain in the apparent fine-tuning of the fundamental constants.”
Page 142
The God Delusion
Richard Dawkins

"The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. ... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."
Page 125
A Brief History of Time
Stephen Hawking

“A common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that THERE ARE NO BLIND FORCES worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”
Fred Hoyle
"The Universe: Past and Present Reflections,"
Engineering and Science,
November 1981


“Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alternation of the night and the day; in the sailing of the ships through the ocean for the profit of mankind; in the rain which Allah Sends down from the skies, and the life which He gives therewith to an earth that is dead; in the beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the earth; in the change of the winds, and the clouds which they Trail like their slaves between the sky and the earth;- (Here) indeed are Signs for a people that are wise.”
Al Baqarah (2)
-Verse 164-

“Allah is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; is firmly established on the throne (of authority); He has subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law)! Each one runs (its course) for a term appointed. He doth regulate all affairs, explaining the signs in detail, that ye may believe with certainty in the meeting with your Lord.”
Ar Ra'd (13)
-Verse 2-

Freddie Mercury, the singer in "Queen," inspired millions. You have not.
Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, has helped bring many technological wonders into the world. You have not.
Tchaikovsky, the great composer, changed the face of music forever. You have not.
Marlon Brando, the actor, inspired millions. You have not.

There are also very many who had no women around them, and whose correspondence strongly indicates that they were gay:
Shakespeare.
Da Vinci
Plato and Aristotle

What is the connection between homosexuality and great music? Are you saying that homosexuality increases the intellectual level of a homosexual? Was Einstein a gay if that is the case? If so then why not every homosexual is Einstein?

Unfortunately, your breath-taking argument lacks any credible reasoning that may inspire to consider homosexuality as a beneficial trait for humanity…

Special Note on Einstein
There are growing number of people who are vigorously arguing that Einstein was another Jewish deceiver. They are giving evidences proving that his first wife has done all the work of plagiarism for him because he was not capable even to plagiarise other peoples’ work which he has published as his.

It would be a rocking news if it turns out to be true.

But you have refused to answer my question. Demonstrate that YOU provide any value to society. What have you achieved, other than grumping about Jews on an internet forum? Reveal your greatness to us all! *holds breath*

Seriously, though, what benefit do you bring to humanity? Because it seems to me you are doing everything you can to insult rather than to inspire, to spite rather than to love, to blame rather than to accept. I think you are a cancer to society, and that you have little good to offer it. Prove me wrong.

Well, no one respect the crooks so why do I.

First you have tried to connect homosexuality with great music and gave an impression that for being a great singer one have to be a homosexual and here you are trying to connect homosexuality with the person of Harris and giving an impression if Harris is not a homosexual he cannot be beneficial.

It seems you have consumed all of your mockery against the truth and you need some serious support of some Mockery Bank.

Neither I will dance in front of haters who can reject any truth in their jealously, envy, and hatred nor I am going to praise myself in front of wise people as they do not need persuasion to appreciate the truth.

That's a lot of work required to validate the non-pedophilia of a fairy-tale's founder. There's a simpler solution-- don't bother with the fairy tale, since Allah cannot be shown to exist, nor to have any influence in our lives.

One of the noteworthy feature of you guys is, whenever you throw a flamboyant statement you never give any supporting reference with it. You throw it like a gossip and surround it by stupidity to distract people from the reality. This is a very old Jewish trick to quote something out of context and to quote only part of the whole story to twist the reality and give it a new fallacious meaning.

You have squeezed the age of Aisha out of whole incident and make it appear as if Aisha has got married with Prophet Mohammad at the age of 9 which is not true because in actuality her parents only informed her about their intensions to marry her with Prophet Mohammad when she was 9. Even worse, you have twisted the reality so viciously that you have produced another lie that Prophet Mohammad had SEX with 9 years old girl (without being married with her) and based on this sole fictitious scenario you SLANDER Prophet Mohamad for being a Paedophile.

Can you see how hostile you are? I can give plenty of historical records to show how nasty you (Jews) are.

Did you give any historical reference to support your SLANDER? Are you capable of providing historically verified facts to show that Prophet Mohammad had sex with 9 years old girl?

Answer is BIG NO.

I go a step further and say that you did not even know that Aisha is the one who is telling the story of her marriage and I bet you do not have a slightest bit of idea how deeply she was inspired by the personality of Prophet Mohammad.

Try to find a single quote where Aisha has expressed her displeasure against her marriage with Prophet Mohammad.

You are thinking like a Jew for whom love has no other meaning than sex, homosexuality, incest, and paedophilia. So, it is you who need lot of work to clear out your mind from all kinds of evil and hedonistic plans.

The purpose of Jewish Media and atheist forum is to distort the facts and misrepresent them to unjustly damage the reputation of anyone and anything that hinder Jews from becoming the undisputed masters of the world. SLANDRING a non-Jew is a HOLY COW in Talmud.

No.
To me my comment is a good description of what ANYONE who acts that way is, not just a handful of hard-line Jews.
It's a good description about what a piece of shit you are for coming here and pushing your hateful bullshit, all the while lying repeatedly to us about a whole section of humanity, and about us, somehow comparing us to the same group you so loathe (or at least you claim).
Personally, seeing you come onto this site and, knowing what the members here are like, making claims that you KNEW would cause controversy, claims that would have been welcome at many sites such as stormfront or any other piece of shit site like it, indicates to me that you're simply here trolling.
So, I will say this as my final comment before I put you on my ignore list: If this is TRULY your opinion, Go fuck yourself. You are a despicable piece of shit that doesn't deserve to live in the world of decent people. If you love the Nazis and their shit so much, I honestly hope you end up as many of them did.
I have to go have a shower now. Even dealing with scum like you over the 'net makes me feel dirty.

Jewish intellect cannot cross the boundaries of hate, deception, and hostility because they have submitted their souls to their unscrupulous hedonistic desires.

I've sometimes said that I think Harris should be banned for proselytizing and for hate speech. Here we are in the philosophy forum section, which he has hijacked for his bullshit rant about Jews and homosexuals. At the very least, his type of drivel should be dumped in one of the religious sections, as there's nothing philosophical about it.

Mocking non-Jews is a Jewish Holy Ritual and Jews enjoy it doing. On the other hand, they cannot tolerate when non-Jews mock them. That is the reason why Atheist forum is full of anti-Christian and anti-Muslim comments whereas I am the only person in the entire atheist forum who is condemning the deceits of Jews and Judaism.

No one can be more arrogant than the Jews.

“A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.”
Baba Mezia 59b

[bennyboy]

Harris Wrote:My question remains unchanged:
Were the scientific ideas conceivable without the universe?

bennyboy Wrote: Nope.

Is not the Cause of Universe greater than all scientific ideas?

You haven't shown the Universe to have been caused at all.

Indeed, Universe has come from “SOMEWHERE.” Is not it? Do you disagree?

Either everything that exists must have a cause, or some things do not need to have been caused. You say the Universe must come from "SOMEWHERE," but you do not demand that God must come from "SOMEWHERE." Therefore, it is possible that something may exist which does not come from "SOMEWHERE."

If something may be said to exist without needing to be created, then I would argue that conservation of energy/mass/etc. itself is a prime rule, and that the Universe doesn't come from somewhere.

POINT ONE:
According to the most credible cosmological model of physics “The Big Bang Model,” Universe has a BEGINNING. Physicists have developed this model based on the concept that Universe is EXPANDING which Hubble has discovered by means of “Redshift method” for which he earned a Nobel prize. On top of that the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation put the BEGINNING concept on an unequivocal empirical footing. So, Science says that Universe has a BEGINNING and Logic says that anything that has a BEGINNING has a CAUSE so Universe has a CAUSE and it is not UNCAUSED. LOGIC also says anything that has a BEGINNING has an END therefore, Universe is not ETERNAL either.

1) CAPS ARE ANNOYING. I can read-- you don't have to HIGHLIGHT the KEYWORDS for me.
2) The Big Bang singularity was timeless, in the same way that Allah is. Note this: Allah is not eternal, since eternity relies on a framework with infinite time. But if you want to call timelessness "eternity," then the Big Bang is still a better fit for cosmogony than Allah is. I predict you will special plead: "But who MADE the Big Bang singularity?" And I'll say "But who MADE Allah." And you'll go on about how Allah doesn't need to be made.

Get this. . . it doesn't matter what model of reality you want to favor or contest. Your causal argument fails to special pleading-- the idea that everything must be caused, but not God. So. . . not everything DOES need to be created, and the argument is self-defeating.

Didn't read the rest of your text wall. I'll go back to some of it later if I have a lot of free time.

[bennyboy]

What is the connection between homosexuality and great music? Are you saying that homosexuality increases the intellectual level of a homosexual? Was Einstein a gay if that is the case? If so then why not every homosexual is Einstein?

Your logic fail is real. You should think before you say dumb stuff like this.

I didn't say there's a connection between homosexuality and great music. I said that there are many homosexuals who have contributed positively to humanity-- whereas you have not. Therefore your criticism of homosexuality on the basis that homosexuals cannot contribute to humanity is obviously not well-founded.

Nor, because gay people can be great scientists, is that an assertion that Einstein was gay because he was a scientist or vice versa. That's a false syllogism, and is taught in Logic 101, which you apparently have not yet taken.

Let me use your own logic. You say homosexuals have not contributed to humanity. YOU have not contributed to humanity. Therefore, by your brilliant reasoning methods, you are a homosexual. Do you accept this logic? If not, then don't be stupid enough to use it in your own arguments.

[Alex K]

This cosmology discussion would be right up my alley, but I just can't bring myself to do it

[bennyboy]

This cosmology discussion would be right up my alley, but I just can't bring myself to do it

Well, I'm assuming as a physicist that you are a proponent of the BBT.

If so, is there anything you can say to address the question of where the Big Bang could have come from, or is that question stuck in metaphysics and philosophy?