Topic: IRYA: Syntax
+Anonymous A — 10.8 years ago #43,491

Can you give proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct?
Well?
Ci͔a̱͇̪̟o͙̼̟̰,͍͍ ̘̥T͍͔̻͓̮̬͓h̝̥͔̱̩e ̳̜D̥͖̥̦o͈̝c͇̜͍̘t̹̲̻̻̯͔͎o̲̣̙̰̭̹r̻̺̺̫.̘͙
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
| Sprite. | - | 0% | |
| Boners. | - | 0% | |
+Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 7 minutes later[T] [B] #475,277
@OP
Atheism is very very much the observation that no compelling evidence for the existence of God(s) Goddesses has been presented.
Also who the fuck gave anyone the right to discount all the Roman Greek American Indian East Indian - Ancient cave dweller deities and boil them down to one clueless worthless God?
At least the Church next door to me SRF gives much homage to several East Indian Gods n Buddha. They do toss in Jesus fucking H Christ in that mix.
They also have to endure my often Bar-B-Q smoke when the wind is not blowing directly west as is usual -
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,278
@previous (Syntax )
That's neither proof nor evidence. Also, show me some transitional fossils. Hint: they don't exist.
C̳̝̟̜i̠̱ḁ͈̰̗o̮̝̩͕̳͙,̣̫͓̺͍̺͇ ̩̣̦̖T͇͖͕ͅh̦̙͉͈e̪͓̬̭͕ ̠̜̻͓͕̩D̖̦o͉̭͎̫ͅc͔t͕̞̻̼o͙̩̯r̭̥.͖
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 8 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,282
@previous (A)
I no something about much but having no background in transitional fossils did this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil
Suggest you read it for update -
Indeed, Archaeopteryx was discovered just two years later, in 1861, and represents a classic transitional form between dinosaurs and birds. Many more transitional fossils have been discovered since then, and there is now abundant evidence of how all classes of vertebrates are related, much of it in the form of transitional fossils.
However it seems you are some kind of believer in God - Look if you need that as a crutch - If you are into Cannibalism re eating body of Jesus and drinking Jesus blood?
Hey I might make fun of you for it but its also a free country for most - You are free to believe Micky Mouse is a living real character that disney created so as to live forever
Me I think your ok in my book since you make nice fun of the fake The Doctor - So please keep at it.
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 23 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,289
@previous (Syntax )
Why do you think it's ok to murder babies and use the fetuses in the production of Coca-Cola and other products meant for human consumption?
Ci̦̗̜̬a͔o̫,̱͖̜̖͉̘̻ ͔̹̬̮̯̞T͚͙ͅh̪͓̣͎̺͔e̻̱ ̲̯̻̱D̤͕̬̲̯oc̹̱̫t̺͓̯͖̹̳ͅo̟͇ͅr̯̝̣̭͈.͓͚͍̹͚͓ͅ
+Anonymous C — 10.8 years ago, 23 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,290
@475,282 (Syntax )
Are you saying he makes fun of himself?
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 9 minutes later, 32 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,305
@475,289 (A)
> fetuses in the production of Coca-Cola and other products meant for human consumption?
What the fuck? I had to submit that line to Google to decode it. Found a bunch of links but decided to select the one that might add some humor to such garbage YET even they couldn't
http://gawker.com/5879254/which-companies-are-using-aborted-human-fetuses-in-their-food
@previous (C)
> Are you saying he makes fun of himself?
There are several interesting theories on the Pretend Doctor vs the Ciao The Doctor. Frankly its not like any of this adds cash in my wallet.
The reply to Ciao Doc is maybe my first reply EVER? I think so - 4Sure he is not as smart as I thought given he supports God nor had a clue about Transitional Fossils or Fetus's
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 1 minute later, 34 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,307
@previous (Syntax )
But how do you explain that carbon 14 dating is so inaccurate?
C̱̹͈̣͙ia̘̬̠͔̥o,̫̩̠̳̹ ̥̗T͉̯̤h͍̙̯͉͈͔̤e͖̭̮͈ ̱͕͈̘̥͉d̞̘͈o̤̦̼c̪͕̩t̠̗o̖̭r̠̬͈̦̟̞̲.͔̩̖̱͚
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 5 minutes later, 39 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,312
@previous (A)
Been a bunch of years since I used info on carbon 14 dating and then it was only for hobby stuff - Study of a limited group of American Indians in California
Have NOT looked at updates other then wot I view on NPR NOVA - About to spend a solid 13 minutes on looking at just one Globalstar Satellite telemetry download or I wood hit Wiki for a update clue
Maybe 20 mins from now will
Save me the time n tell me Y its inaccurate - NOT that from memory it was accurate to exact date to the very minute in history
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 9 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #475,316
@OP
@475,278 (A)
@475,289 (A)
@475,307 (A)
You're sure spending a lot of time and effort on troll questions.
But while you are on an obsessive posting spree, please explain this quote from Charles Darwin himself:
> To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #475,320
@475,312 (Syntax )
It's been 25 minutes. Drop the telemetry download. It's not important. Get on the Darwin quote ASAP instead.
C̼̭̱͖͍͙͍i̼̭̣̰̳͕̞a̳͙̦͉̙o͙̗,̯̺̱͇̱̪ ͔Th͚͎͍͖̭͖͖e̹̬̤̠̤ ̙̩̗̯D͎͉̻o̗̠̜̝c̻̗̺̫̗͙ͅt͇o͇͍̳̗͙̹r͎͉̰̙͉͓ͅ.̺
(Edited 11 seconds later.)
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 41 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #475,326
@475,316 (A)
> You're sure spending a lot of time and effort on troll questions.
Unique amount of dead time between Satellite passes over Command n Control sites with so much going so good with one minor odd exception
> > To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
Shame just shame on you - That is a Troll question
How to misquote Darwin
Misquoting Darwin is a cottage industry amongst creationists and, sadly, others use their methods. It's easy to do, just take the first sentence (or part of one as Morgan did) and pretend it's the point he was making. This quote is one of the most famous misquotes of Darwin in this style, as used by many many creationists. They quote the first sentence only: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." This, however, is merely Darwin's rhetorical setup; they have to stop fast before they get to what he was actually saying. From On the Origin of Species, on the subject of the evolution of the eye:
ORGANS OF EXTREME PERFECTION AND COMPLICATION.
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility.
Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species, 6th Edition (above from Project Gutenberg)
@previous (A)
> Drop the telemetry download.
Telemetry view is limited in time for one pass by a Command n Control station. If at 90 degrees directly overhead it can be 16 minutes horizon to horizon (Almost as Dish has a Software stop to prevent full bottom of Horizon) No want to cook anyone with 10 Megawatts near by.) 13 minutes is a very good amount of time to have -
Hope you are pleased with one click on your popular Darwin misquote - Google as a stock I own is very Good - as a product its most excellent
+Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #475,327
@OP
Proof PROOF PROOF:
"Niggers tongue my anus___________________"(Edited 7 seconds later.)
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #475,328
@previous (Syntax )+The Robot — 10.8 years ago, 59 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,330
Beep bop boop
+Anonymous F — 10.8 years ago, 25 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,333
@475,278 (A)
> That's neither proof nor evidence. Also, show me some transitional fossils. Hint: they don't exist.
Illegible madblathering. Protip: He doesn't need to show you "some transitional fossils" as you are conversing with one in this thread. Hint: you're welcome.
C̣̹̯i̜̝͚̭a̘͇̹̺̖̘̥̥o͖̮̪̖̺̙̲̰,͚͖̼ ̳̫̤T̤͎h̯͉̥̩̪̣̥e̗̖̟̬͚ͅ ̩̪͈͔̭̫͓Ḏ͎͈̯ͅo̰͓c̬̘̪̜̙͉t̠̲̗͖̖̼̱͇o̺͚͚͕̞͉̭͚r̼̪̝.̦̤
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
·Anonymous C — 10.8 years ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,335
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 3 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,350
@475,326 (Syntax )
Thank you for acknowledging my troll question and typing and copypasting those sentences. Since I have you dancing by my flute and you can't help but respond to whatever bullshit I throw at you, please explain why, if there is no God, 7.5 billion of the world's population believe in Him. (Checkmate athiests.)
C͚̞̭̻͎i͓̱ạ̘̜̪o̜̙̦̪,̙̮͕̝͔̤ ̣̮̫͙̥T̮̭̜̺̹̻h̗̺̤̗ͅe͈͎͕̹ ̹̣̼̺̙D͇̭͎̙̫̙ͅo̞̺͉̯̞c̫̗t͖̝͓o̦͈̹r̦̟̫.͍̻̜̻̬͓̤
·Anonymous C — 10.8 years ago, 11 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,391
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,397
@475,350 (A)
> why, if there is no God, 7.5 billion of the world's population believe in Him. (Checkmate athiests.)
You who believes in Jesus the Jew Christ. As expected your numbers are fucked up - Did you also go to same schools as that other pretend fake Doctor?
Total number of people that believe in the one and only so called God -
Why? Cause of course they be
DUMB as Fuck n need a Crutch
Here’s the breakdown of “The Global Religious Landscape,” based on an analysis of more than 2,500 censuses, surveys and population registers:
• 2.2 billion Christians (32 percent of the world’s population).
• 1.6 billion Muslims (23 percent).
• 1 billion Hindus (15 percent.
• 500 million Buddhists (7 percent).
• 400 million people (6 percent) practicing various folk or traditional religions, including African traditional religions, Chinese folk religions, American Indian religions and Australian aboriginal religions.
There are 14 million Jews, and an estimated 58 million people - slightly less than 1 percent of the global population belong to other religions, including the Baha’i faith, Jainism, Sikhism, Shintoism, Taoism, Tenrikyo, Wicca and Zoroastrianism, “to mention just a few,” the study says.
About half of all Christians in the world are Catholic, 37 percent are part of the Protestant tradition, 12 percent are Orthodox Greek or Russian.
The largest population of Christians (243 million) is found, incidentally, in the United States, followed by Brazil, Mexico, Russia, the Philippines, Nigeria and China.
NOW NOTICE Many choices of the real answer to how many - I chose the most suspect one of first page of
Search
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/dec/23/84-percent-world-population-has-faith-third-are-ch/
Source if of course that Wacko Sun Myung Moon - So you can expect a possible inflation on number of Christians - Muslims? Both believe in Ur Worthless God = 55% of Planet Earth population
So you say 7.5 Billion n Washington Times/Sun Myung Moon says
only 3.8 Billion wacko dumb as fuck people believe in God
Anyway nice to see you admit your as in image
(Edited 1 minute later.)
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 22 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,409
@previous (Syntax )
Thank you for taking the time to obsessively respond to all this bullshit that I don't even believe in. Your meth fueled typing bouts shall surely
not go unrewarded.
While I've got you hooked, could you please explain how there can still be apes if we evolved from apes? Checkmate again, atheists.
C̜̠̼̰i͓̺͚̤̗̥̞͟a̬̳̳̤͙o̗̼͞,͇̬͈͍̹ ̡͖T͚͔̭̮͖͈̟h͚̜̰͜e ̹̤̯͎̗̙̰D͇͉͙̝̘o̙͈̻͠c̶̜̫t͕̤̣͇̩̝͟o͎̞r̸̬̘͉̱̤̹̦.̪̪̮
+23skidoo !fhxsrNUEjI — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,411
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 21 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,413
@previous (23skidoo !fhxsrNUEjI)·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 24 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,421
@previous (Syntax )
Take your mind off the mudslimes and answer my question, syntax.
> Could you please explain how there can still be apes if we evolved from apes? Checkmate again, atheists.
See:
@475,409 (A)
C͚͕i͖͇a͎͎͉̗o̭̺̜,̤͚ ̻̣͚̞Ț͇͙̠̤͙̖h̩͖͓̮̮̩ḙ̜͍͍̘̠ͅ D̟͖̳͙͎̥͔oc̞̯̫t̼̟̰̰͇̹͈o̪͔̣̥̰r̼̲.
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,423
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,425
@previous (Syntax )
What, you mean you don't have an answer? Have you given up on evilutionism?
C͈̲̤̫̯͓i̯a̻̞̠̺̥̣̪o̙,͙̦͓̣ͅͅ ̣̠̟̲̗̺̞T̩̰̩̥̫h͎̺͓̙ͅe̲̱͖͙ͅ ̜͕͉D̯͚̺̤̣̙o̜̰̮c̪̲̝̗̗̺ț͍̟o̜̹͇͇̩̰r͈̻͔͇.̗͚
·Syntax — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,426
·Anonymous A (OP) — 10.8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[T] [B] #475,427
@previous (Syntax )
Where did the effort go? Did you run out of meth again?
Ci͇a͇͚̻͈ͅo͕ͅ,͓͕ ̩̪͔̖̣̱̤Th̪͚͓̤̦e͇̱̯͕̘̩̺ ͖̱̪̳D͙o̱̳ct̟o̭̤r͕͖̫̙̬̗̬.̩̲̱̹̦͙
Start a new topic to continue this conversation.
Or browse the latest topics.