Freedom From Atheism Foundation

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Real scientists recognize natural patterns, appreciate the math behind them, come to terms that it's not happenchance, and eventually become deists. Things like DNA being a database with checksums and fantastical properties that we can't even imitate or understand the combinations of 4 little base pairs; it simply doesn't just poop itself out.

Basically, you're one step removed from people who believe in god because they see a picture of jesus in a piece of toast or the eyes of god in the wood grain on their closet door. You want to believe so damn badly, so you grasp at whatever you can to give your beliefs enough credibility for you to believe them without feeling like it's purely faith. You need to just come to grips with the fact that faith is exactly what you have and no evidence is required for you to believe it.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Shamalam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Logic has no place within this thread, good sir.

Yeah, I'm starting to realize that. The arrival of Glenzig should have been my first clue.

[r00t]

There is plenty of evidence for God, if we are talking about God as the definition of a supernatural unexplained creator: 1) Existence, 2) Everything

[Ahldagor]

i always like it when people personify evolution as if it has controlled how creatures have changed like it is a god leaving out the randomness that is at its core

[r00t]

Originally Posted by Shamalam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're suggesting that real scientists, when faced with something they can't immediately explain, simply give up and start believing in god? As in, if they don't reach the same conclusions as you, they aren't a real scientist?

Man, I wish I could be 14 again. Freakin' adorable.

That's exactly what I'm saying.. All of the greats from Franklin to Einstein have been deists for a reason. Science proves things aren't just the adorable fantasy that things exist without being created, a quite common atheist belief.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Rellapse40]

Dawkins and Hitchens are fucking annoying spent 2 hours watching a documentary a while back on these two cum guzzlers. 2 fucking hours i will never get back would rather jerk off to animal porn

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are so fucking retarded. Every one of your posts is a nonstop train of idiocy. Please stop.

Good explanation. I look forward to another well worded rebuttal.

[Ahldagor]

don't get pedantic and look at the episteme of the notions

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i always like it when people personify evolution as if it has controlled how creatures have changed like it is a god leaving out the randomness that is at its core

Its because its unreasonable to have highly organized extremely complex structures that are the very building blocks of life and tell people that they just kinda happened that way for no rhyme or reason.

[Shamalam]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's exactly what I'm saying.. All of the greats from Franklin to Einstein have been deists for a reason. Science proves things aren't just the adorable fantasy that things exist without being created, a quite common atheist belief.

Science proves no such thing, and the fact that you think otherwise suggests a complete lack of understanding of how science actually works. In fact, "things exist without being created" actually seems to apply quite well to your idea of a creator/god. If nothing can exist without a creator, who created god? Did he just create himself one day? If he was able to come into being without being created by something greater, why can't the same be true of all life as we know it?

And while we're at it, what gives you the right to decide for us who the "great" scientists are? I could just as easily cherry pick some "great" atheist scientists, too, but what would that prove?