If Questions Came By Instant Messaging, Only Longer

Question from Rachael:
so u think that god is stupid well i have a few words for u i was like that at one time screw god but i learned the hard way that u need to rethink that god is real as real as the sun and the stars how do u think that u made in this earth i know from ur mom but how do u explain the 1st person on earth theres a hell and a heaven and ur going to be in hell if u don’t get ur act right or some day gods gonna strike u dead all those problems u have in your life could be resolved in just going to a church and praying u will find that that will help u

Answer by SmartLX:
Went to church and prayed, rather a lot. Many atheists started out religious simply because of their upbringing. If you believe, you can convince yourself God is talking back to you, but if not there is usually silence and that’s fine.

Regarding the “ur mom” argument, the line of ancestry goes back past the first humans to the first primates, to the first mammals, to the first tetrapods, to the first vertebrates, to the first multi-celled organisms, to the very first life, and at that point if you look practically anywhere on the site right now you’ll see the same argument raging over whether natural abiogenesis is possible. If there’s no god then it happened, no question, and if there is a god it still might have happened, but whether it’s more unlikely than the existence of a god is so subjective it’s an argument not worth having between a believer and a non-believer. Probabilities get us nowhere unless they’re 0 or 1.

If you’re still around, do comment and let us know how you “learned the hard way”.

51 thoughts on “If Questions Came By Instant Messaging, Only Longer”

  1. More christian threats. These people never have anything original to say. Then they whine and complain when they are treated with derision and contempt. They are too stupid to understand why.

      1. I did but apparently, you did not see it. Email me at slrman @ globomail.com Now it is telling me that I am sending spam. Therefore the spaces around the “@” in the address.

    1. Rachael, hell isn’t used by God to cause us to fear not accepting Him. For those who try to use salvation as a means of evading hell, they still would not be saved. Salvation comes from knowing God. And only those who have a longing to know Him will make the attempt. For those who fool themselves into believing that there is not God then they would have make the worst mistake in their lives. But God is wanting us to see that He is and that He loves us. Should we fear Him, only if we don’t realize that He loves us.
      And there is no hell presently. Hell is, or will be when Christ returns the second time. Please remember that all things must be proven by the Scripture. So, no where in Scripture does is say that man is immortal. This teaching came from other cultures, that has been incorporated into the teaching of the church during the time the Catholic church started compromising on biblical truth.
      The Bible plainly states that only God is immortal. It states that man will be granted immortality when Christ returns and the dead in Christ will rise first and we which are alive will be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye. So when someone dies they do not go to heaven or hell. They obey what God said would happen to them when they die. Genesis 3:19 “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return”
      So, God says to Adam that when he died he, (not his body), would return from where he was created from. To the dust of the earth. Also remember in Genesis 2:7 God told us what constituted a soul. ” And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” So we see from God that it took dust of the ground that He created, and breath from God, being breathed into the nostrils of Adam and then man became a living soul. As opposed to a dead soul when “3 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.” Psalm 146. Remember that breath of life that God shared with Adam that was breathed into his nostrils? Well, the Bible says that “then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”Ecclesiastes 17:7.
      The only thing is that the Hebrew word translated as “breath” in Genesis 2:3, is wrongly translated as “spirit” here in Ecclesiastes 12:7.
      4 “His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish”. But this is seen as being translated wrong when we checkout other translations of this verse. This is from the CEB, version. “before dust returns to the earth as it was before and the life-breath returns to God who gave it.”
      But the Bible says that God prevented man from receiving immortality when in he was force to leave the Garden of Eden in Genesis 3:22-24. “22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
      23 Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
      24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
      Now, what good would it do for God to prevent the body from living forever. God was trying to prevent the whole being from living forever, at least for now before the second coming.
      This along with many other texts that shows that when man dies, he sleeps for now. John 11. “11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
      12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
      13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
      14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.” So if man goes to sleep when he dies, that means he doesn’t go to heaven or hell. Check out Ecclesiastes 9: “5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
      6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun” And look at this to bat home the truth about death and hell. Psalm 115:17 “The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.” If a person did go to heaven when they died they would be praising God wouldn’t they? But here we see no, and why. It is as Jesus said, that they would be sleeping in death waiting. (Now you can ask me, for what the dead would be waiting for) Ok, I’m glad you asked me. Here is the reason straight out of God’s own word. Look at Daniel 12:2 “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” And 1 Thessalonians 4:13 “But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others who have no hope”
      This truth about what happens to us at death is all through the Bible. Only those who fail to study about death fail to see all the Bible contradicts a belief that when man dies they go to heaven or hell. But is just half of what needs to be corrected. Since man is not immortal, and can not live forever, then an eternal hell is not scriptural either. First off, it contradicts the most beautiful attribute of God. And that God is love. Remember earlier when God prevented man from eating from the tree of life. He said that man would live forever if he did. So God prevented man from doing this so that man would not have to suffer forever. The lie being spread that man would not die is a lie that was told the first time by the devil. In Genesis 2, it is recorded that God told man not to eat of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” or he would surly die. Genesis 2:17.
      But we find in Genesis 3:4 we find satan telling the first lie on this earth. “But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
      4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
      5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” We also see the devil, casting doubt upon God’s love for Adam and Eve. But the lie “ye shall not surely die”, is a lie that many Christian churches and therefor Christians are believing and teaching. And this means that they are not worshiping the true God. How could a loving God send someone to hell and torture them forever. This is a contradiction to God’s true nature. He can’t be a little of one and more of another. He is either all loving or He isn’t. And if He isn’t then He isn’t the true God. So that is why we see the contradictions that this teaching raises in the Bible. The dead are not immortal. They are not granted eternal life. As a matter of fact. Jesus himself told us who will receive eternal life. And that is found in probably the most famous Bible text in the world. John 3:16. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
      Jesus, that’s right Jesus said that the only ones who will receive eternal life, He said that “whosoever believeth in Him, should not perish but have everlasting life.” Now a question, what is the opposite of eternal life? Is it eternal torment or eternal suffering? No, the opposite of eternal life is eternal death. That is right death. Jesus once again shines the light of His truth from His word from Matthew 10:28 ” And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” And Romans 6:23 tells us that what the soul is paid for sin is “23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Now some people will look at this and say that God is not talking about death of the soul, trying to force the belief that the body can be separated from the body, but if God were not talking about the whole of man, in death then why is He not talking about it when He mentions about eternal life. He said that “the wages of sin is death” death for whom, for those who are sinful when Christ returns the second time. And that the gift of God is eternal life for who, just the soul? No, the whole being.
      Please don’t believe the lie that Satan is attempting to continue to push. Tell the devil and the church body that God is love and He would not torture a person in hell forever. But that there will be a short time of punishment when all the wicked will be tried before God’s throne and sentenced to hell fire from heaven. Look at Revelation 20. When the devil is loosed after being bound upon this earth, and then when all the wicked who were dead are now resurrected during the second resurrection, and then the devil deceives the wicked for one last time, convincing them to rise up to take the city of God, and then God rains fire down upon them. Quick question. (Where are the wicked resurrected at? In heaven or on this earth where they died? That is right the wicked who were dead and are now resurrected on this earth. And when they try to take God’s city, the fire of God rains down upon them, just as the fire rained down upon the wicked who were in Sodom and Gomorrah. But this time there will be so much fire that there will be a lake of fire and the Bible says that the devil, his demon friends and the earthly friends that followed him, will be thrown into the lake of fire, along with the ‘idea” of death and hell, and all will be burned up. We see this truth being told to us in Malachi 4 “For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
      2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
      3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts.”
      So remember in the beginning of this post. I said that hell was not yet. Well this is the hell, being spoken about in Malachi 4. Hell fire will rain down from heaven onto this earth, when the wicked will follow satan one last time. And God will punish them and then will start the cleansing of this earth from sin and from those who refused to follow God and showed that they would even follow satan in the last seconds of their lives. But you see the mercy of God. The wicked are not eternal as the righteous. The Bible said that the righteous were made immortal. “1 Corinthians 15:52
      In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed”
      1 Corinthians 15:53
      “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
      54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”
      No, the wicked were not changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye. They are still mortal, and therefor subject to the death, the eternal death, that the Bible speaks of. And to drive the point home that hell would have been on this earth and that there will be no more hell after God finishes cleaning the earth, look again at Malachi 4:3, “And ye shall tread down the wicked, for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this,” saith the Lord of hosts”
      The wicked will be ashes under the soles of the righteous. Why? Because “For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall be stubble. And the day that cometh shall burn them up,” saith the Lord of hosts, “that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” Malachi 4:1. Now look at 2 Peter 3:10 “But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat. The earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” Now look at verse 7 of the same chapter. The earth was reserved for fire. Which is referring to the time when God resurrects the wicked after the 1000 years when the devil was by himself because all the wicked were slain when Christ came back the second time. And then all the earth is cleansed and remade, and prepared to receive the City of God where the righteous will live for all eternity. “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” Revelation 21:4. Please, please accept Christ and allow Him to be yours.

      1. Your post is full of the usual lies and threats of all theists. It also depends heavily upon babble quotations. Those alone tell me there will be no rational content. There was not.

        You might learn the uses of paragraphs. Then your post would not resemble something written by an under-achieving 7th grade student.

  2. SmarLx, why comment and not allow direct rebuttal? And as you know, with out God nothing would have been. Since in all probability God was the One that started the “big bang” making all the matter and forming them into all the celestial bodies. At the same time, time and space came to be. How do I know this? Well, I’m glad you asked? (smile), God said He did it, and Science got it right this time. As I pointed out before, why would anything be, if all nothing has been nothing since before time began. And that makes God being before time. But I digress. It doesn’t make sense to believe that anything would have come into being from nothing. Because if there wasn’t God nothing would have remained nothing. No one can say it wouldn’t because when we have no money in our pockets, money never appears in our pockets, even if we wait millions of years.(smile). But where there is nothing, nothing always will be there. Unless an outside force acts upon that nothing. And only an intelligence makes or creates. So no God, no nothing.

  3. Circular reasoning. “God said it” so there must be a god. I would think that someone as well spoken as you are would not use such an absurd argument. As has been shown many times before, erudition does not equal intelligence.

    1. If something is the absolute truth and innerant then why would it ever rely on things that don’t have those two qualities? You may not like it but if something is completely true, it should rely only on itself and thus be circular.

      1. Ah yes, Bruggencate refers to that as “virtuous” circular reasoning. But you have no way to determine whether it really is the inerrant truth, because you only have one unverified source. It is a personal choice to take God’s supposed word for it, and God’s reliability becomes your own assertion. it also becomes impossible to make a sound logical argument in favour of God to anyone else, because the logical fallacy hasn’t gone anywhere, so all you can do is coax people to accept your assertion on faith.

      2. Your very reasoning is circular and so absurd I am surprised that even a theist would humiliate himself by using it. You may not like it, but if something is true, there should be no problem finding substantiating evidence of it. That evidence is something no religion has ever found. If you had verifiable proof, you would not need the lie of a paradise nor the empty threat of a hell. Lies and threats do not make a convincing argument or even a basis for debate.

        1. This has gotten very amusing. I always think 7th grade student when I don’t see paragraphs and as an adult call someone out on it, on an online forum. So worth it.
          I guess anyone who believes in a higher power should be ashamed and is most likely stupid. That doesn’t make sense. 6 billion people might actually be on to something that isn’t stupid and shameful.
          I would like to add some about witnesses and evidence but I already have and it gets discarded.
          When we all die we’ll find out who is stupid and who is shameful. How about for now we just quit the name calling, agree to disagree and maybe actually do something worthwhile.

          1. Can 6 billion people be wrong? Without a doubt. At one time almost everyone believed the Earth was flat even though the evidence it is not was plentiful and easy to see.

            Yes, using decent common English is important. Maybe not to you but that doesn’t keep anyone that “can’t be bothered” from looking like an under-educated moron.

            You have no evidence f you had a single verifiable fact you would use it instead of the lies and threats that comprise the totality of all religions.

            As far as name calling, that’s the pathetic dodge people always use when they hear the truth about themselves. FYI, when it is true, it is not name calling or insults, it is a description.

            You want to do something worthwhile? How about reading the babble objectively. I did so several times at an early age and it helped my see that it was a ludicrous collection of nonsense. Try to actually read it and question what yu read. Check out the “prophecies”. Did any of them happen? No they did not. I can furnish you dozens with absolute proof they did not. Ask yurself if there is any proof at all of the “miraculous” events described. Take the great flood. Is there any evidence of a cataclysmic even such as that? Is there enough water on the earth to completely inundate all the land masses?

            Why did your god have to kill all the animals and plants because some humans behaved exactly as an omniscient god knew they would when he created them. What did those animals, fish, and plants do? Yes the fish, too. I the rain was fresh water, the salt water creatures would die. If it were salt water, all the freshwater creatures would die and the salt would render the land barren for centuries.

            That’s just a sampling of he kind of absurd nonsense in your babble. Yes, theists insist it is the ineffable word of god. They demand that everyone believe it. That requires more suspension of disbelief than a James Bond film.

            1. So your fine with saying that 6 billion people, 85% of the world’s population is wrong and you happen to be right? I get that people can be wrong I get frustrated with it all the time. That said I don’t think that many are wrong, just 15% are. In case you didn’t find any there, was some sarcasm there. Gerald while he may not use paragraphs…. actually he does. Just not two enter key taps like….

              Example

              Another example
              So my church and my religion is lying and threatening when we do face painting or take pictures for people or run crafts or help a struggling family? You just lumped loads of good deeds and organizations into lies and threats.

              I can say someone isn’t smart or I can say they are stupid or I can add some more foul language. They may not be smart but that doesn’t mean name calling is justified. In fact they may smart after all but you are saying they aren’t from and online post. Great judging material.

              Just because people have a different view doesn’t mean they aren’t smart. SmartLX for example, I disagree with him on a lot of things and while he may not have an IQ of 200 I still think that he is smart. Even though with all rationalism summoned, life coming from non-life is utterly absurd to me. Still not calling him names.

              It is impossible to read anything completely objectively. We all have our own views and opinions. You see non-sense I see truth. I guess I’m stupid. More sarcasm.

              Sure I’ll go check the prophecies about 2000 years old and get back to you about their validity. Wait, I have already read proof from a scientist and he backs me up on the flood and other things as well. Lots of scientists do. Both sides have scientists saying their right. Nobody seems to be finding the silver bullet.

              I do know animals died in the flood…. and people… and vegetation. I would love to type for hours (not really) about the flood and try to convince someone who is completely adamant that I am speaking non-sense. On forum where nobody has convinced anybody that they are right. On the other hand, maybe a few have been convinced, who knows.

              I wouldn’t demand you believe. I think your in trouble if you don’t but go ahead and don’t. When we die we’ll know the truth. I can’t believe you just insulted James Bond. lol

              1. More than 85% of the people were wrong about the flat earth, so yes, the 16+% of atheists can be right and the rest of you can be wrong. Keep in mind, Beliefs, no matter how sincerely held, do not alter facts. The earth is a sphere and there is no evidence of any god any any time.

                Your religion is evil because it NEVER does anything without proselyting. Your religion is the one causing people to bomb family planning clinics murdering and maiming doctors, staff, and patients. Your religion is the one used to justify beating someone horribly and leaving them to die hanging on a barbed wire fence, as was done to Matthew Sheppard.
                Your religion is the one that wants to deny common civil rights to others because they “offend” you.

                FYI, when it is true, it is NOT name calling, it is a description. That description when I use it is based upon your own posts. If you don’t like it, change your behavior.

                It might be impossible for you to read anything objectively, you are projecting your own failings upon the world in general. Oops, that what you said I was doing. Yes, you are stupid. Thank you for recognizing that. (No sarcasm, only a description based upon your posts)

                What scientist backed you up on the flood? You post BS and expect other to believe it. Proof, moron, proof.

                Here are a few of your prophecies:

                Genesis 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.
                Here God tells Isaac that his descendents (Hebrews) will be as numerous as the stars.  Considering the number of stars there are in the universe, that would have to be on the order of 10 to the 20th Jewish people.

                Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
                Christians say that this verse is a prophecy of Jesus’ birth to a virgin.  There are a couple problems with this prophecy…First, virgin in this verse is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word “almah”, which actually means “young woman”.  A young woman is not necessarily a virgin.  “Bethulah” would have been the correct word to use if the author meant virgin.  Second, nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus referred to as Immanuel.

                Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.
                Damascus is still inhabited today with over a million people, and hardly a ruinous heap.

                Isaiah 19:4-5 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts. And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up.
                The river mentioned here is the Nile.  The Nile is still one of Egypt’s greatest natural resource.

                Isaiah 19:18 In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the LORD of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.
                The Canaanite language has never been spoken in Egypt, and is now an extinct.

                Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
                There are uncircumcised people living in Jerusalem even today.

                Ezekiel 29:10-11 Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia.  No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.
                Never in its long history has Egypt ever been uninhabited for forty years.

                Amos 9:15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.
                Many times, Jews have been pulled up out of their land.  The ownership of their land is still being fought for.

                Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
                Nineveh was never overthrown.  Why?  Because God changed his mind in verse 3:10, despite what Malachi 3:6, Numbers 23:19 and Ezekiel 24:14 says about God never changing his mind.
                Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

                Zechariah 11:12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.
                Christians say that this prophecy is was fulfilled when Judas received 30 pieces of silver for betraying Jesus.  Matthew 27:9 recites this verse, but incorrectly credits Jeremiah with the prophecy.

                Matthew 1:22-23 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
                Again, Jesus is never referred to as Emmanuel (Immanuel).

                Matthew 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
                Nowhere in the Old Testament is such a prophecy found, so how could such a one be fulfilled?

                Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
                There is no passage in the Old Testament that can be attributed to what Jesus is saying here.

                Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
                Jesus states that all the signs marking the end of the world in Matthew 24 would be fulfilled before his generation ended.  That generation ended 2000 years ago, and the world has not come to an end, neither has all those signs been fulfilled.

                If this is not enough for you, I have many more. You cannot find a single prophecy that has happened. Remember, something written after the fact is NOT a prophecy.

                You would love to be able to explain why your god supposedly killed all the animals and plants. You can’t so you evade the issue. That’s what theists always do with anything that they cannot answer.

                I have no hope at all of convincing any theist of anything. You are all too closed-minded and empty of rational thought. As was said on the TV show, “House” “If you could reason with theists, there wouldn’t be any theists.” What I do hope to do is help the undecided see how absurd and astoundingly ignorant all religion is.

                I am not in trouble. Again, that’s a typical theist attempt at instilling doubt and fear in place of presenting the facts you do not have.

                “When we die, we’ll know the truth”. Another typical christian threat. Keep in mind that beliefs and faith are both accepting as true something for which there is no supporting evidence and perhaps even much evidence against it. How smart is it to do that?

                You do demand I believe or at least live by only the rules you want to set for everyone. That is the most egregious fault of any religion. I did not insult James Bond, I insulted the movies, which were, after all, intended to be only entertainment, not believable. Try reading the original books. They are far more believable.

                BTW, it is “you’re” and there is no hyphen in “nonsense.” It also is “They’re right”. Why are you theists so consistently bad at English?

                1. Wow I think those are fightin’ words. 85 + 16+ is more then 100. There is evidence for a higher power. There are multiple religious books and witness accounts. If you don’t like that then to bad. You don’t get any scientific laws from religion. There is an observable theory that contradicts life from non-life which doesn’t bode well for life beginning theories which don’t involve some sort of eternal higher power. Feel free to deny those things.

                  And now my religion is evil. If Christians are right then everything we should be doing is proselytizing to save people. Does helping someone while proselytizing in any way negate the fact that you are helping them? Extremists………. Now it’s time to play “think of a religion that has never had anyone do something that is completely against its beliefs in its name”. How about Islam, same extremist problem and would you believe it they are (Islam and Christianity) two of the biggest religions out there so wouldn’t it make sense that there would be insincere followers?

                  You know who else offends (I don’t really like the word offended there, it seems rather petty and ill fitting) Christians? Liars, Thieves, Murderers, Adulterers….. Christians believe those things are wrong and they are sinful along with homosexuality. “Love the sinner, hate the sin”. We should love one another but we shouldn’t love the sin that everyone does and that corrupts. But you read the Bible, you should know this.

                  It is never justifiable to swear at someone and say “but it’s true”. Do you think it’s fine to call someone with a learning disability stupid? NO but hey it’s true so go ahead. I am to change my “stupid” behavior so that you don’t call me stupid anymore? lol

                  Everyone makes mistakes. I think I can state that as a fact. So we don’t make mistakes or can change our incorrectness when it comes to trying to read objectively? I am not reading it objectively according to you. Who are you to be objective to say I’m not being objective?

                  https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/geologic-evidences-for-the-genesis-flood/

                  You missed several of the articles where I was debating things similar to this.

                  You really like name calling and swearing.

                  Is there a website that listed all of these prophecies and their errors?
                  Here. We. Go. I’m not going to answer all of these as there are a lot of them and I don’t want to spend the time trying to convince you of much. Also it would be a massive post and it’s time consuming to scroll to see what you said and then back down to write a reply. I’ll say this now, what I’m writing is what I think and might not be exactly what was meant.
                  I think it gets the point across that dead and alive, there have been A LOT of his descendants.
                  I think it’s safe to say that a young woman who was a virgin had Jesus and he was called Immanuel which you even mentioned in one of these prophecies… “Matthew 1:22-23 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”
                  Which aligns with the prophecy from “Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”
                  Did you just copy and paste these? I’ll point out that this makes me doubt the rest of these “problems”.
                  “Zechariah 11:12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.
                  Christians say that this prophecy is was fulfilled when Judas received 30 pieces of silver for betraying Jesus. Matthew 27:9 recites this verse, but incorrectly credits Jeremiah with the prophecy.”
                  I would trust the Word of God over Christians’ thoughts.
                  I’ll give you credit whether you came up with these on your own or found them somewhere, I haven’t ran across any of them and I don’t know an answer to some of them. Other then the the Bible is God’s Word and inerrant and perfect. I can hear the angry replies coming with that statement.

                  I think I found one that happened with the whole Isiah and Matthew Immanuel thing. I never would have known the definition of prophecy, thank you so much.

                  How about this explanation, God is perfect and I’ll trust in his decisions.

                  A lot of people evade or shy from things they can’t answer. I’d chalk it up to human pride and nature.

                  With your whole threats thing, I wasn’t threatening you. We will all know what the truth was and is when we die, whether we cease to exist or go to heaven or hell. That’s a statement and I’d say a true one, not a threat.
                  If I’m right you will be in trouble, that is another truth. If you’re right then I’ll have tried to live a morally right life, helped others and believed in somewhat of a fairy tale. I don’t feel threatened by that. Again, I meant those as true statements not threats.

                  If either side could be easily convinced, there wouldn’t be a sides.

                  I demand you live morally right. Yes by my standards but don’t you demand I change my behavior or else I can be called stupid and you have every right to belittle me? I don’t really feel belittled but I think your trying to do that or just troll.

                  Maybe atheists are bad at English but we Christians are just to gracious to call you out on it. lol
                  “Everyone looks retarded once you set your mind to it.”
                  by David Sedaris
                  “Humans see what they want to see.”
                  by Rick Riordan

                  1. Thank you for demonstrating your arrogance and ignorance. You keep doing that better each time.

                    As for 85 + 16 is more than 100. All that proves is I used a theist’s claim about the percentage they had and facts for mine. Too bad you are too dumb to see that. For you, everything proves the presence of a god. Everything except facts of course, you have never had any of those so you claim they do not matter.

                    What is that “observable theory”? You theists always make claims that are vague and offer no proof. Links, facts, verifiable evidence. Show some or slink away.

                    You are a goddamned (no pun this time) fool and a liar. You protest my swearing but that is only your arrogance demanding that everyone adhere to what you want. If you can demand I go by your rules, then you must give me the right to demand that you obey mine. Mine says, if you cannot produce a verifiable fact, nothing you say is true. That means put up or shut up if you dislike being shown to be a liar.

                    If it is true, it is NOT name calling, it is a description. If you don’t like the description, stop lying and evading challenges. For example, I have repeatedly asked for your proof of any god or proof that anything I have posted is not true. All of you have ignored both of those. So when I say you are liars and cowards, that is based upon your own posts.

                    I scroll back to see what you wrote. It is worth the effort to hand you your head with every post. You continue to use babble quotes to prove the babble is true. You love circular reasoning because it is easy and requires no thinking at all. Again, when I see a bible verse used to prove the bible is true, I know there will be no rational content in that post. Thanks for demonstrating the accuracy of that to everyone.

                    “You’re going to hell” is the most common theist threat. Even veiled as you did, it it still there. Do atheists threaten you with, “You’ll find out when you die and see nothing?” No one knows what happens after death. Anyone that says they do is delusional or a liar. Theists make no claims – ever. We say, “There is no evidence of any god at any time. That’s atheism in a single sentence. Theists are the ones making absurd claims and you never provide a single iota of proof.

                    Are you saying that I have not lived a morally right life? Then you ARE an arrogant asshole. You know nothing about me except I am more erudite and better-spoken than you are.

                    Are you saying that you have NEVER done anything that is condemned by your bible? Genocide, rape, human sacrifice, slavery, torture of animals, and denigration of women are all exempted. All of those were either committed or ordered by the god of the bible so they must be OK to do. If you believe your babble, you are probably already condemned to your hell. Luckily for you there is the same evidence for hell as there is for your god – none.

                    FYI, not all atheists are good people, but using the prison population statistics a greater percentage of them are than there are of christians. Perhaps it is because we do the right things because it IS the right thing, not for any system of rewards and punishments.I admit, I do feel some personal satisfaction when I know I have been able to help someone simply because they needed it. This week, I loaned (probably gave) R$4,000 to a woman I have only seen three or four times to have her leaking roof and electrical repairs made. No, she is not having sex with me and probably never will. She is a good person that is a little down on her luck right now and this amount, while not a serious thing for me (a little over 1,000 USD) will make a big difference to her life. This is an example of “paying it forward.” Other people have helped me in non-financial ways that I can never repay. This is a way of doing that and is the right things to do. I really don’t expect to get the money back. That is not the point, I am showing respect for the people that give me a little boost at different times.

                    I will not be in trouble if there is a god. When asked “What will you do when you have to meet god?” (another threat) I reply, “I will bitch slap that SOB so hard he will retreat in to the Paleolithic era.” How dare he, who is supposed to be omnipotent, allow children to have cancer and to order torture of animals and genocide of entire races of people that he supposedly created. Your god is a petty, jealous (by his own admission) violent asshole.

                    Remember, I am not calling you stupid, I am saying you ARE stupid. If the difference is too subtle for you, thanks for proving my point. You “demand”that I live morally right? How do you know I do not? That’s another unwarranted assumption on your part. As usual, you theists demand everything. You demand respect because you cannot imagine that respect must be earned. When you demand it, you are admitting you know you don’t deserve it but want the perquisites that go with it anyway.

                    Yes you are bad at English. In this post you missed “You’re” and “Too”. Again, you prove my points. You are a rather stupid liar, a moral coward, and an arrogant fool. You have evaded my requests for proof and have not produced a single fact. Thanks for showing everyone that I am right.

                    1. I’ve decided that you must be a troll so I think I’ll call Gandalf and see if he can help. I was pointing out with the statistics that you should use 85/15% or 84/16%. I don’t know how being 1% off somehow makes it no longer a fact when I use that statistic. I once googled the percentage of DNA we share with apes and had a larger discrepancy then that.

                      No facts…. Did you go to the link I put in the my last comment and read any of it? The observable theory mentioned was biogenesis. I thought you would know of it and realize that’s what I meant. It’s been mentioned before and states: Life only comes from life (among other wordings).

                      More name calling…… Once there was a time with a bit more politeness but oh well. You can live your life as you want. I shall repeat, you can live your life as you want. I choose to live mine differently. I mean by this that I try to live by a different moral code. Follow whichever code you like.

                      How was answering and finding an error in your list of prophecies evading? You didn’t mention or explain that error either.

                      lol It is still name calling and it is impolite and it is childish and it is uncalled for and it shouldn’t be done. And I know that you will still do it.

                      You just listed multiple Bible verse in your last post…..

                      ““You’re going to hell” is the most common theist threat. Even veiled as you did, it it still there. Do atheists threaten you with, “You’ll find out when you die and see nothing?” No one knows what happens after death. Anyone that says they do is delusional or a liar. Theists make no claims – ever. We say, “There is no evidence of any god at any time. That’s atheism in a single sentence. Theists are the ones making absurd claims and you never provide a single iota of proof.”

                      Again I didn’t mean it as a threat. But I have said that already and all you seem to see is THREAT THREAT THREAT.

                      I wanted to point out something that you seem to love to do. “Theists make no claims – ever. We say, “There is no evidence of any god at any time. That’s atheism in a single sentence.”
                      You just said theists make no claims….I think you meant atheists. I have found small errors in your posts and I haven’t mentioned them because I don’t think they matter. I know what you meant and it doesn’t need brought up as proof that the person who made the errors is lesser. We all make mistakes YES even mispells or the wrong your or you’re. Not a big deal. But if you want you can still mention them. I only read through to catch bigger errors.

                      I have no idea how you life your life…..but there does seem to be a lot of name calling and swearing lol. Never said I didn’t do anything wrong “We should love one another but we shouldn’t love the sin that everyone does and that corrupts.” I meant everyone when I said everyone. Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Emphasis on fall not fallen.

                      Congratulations you did do something worthwhile and it probably isn’t the first time nor the last. I think that’s a better way for all of us to spend our time rather then arguing over the truth and which truth is right.

                      You mention a lot of popular issues with a loving God and death and pain in the world. I don’t think it’s worth mentioning anything about it. I don’t think that people would take it sincerely and it would get bunched up with “religious lies”.

                      Making assumptions about people via internet communication….not a great plan.

                      Not worth it to continue responding. I don’t know how you live. You seem to be pretty sure you know how to describe me.

                  2. A world-famous chemist tells the truth: there’s no scientist alive today who understands macroevolution
                    March 6, 2014 Posted by vjtorley under Intelligent Design
                    483 Comments

                    Professor James M. Tour is one of the ten most cited chemists in the world. He is famous for his work on nanocars (pictured above, courtesy of Wikipedia), nanoelectronics, graphene nanostructures, carbon nanovectors in medicine, and green carbon research for enhanced oil recovery and environmentally friendly oil and gas extraction. He is currently a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science at Rice University. He has authored or co-authored 489 scientific publications and his name is on 36 patents. Although he does not regard himself as an Intelligent Design theorist, Professor Tour, along with over 700 other scientists, took the courageous step back in 2001 of signing the Discovery Institute’s “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism”, which read: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

                    On Professor Tour’s Website, there’s a very revealing article on evolution and creation, in which Tour bluntly states that he does not understand how macroevolution could have happened, from a chemical standpoint (all bold emphases below are mine – VJT):

                    Although most scientists leave few stones unturned in their quest to discern mechanisms before wholeheartedly accepting them, when it comes to the often gross extrapolations between observations and conclusions on macroevolution, scientists, it seems to me, permit unhealthy leeway. When hearing such extrapolations in the academy, when will we cry out, “The emperor has no clothes!”?

                    …I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution could have happened. Hence, am I not free to join the ranks of the skeptical and to sign such a statement without reprisals from those that disagree with me? … Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution? If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me.

                    In a more recent talk, entitled, Nanotech and Jesus Christ, given on 1 November 2012 at Georgia Tech, Professor Tour went further, and declared that no scientist that he has spoken to understands macroevolution – and that includes Nobel Prize winners! Here’s what he said when a student in the audience asked him about evolution:

                    … I will tell you as a scientist and a synthetic chemist: if anybody should be able to understand evolution, it is me, because I make molecules for a living, and I don’t just buy a kit, and mix this and mix this, and get that. I mean, ab initio, I make molecules. I understand how hard it is to make molecules. I understand that if I take Nature’s tool kit, it could be much easier, because all the tools are already there, and I just mix it in the proportions, and I do it under these conditions, but ab initio is very, very hard.

                    I don’t understand evolution, and I will confess that to you. Is that OK, for me to say, “I don’t understand this”? Is that all right? I know that there’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand anything about organic synthesis, but they understand evolution. I understand a lot about making molecules; I don’t understand evolution. And you would just say that, wow, I must be really unusual.

                    Let me tell you what goes on in the back rooms of science – with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. I have sat with them, and when I get them alone, not in public – because it’s a scary thing, if you say what I just said – I say, “Do you understand all of this, where all of this came from, and how this happens?” Every time that I have sat with people who are synthetic chemists, who understand this, they go “Uh-uh. Nope.” These people are just so far off, on how to believe this stuff came together. I’ve sat with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. Sometimes I will say, “Do you understand this?”And if they’re afraid to say “Yes,” they say nothing. They just stare at me, because they can’t sincerely do it.

                    I was once brought in by the Dean of the Department, many years ago, and he was a chemist. He was kind of concerned about some things. I said, “Let me ask you something. You’re a chemist. Do you understand this? How do you get DNA without a cell membrane? And how do you get a cell membrane without a DNA? And how does all this come together from this piece of jelly?” We have no idea, we have no idea. I said, “Isn’t it interesting that you, the Dean of science, and I, the chemistry professor, can talk about this quietly in your office, but we can’t go out there and talk about this?”

                    If you understand evolution, I am fine with that. I’m not going to try to change you – not at all. In fact, I wish I had the understanding that you have.

                    But about seven or eight years ago I posted on my Web site that I don’t understand. And I said, “I will buy lunch for anyone that will sit with me and explain to me evolution, and I won’t argue with you until I don’t understand something – I will ask you to clarify. But you can’t wave by and say, “This enzyme does that.” You’ve got to get down in the details of where molecules are built, for me. Nobody has come forward.

                    The Atheist Society contacted me. They said that they will buy the lunch, and they challenged the Atheist Society, “Go down to Houston and have lunch with this guy, and talk to him.” Nobody has come! Now remember, because I’m just going to ask, when I stop understanding what you’re talking about, I will ask. So I sincerely want to know. I would like to believe it. But I just can’t.

                    Now, I understand microevolution, I really do. We do this all the time in the lab. I understand this. But when you have speciation changes, when you have organs changing, when you have to have concerted lines of evolution, all happening in the same place and time – not just one line – concerted lines, all at the same place, all in the same environment … this is very hard to fathom.

                    I was in Israel not too long ago, talking with a bio-engineer, and [he was] describing to me the ear, and he was studying the different changes in the modulus of the ear, and I said, “How does this come about?” And he says, “Oh, Jim, you know, we all believe in evolution, but we have no idea how it happened.” Now there’s a good Jewish professor for you. I mean, that’s what it is. So that’s where I am. Have I answered the question? (52:00 to 56:44)

                    Professor Tour’s online talk is absolutely fascinating as well as being deeply moving on a personal level, and I would strongly urge readers to listen to his talk in its entirety – including the questions after the talk. You won’t regret it, I promise you. One interesting little gem of information which I’ll reveal is that it was Professor Tour who was largely instrumental in getting Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley, winner of the 1996 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, to reject Darwinian evolution and accept Old Earth creationism, shortly before he died in 2005. It was Tour who persuaded Smalley to delve into the question of origins. After reading the books “Origins of Life” and “Who Was Adam?”, written by Dr. Hugh Ross (an astrophysicist) and Dr. Fazale Rana (a biochemist).. Dr. Smalley explained his change of heart as follows:

                    Evolution has just been dealt its death blow. After reading “Origins of Life”, with my background in chemistry and physics, it is clear evolution could not have occurred. The new book, “Who Was Adam?”, is the silver bullet that puts the evolutionary model to death.

                    Strong words indeed, for a Nobel scientist. Readers can find out more about Professor Richard Smalley’s change of views here.

                    Why should we believe macroevolution, if nobody understands it?

                    Now that Professor Tour has informed the world that even Nobel Prize-winning scientists privately admit that they don’t understand macroevolution, a layperson is surely entitled to ask: “Well, if even they don’t understand it, then why should we believe it? How can we possibly be obliged to believe in a theory which nobody understands?”

                    That’s a good question. And it’s no use for Darwinists to trot out the standard “party line” that “even if we don’t yet understand how it happened, we still have enough evidence to infer that it happened.” At the very most, all that the current scientific evidence could establish is the common descent of living organisms. But that’s not macroevolution. Macroevolution requires more than a common ancestry for living organisms: it requires a natural mechanism which can generate the diversity of life-forms we see on Earth today from a common stock, without the need for any direction by an Intelligent Agent. But the mechanism is precisely what we don’t have evidence for. So the question remains: why should we believe in macroevolution?

                    The decline of academic freedom

                    Given the massive uncertainty about the “how” of macroevolution among scientists working in the field, you might think that a wide variety of views would be tolerated in the scientific arena – including the view that there is no such process as macroevolution. However, you would be sadly mistaken. As Professor Tour notes in his online article on evolution and creation, an alarming academic trend has emerged in recent years: a growing intolerance of dissent from Darwinism. This trend is so pronounced that Professor Tour now advises his students not to voice their doubts about Darwinism in public, if they want a successful career:

                    In the last few years I have seen a saddening progression at several institutions. I have witnessed unfair treatment upon scientists that do not accept macroevolutionary arguments and for their having signed the above-referenced statement regarding the examination of Darwinism. (I will comment no further regarding the specifics of the actions taken upon the skeptics; I love and honor my colleagues too much for that.) I never thought that science would have evolved like this. I deeply value the academy; teaching, professing and research in the university are my privileges and joys…

                    But my recent advice to my graduate students has been direct and revealing: If you disagree with Darwinian Theory, keep it to yourselves if you value your careers, unless, of course, you’re one of those champions for proclamation; I know that that fire exists in some, so be ready for lead-ridden limbs. But if the scientific community has taken these shots at senior faculty, it will not be comfortable for the young non-conformist. When the power-holders permit no contrary discussion, can a vibrant academy be maintained? Is there a University (unity in diversity)? For the United States, I pray that the scientific community and the National Academy in particular will investigate the disenfranchisement that is manifest upon some of their own, and thereby address the inequity.

                    It remains to be seen if other countries will allow their young scientists to think freely about the origin of life, and of the various species of organisms that we find on Earth today. What I will say, though, is that countries which restrict academic freedom will eventually be overtaken by countries which allow it to prosper. There is still time for America and Europe to throw off the dead hand of Darwinism in academic circles, and let their young people breathe the unaccustomed air of free speech once again.

                    (UPDATE: Here’s a link to my follow-up post, Macroevolution, microevolution and chemistry: the devil is in the details. It amply refutes the simplistic charge, made by some skeptics, that Professor Tour was conflating macroevolution with the question of the origin of life.)

                    UD Editors: This post has received a great deal of attention lately, so we are moving it back to the front page.

                    (Visited 362,413 times, 78 visits today)
                    From: https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-world-famous-chemist-tells-the-truth-theres-no-scientist-alive-today-who-understands-macroevolution/)

                    1. First paragraph from James Tour’s page entitled {Layman’s Reflections on Evolution and Creation. An Insider’s View of the Academy} at jmtour.com:

                      “Assuming that I have something significant to contribute to the evolution vs. creation debate, many ask me to speak and write concerning my thoughts on the topic. However, I do not have anything substantive to say about it. I am a layman on the subject. Although I have read about a half dozen books on the debate, maybe a dozen, and though I can speak authoritatively on complex chemical synthesis, I am not qualified to enter the public discussion on evolution vs. creation. So please don’t ask me to be the speaker or debater at your event, and think carefully about asking me for an interview because I will probably not give you the profound quotations that you seek. You are of course free to quote me from what is written here, but do me the kindness of placing my statements in a fair context.”

                      He says, in his own words, in no uncertain terms, that he is not an expert. Yet the uncommondescent website presents him as one. I’ve pointed out many times in the past that you need to fact check anything you read (both scientific or creation sourced) and see if it is accurately represented. Once again you did not do this. You just post some article from your creationist masters without the first clue if it is authentic or not.

                      Tour is NOT a proponent of ID as a matter of fact. Did you even realize that? Why didn’t your creationist masters tell you that in their article? He said (same article at jmtour.com): “I have been labeled as an Intelligent Design (ID) proponent. I am not. I do not know how to use science to prove intelligent design although some others might. I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion. So I prefer to be free of that ID label.”

                      Your cut and paste jobs are full of holes. Everytime. And we will be here to point them out for you.

                  3. You know, or you realize that the ones who didn’t believe that the world was flat were also Christians. But they were Christians who were willing to accept the evidence and spread that evidence, inspite of the consequences. And the truth won out. As it will with our cause for Christ against evolution. There is not a chance that evolution is true. It is and has always been supported by unproven sub assumptions that as the main assumption have no provided evidence. So that leaves all the evidence pointing to the fact that life can come from only something or Someone that is life. That leaves the evidence pointing out that all life is too designed for life ever to have happened on its own. That leaves the point that there are no mechanical instruments that could ever have happened on its own so organisms the bestest ever made could never have originated on their own. Laugh and howl and curse all you want. But the facts are the facts and you can not provide anything to downplay them. (at least nothing more than the “it isn’t so” usual stuff). But no physical proof that says that there is not God and nothing to support the flailing and crying of help from the theory of Evolution, as it sinks in one of the bogs of quicksand as it takes its place in failed theories along side that of any other scientific theory that tries to leave our the Intelligent Designer from His rightful roll of God.

  4. James Smith. What is wrong? We are not here trying to turn your world upside down. Well maybe we are but in a good way. Christ has only the best for you. We know this. I can’t believe that you actually believe that Christians are automatons that merely move and think as though we are programmed. There are people who are like this, but most of us coming to Christ, come to Him out of slavery. Slavery to sin. To selfishness. To behavioral forms of life that prove ultimately unprofitable and ultimately unfulfilling to anybody who really loves themselves. And God is all about helping us learn to love. Really love. Not like you think love is. No, you don’t know how to love. Or live for that matter. None of us do. That is the reason that we come to Jesus. We know that there is emptiness in our lives. And we come to Him hoping to find what is missing. But when we finally get to know Him we find so much more than what we were seeking. You are empty my friend. That’s probably why you are hanging on to your sad excuse for a god, Evolution. Your afraid that with it gone, you won’t have anything to blame for your life being as bad as it is. But God can and will turn your life around. All you have to do is surrender your life to Him. He knows how to provide for you. He knows what you really need. And he won’t stop from trying to let you see that He means business, which is to love with for all He is worth. I hope you give Him a chance to show you.

    1. Yes, you are trying to rule our world by forcing everyone to live by your beliefs whether they share them or not. That’s why you want to deny common civil rights to others because they “offend” you. Your religion, all religions, offend me. Should you have to give them up because I say so?

      Yes you do live like unthinking automatons. You refuse to even consider facts or that you might be wrong. As you have no doubt seen my post, “Shown undeniable proof, I will change my mind on anything, including religion.” Then I ask, “What will it take to change your mind?” over 99% of the times I ask that question, it is ignored. When it is answered, it is “Nothing will change my mind.” Then I am often accused of being “closed-minded”. The person is too dumb to see the irony in that.

      You are projecting your own behavior or what you want to believe upon others. We do not believe because we wish to “sin”. We do the right thing because it is the right thing without false promises of a paradise or empty threats of a hell. Considering that over 97% of all the people in prisons in the USA self-identify as christians, apparently your faith is not very effective in influencing behavior. Atheists make up 16+% of the general population but less than 1% of those incarcerated. Obviously, our moral sense is far better than yours.

      You are arrogant and insulting. I do not know how to love? FYI, I loved my wife for as long as she lived. I love me children and my dog. I love my relatives, even those that are theists. Your god teaches us to love? BS! By killing most of the life on earth, including plants and animals? By condoning, even ordering genocide, slavery, human sacrifice, torture of animals, and denigration of women? Everyone of those is in your babble. Don’t believe it? Actually read it sometime cover to cover as I have done many times. Do that instead of “cherry picking” verses and then “interpreting”then to mean what you want them to mean. If the babble is the inerrant word of god, why do humans have to interpret it? Are you saying your god is so stupid he cannot express himself clearly?

      I do know how to live. All my life I have worked hard for my employers and myself, been kind to friends, relatives, and strangers alike. I have helped others who were not in a position to do anything for me without expecting any reward then or after my death.

      Evolution is not an excuse for any god. It is a fact. There are thousands of proofs of evolution in museums, laboratories, and universities all over the world. There is not one bit of evidence of any god. If you had it, you would not need the lies and threats all religions have always used.

      You did not “come to jesus” You were brainwashed from an early age to believe that nonsense without ever questioning it. That is another evil of your religion, brainwashing children. Your religion is about instilling guilt and fear. Everything is a “sin”. That’s another lie. There is only one true sin; hurting someone else unnecessarily. Everything else is invented absurdities.

      I am not “empty, you arrogant fool. Yes, arrogant Christians are invariably arrogant, judgemental, unforgiving, condescending (as you have been on here) and bigoted. I have never met a christian, including my own relatives that was not delusional, a liar, or a hypocrite. Unfortunately, many of you are all three at the same time.

      My life is not bad, you are willing to lie about anything even when you have no clue so to prop up your hope that you are not being a fool over something that does not exist.

      Prove there is any god. Prove anything I have ever posted is not true. Stop being so goddamned (pun intended) smug about everything. Open your mind to facts. I know you may have never recognized a fact in your life. Your religion certainly has none. If it did, would it need the lies and threats?

      You do not have any concept of how to debate. All you can do is try to preach. Honest debate is forbidden in all religions. None can stand up to an approach based upon verifiable facts. If you have read my other posts on here you have seen how I can provide them. Many are by using your own babble to demonstrate how contradictory and silly it is.

      I do not have to “surrender my life” to any mythical deity. What that means it to stop thinking and believe anything you are told, no matter how ridiculous.

      Show me a fact. If you had even one provable fact about any god, you would wipe out all other religions and atheism at the ame time. You don’t have one, only lies and threats.

      Like most of the other theists on here, learn to use some paragraphs. If you are too lazy to press the return key twice, indent the first line after one press. Four or five spaces will do it is you are not to lazy for that, too. You are making all of your posts hard t read and they look like they were written by an uneducated fool. Oops, did I hit a sore spot?

      1. “I am not “empty, you arrogant fool. Yes, arrogant Christians are invariably arrogant, judgemental, unforgiving, condescending (as you have been on here) and bigoted. I have never met a christian, including my own relatives that was not delusional, a liar, or a hypocrite. Unfortunately, many of you are all three at the same time.” Please, please ask yourself, why you haven’t met Christians without these faults? Do you feel everyone you meet are as you say, or just Christians? And don’t get me wrong, we are as you say we are. We are after all human. But so are all of the rest of humanity. The only thing is Christians are being changed from the inside out. It takes time and effort, and a lot of forgiveness form God. But there are quite a few Christians who should be able to accept you as you are and respect you as you are. But if they are good Christians, they will grow on you. Because God loves us so much and He wants each Christian to demonstrate this love to others. So if we are not doing a good enough job, please forgive us. And I promise we will continue to try to win your confidence.

  5. “Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus.” Please to remember that prophecies are supposed to be fulfilled in the future. And that future could be any time in the future. So look for this one to be fulfilled sometime in the future.
    ” We do the right thing because it is the right thing”, yes some do the right thing in as far as they care to. But if evolution is to be believed, for anyone to do the wrong thing means that that person is not evolving. And there are plenty of that going on. (doing the wrong thing and not evolving).
    “You do not have any concept of how to debate”. Maybe, maybe not. I only know that I have given more evidence telling each Atheist as to why Evolution should not be believed, then anyone has given me why my points are irrelevent. Most of the time it is as you, do, talk about how wrong I am, pointing out the flaws in my grammer or how silly I am preaching. But you won’t discuss my logic. Why is that? I have told you about what we have observed, time and time again down through history about how we only have observed life coming from life. I have heard time and time again from Scientists that they use observation to determine viewpoints. And that if a point is not observed then it should not be presented as a theory. Yet, this is what the theory of Evolution has been presented as even though it as the main theory is sorely lacking in credible, substantive evidence, but the other sub theories, that are used to make evolution more plausible, are not presented with observable evidences. Only here say. You may ask which one and I think I can provide three. 1) Evolution implies that since all the other species came from one unique, first ever happening form of life, then that first ever form of life did not have an intelligence that made it. Therefor that first ever unique life form, came from nothing. This theory for one smacks, or smells of a theory that has been ruled out a long time ago, which was the Spontaneous Generation theory where it was believed also that maggots and worms and flies appearing from rotting flesh came from nowhere. Well as I said the part of the theory of evolution that implies that the first ever unique life form came from nothing. So Science itself has thrown out this theory. Yet the evolutionists are trying to perform it’s own religious resurrection and under the guise of not mentioning that that this out of nothing arrival is actually Spontaneous Generation, they are building there theory on thin air, way above the Mount Everest thin air. And since the Evolutionist never even tries to answer the fact that we have never observed life coming from nothing, then they are doubly refusing to answer questions that should be attended to before they dignify Evolution with the title as a theory. And number three, Man has only observed that each species only brings forth a species resembleing itself. No, new species have ever been observed coming from a different species. Simple or complex. Each one brings forth themselves.
    Now please be disciplined enough to explain why even though the theory of Evolution has never provided not one observance where the theory of Evolution should be considered as a viable answer to life, that they continue to push it as one?

  6. Thank you for again demonstrating that you are as ignorant as you have proven in every other post. You also don’t have a clue abut paragraphs yet. But maybe I over estimated you. Perhaps you ARE an under-achieving 7th grader.

    You also show that you still don’t have a clue about evolution. That never stops you religious freaks from rattling on about it. Even when you know you would be better off shutting up about things you don’t understand.

    As far as your “prophecy, you totally ignore everything I posted because you cannot deny them. Then you use another one, that you can’t even prove was really made, and claim, “It hasn’t happened yet, so it is still true.” Have you no shame? You are making religious people look bad and doing it all by yourself.

    You are certainly an obnoxious, deeply ignorant SOB. You love that. I say rattle on, shit for brains. I will neither read nor rely to anything else you post. You are a total waste of time and resources that could be used to heal the sick, aid the poor, and educate the young. Instead, you and your religion are only focused upon brainwashing and forcing your sick beliefs upon everyone else.

    You consistently ignore my requests for proof of any god, or that anything I have posted is not true. As always you show that you a a liar, and a coward, intellectually and ethically.

  7. A lot of claims with no reliable proof. It seems you are the one that has a problem. Well at least you’re not willing to admit to it. Even though I and others have asked you to smooth out your unmistakeable turbulent character, you have found it too dificult to do so, or you don’t care. We have responded to your insulting posts with kindness, and you refuse to return in kind. You truly need to seek aid with your character flaws, and I know God can help. If you would please seek out a Seventh Day Adventist church in your area and talk to one of the pastors. He with God’s Holy Spirit will be able to guide you and help you gain the victory over sin and help you learn to discipline yourself so that the type of posts you deliver will not be such a blight on your character.

  8. First, as I have said several times before, it is not name calling if it is true. You prove what you are by your posts. I know you are offended by swearing, but that is simply you arrogant christians trying to impose your absurd beliefs upon everyone else.

    Next, not one of you has ever produced a verifiable fact, Nor have any of you attempted to prove anything I have posted is not true. Instead, you lecture and use babble quotes to prove the babble is true. How sad that supposedly educated people cannot recognize how silly that is. “I said it’s true, so it must be true.”

    Making assumptions about people is exactly what you theists do. I base my opinions upon what I observe in your own posts. If you don’t like it, STFU.

    Of course you don’t want to continue. You have had your head handed to you every time. I ask for verifiable facts, you respond with more preaching and babble quotes. If theists had any facts would you need the false promise of a paradise and empty threats of a hell? Lies and threats is all any religion has to offer. Then you put on your sanctimonious clock and insist you are superior to non-believers because you accept as true something for which there is no supporting evidence and even much evidence against it. Then you whine and complain “We don’t get no respect.” Respect must be earned, not demanded.

    Personally, I have never met any theist that was not delusional, a liar, or a hypocrite. Often, they are all three at the same time. All of you cherry-pick your babble verses the “interpret them to mean whatever is most convenient for you at the time. If you really believe the bible is the inerrant word of god, why does it need to be interpreted by humans? Or do you think your god is so stupid that he cannot express himself clearly? Judging by the statements and actions of his followers, that could be the problem.

    When you have a verifiable fact to offer, respond. Until then, please go away and continue to delude each other and please stop trying to enact your evil beliefs into laws for everyone. That is nothing more than proof of theist arrogance and a total disregard for the rights of others.

  9. Luke 6:(KJV)
    45″ A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.”
    “What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them” Matthew 15:11
    James you must understand we care for you. God loves you and because He loves us, we desire to make Him happy. And what would really make Him happy is to have you turn your life over to Him. And that is the reason we are reaching out to you. Because what is coming out from you is what needs to be replaced. And it needs to be replaced with God’s love and peace. Please allow Him to save you.

    1. As I have said, babble quotes are a certain indication there will be no rational content in the post. Thanks for demonstrating that again.

      You do not care for me, you liar. You only care for making yourself feel smugly superior and you do not worry if you offend anyone. Oddly, you are offended by almost everything yourselves.

      Stop preaching, you goddamned arrogant asshole. You DO offend me with it. You are assuming I am as stupid as you are. All you people have are lies and threats. Go away and leave rational people alone.

      More babble verses. Thank you for proving again what a moron you are. You have yet to prove anything and you ignore my requests to do so because you know that the lies and threats are all you have. What would make you happy is to think you have turned someone else in to another intentionally ignorant fool. Prove there is a god, you cowardly idiot. Your own posts prove you are everything I have said. You keep coming back for more even though you get your head handed to you every time. Or is it your ass? It is had to tell with you theists, they are both full of shit.

      1. How do you know he doesn’t care for you and is thus a liar? How do you know he is lying about what he said? He has been kind even after your constant swearing and name calling. Seems like he cares enough to be kind to you when you aren’t to him.

        1. He has not been kind, he has been arrogant, condescending judgmental, and unforgiving, just a typical christian. As I said but you are apparently too goddamned dumb to understand. When it is true, it is not name calling, it is a description. Your objection to my language is only another theist attempt to impose your absurd beliefs upon everyone else. Fuck you.

          1. I didn’t know common respect and kindness was so hard for such a morally upright guy. BTW those things are taught to most kids. I once had a woman swear in front of me when I was a kid and she apologized for it. Not an absurd belief. He has been kind enough to be polite, he is still responding which takes a lot of patience when you keep insulting him.

            You aren’t seeing things objectively. You use Bible verses to claim we’re wrong but when we use them you say all of it is irrational. You take most things we say as threats and lies and you show no respect. You are probably causing the condescension​ you’re shown with your inability to be reasonable.

  10. You really are a desperately dumb person. You can’t begin to understand the concept of respect must be earned. I said nothing about kindness. That is due to everyone unless they show they do not deserve it as most theists have done.

    I am not insulting him, I am describing him based upon his own posts. How sad that you cannot grasp that concept either. Clearly, the idea of facts and logic have been eradicated from you by your religion.

    I am seeing things objectively. That’s something else you cannot understand. I use bible verses to show you how they contradict each other or how “prophecies” are nonsense. You use them as circular reasoning. You will have to look that up too, you can’t seem to understand the most obvious things. Must stubborn stupidity in one area of your life extend to all areas? Wait, it has to. Religion can not stand objective thinking, logic, or questioning.

    I am unreasonable? You theists are the ones that insist we must accept your bullshit without an iota of proof. Even if we don’t accept it, you want to enact your idiocy into laws for everyone.

    Yes, you christians are condescending, arrogant, judgemental, unforgiving, and intentionally ignorant. Do you realize that, despite repeated requests to do so, not one of you has even attempted to prove anything I have posted is not true. Nor have you offered any proof that anything you have posted is true. Then you whine and complain when you are treated with disdain and contempt. You have earned it, you deserve it, and I will not cheat you out of it by pretending you are anything but goddamned cowardly fools.

    As I said, when you have a verifiable fact to present, show it to me. Until then, shut the fuck up, cretins.

    1. Jesus said “they’ll know you are Christians by your love.” It seems you are having trouble knowing who your real friends are. If you wold but spend more time with Jesus and with others who have elected to put Jesus first in their lives you will gain control of of your faculties and He will help you to control your anger and clean up your speech. But you first need to recognize your need for Jesus.
      And yes I do love you. And I have been praying for you. God is waiting for His time for you.

      1. It seems you are having trouble understanding English. You make unwarranted assumptions about me. You do not know a damn thing. I said, bring verifiable facts or shut the fuck up. You are again trying to impose your evil beliefs upon me. Go fuck yourself you stupid piece of shit.

        You have been “praying for me?” You arrogant asshole. What if a satan (who does not exist either) worshiper told you he was going to “Sacrifice a couple of babies to Lord Satan for you.” Would you be offended? But you have no problem offending others Thanks for another example of your christian arrogance and total disregard for the feelings and right of others. You are a typical arrogant, unfeeling christian dipshit. Kiss my ass and go far, far away. If you are concerned for me, you will do exactly that. If you only care about making yourself feel smugly superior, keep it up and show everyone what a waste of resources you are.

    2. Lol. By law you are Innocent until proven guilty. If I thought you had to earn my kindness and respect before I gave either two of those to you or anybody I couldn’t get anything done because I’d hate everyone. Seems like you prove my point.

      Christianity is 2000 years old depending on where you start. It seems to have survived time well.

      https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/geologic-evidences-for-the-genesis-flood/
      I posted that a few comments ago. Do you not consider that proof? I found an error in two of your prophecies post and explained another one. Is that not refuting your “evidence”. I mentioned the theory of biogenesis that contradicts most common ideas with the beginning of life. Do all of those go unread and ignored by you or do you just not care to see that you are still claiming I haven’t done something that you can scroll up and see I did?

      I said you could live your life as you want. I asked that while you live your life that you not insult me and my life and that you show some respect and kindness. Neither of those are demands and neither of them seem to register with you.

      You have yet to acknowledge evidence given when you still say it hasn’t. You say I demand you live your life a certain way when I have said the opposite. You say I threaten while multiple times I have said that nothing was intended as a threat. Is anything going to register with you? Or do you just keep going on about how terrible of a person I am until I stop responding out of frustration of having more reasonable and intelligent conversations with a wall then you?

  11. You are a determinedly arrogant, inconsiderate asshole. I said “Proof” You have no idea what that means. I said “Go away” You don’t care what other people say or want. You are determined to be a total asshole about everything.

    Go fuck yourself, you useless piece of shit. Not one thing you have posted is proof of anything except that you are a deeply stupid, self-centered jerk that does not care about other people at all. Your “proof” is like your babble and you. Full of bullshit and nonsense.

    Having an intelligent conversation with you is impossible. As was said on the TV “House”, If you could reason with theists, there wouldn’t be any theists.

    You are about as smart as a wall Again, show verifiable proof or shut the fuck up. Go away and do the world a favor. You can improve the average IQ and ethical level of humanity – kill yourself. If I never hear from you again, it will be far too soon. I despise your religion and I despise you for your insistence that I accept it. Do you understand that, you ignorant SOB? Fuck off and fuck off far. How can I be any more clear? To you, there is no such thing as respecting another person’s wishes. You are totally arrogant and self-centered. GO AWAY! STAY AWAY. Goddamn, you are unbelievably stupid. You offend me, I tell you so and you keep coming back. How is that showing respect? Then you can’t understand why I do not respect you or your horror of a religion.

    GTFO, take a long walk off a short bridge, jump off a cliff, shoot yourself, just do not annoy me again, you turd-brained moron.

    1. Lol at this point it’s fun to read your angry replies. Although it does seem rather immoral to tell someone to go kill themselves. You tell me to go but you still make erroneous claims. As much as you swear and disrespect me and all theists, I have a hard time letting something false stand without proving it otherwise. Not sure what proof you want when I refuted yours and gave my own or that you could ever consider this a conversation to ever be had intelligently.

      An argument if you wanted more proof. Everywhere we look we see life giving birth to life and and non-life remaining lifeless. To not believe in some sort of eternal being that started life, means that life somehow came from non-life. I can’t rationally say that life comes from non-life when I only see the opposite and I can see it everywhere life is.

      Not sure it’s your place to demand I go. I can’t demand how you live and I can’t demand you you treat people so why would I ever listen to you demanding me to stop replying?

      Most of the remaining portion of you reply is telling me to kill myself and swearing at me. So reasonable and very intelligent.

      1. You like being an obnoxious bastard. You have no respect and you are one of the worst human beings I have ever encountered. Go fuck yourself and jump off a bridge.

        Even though you lack the integrity and self-discipline to stop, I do not. I will never read another of your obscenely stupid posts, much less respond to them.

        I must thank you for demonstrating what arrogant assholes you christians like to be. You have at least been consistent in that as you have been in never presenting anything that resembles a fact.

        When you die and may that be soon, you will be disappointed for a millisecond at discovering your god is not there and never was.

        1. I think I’ll be good when I die. Another​ dismissal of a plain theory contradicting most widely held views of the beginning of life. So glad that isn’t a fact.

          I’m somewhat happy you plan on not replying. I think you gave most reasonable atheists a bad name. But I also think that you will reply.

          If I’m the worst and I’ve been kind, how bad do you consider Hitler?

    2. “Kill yourself” puts you completely over the line as far as I’m concerned, JS. I’ve never given a warning before, and you will only get one. Be civil, leave or be removed. I’ll actually have to look up how to do the third one if it comes to it.

  12. Listen to me please. You are in a bad place. You need Jesus as your Savior. Please I will be praying for you at 2o:00 tonight. Please all who believe pray for James tonight.

  13. If you can please, if he will, allow him to continue. JS needs a friend and I’m willing to try. I know it seems hard but, God can make a change, if there is any level of willingness. I have a lot of friends who are praying for JS. And I’d like to invite him to church, maybe not here, I don’t know where he is, but I know that there is a Seventh Day Adventist church where he is and I would be willing to talk with the pastor. Please JS. lets talk as friends.

    1. Understand that I’m not just protecting you and James, Gerald. Demanding that others commit suicide is a horrible thing since cyberbullying has taught us that it works on certain people, and it’s something I don’t even want to give anyone the idea to do.

  14. And I fully agree with you. I have become aware of the correlation of suicide with the increase of it being more advertised through the media. But I’m really concerned about JS. He is in need of help. But there is not much I can do, except pray. And although I believe that effects change that many do not want to admit, still personal action is always beneficial.

  15. Tim, where have you gone? A world-famous chemist tells the truth: there’s no scientist alive today who understands macroevolution
    March 6, 2014 Posted by vjtorley under Intelligent Design
    483 Comments

    Professor James M. Tour is one of the ten most cited chemists in the world. He is famous for his work on nanocars (pictured above, courtesy of Wikipedia), nanoelectronics, graphene nanostructures, carbon nanovectors in medicine, and green carbon research for enhanced oil recovery and environmentally friendly oil and gas extraction. He is currently a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science at Rice University. He has authored or co-authored 489 scientific publications and his name is on 36 patents. Although he does not regard himself as an Intelligent Design theorist, Professor Tour, along with over 700 other scientists, took the courageous step back in 2001 of signing the Discovery Institute’s “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism”, which read: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

    On Professor Tour’s Website, there’s a very revealing article on evolution and creation, in which Tour bluntly states that he does not understand how macroevolution could have happened, from a chemical standpoint (all bold emphases below are mine – VJT):

    Although most scientists leave few stones unturned in their quest to discern mechanisms before wholeheartedly accepting them, when it comes to the often gross extrapolations between observations and conclusions on macroevolution, scientists, it seems to me, permit unhealthy leeway. When hearing such extrapolations in the academy, when will we cry out, “The emperor has no clothes!”?

    …I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution could have happened. Hence, am I not free to join the ranks of the skeptical and to sign such a statement without reprisals from those that disagree with me? … Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution? If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me.

    In a more recent talk, entitled, Nanotech and Jesus Christ, given on 1 November 2012 at Georgia Tech, Professor Tour went further, and declared that no scientist that he has spoken to understands macroevolution – and that includes Nobel Prize winners! Here’s what he said when a student in the audience asked him about evolution:

    … I will tell you as a scientist and a synthetic chemist: if anybody should be able to understand evolution, it is me, because I make molecules for a living, and I don’t just buy a kit, and mix this and mix this, and get that. I mean, ab initio, I make molecules. I understand how hard it is to make molecules. I understand that if I take Nature’s tool kit, it could be much easier, because all the tools are already there, and I just mix it in the proportions, and I do it under these conditions, but ab initio is very, very hard.

    I don’t understand evolution, and I will confess that to you. Is that OK, for me to say, “I don’t understand this”? Is that all right? I know that there’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand anything about organic synthesis, but they understand evolution. I understand a lot about making molecules; I don’t understand evolution. And you would just say that, wow, I must be really unusual.

    Let me tell you what goes on in the back rooms of science – with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. I have sat with them, and when I get them alone, not in public – because it’s a scary thing, if you say what I just said – I say, “Do you understand all of this, where all of this came from, and how this happens?” Every time that I have sat with people who are synthetic chemists, who understand this, they go “Uh-uh. Nope.” These people are just so far off, on how to believe this stuff came together. I’ve sat with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. Sometimes I will say, “Do you understand this?”And if they’re afraid to say “Yes,” they say nothing. They just stare at me, because they can’t sincerely do it.

    I was once brought in by the Dean of the Department, many years ago, and he was a chemist. He was kind of concerned about some things. I said, “Let me ask you something. You’re a chemist. Do you understand this? How do you get DNA without a cell membrane? And how do you get a cell membrane without a DNA? And how does all this come together from this piece of jelly?” We have no idea, we have no idea. I said, “Isn’t it interesting that you, the Dean of science, and I, the chemistry professor, can talk about this quietly in your office, but we can’t go out there and talk about this?”

    If you understand evolution, I am fine with that. I’m not going to try to change you – not at all. In fact, I wish I had the understanding that you have.

      1. Yes, but you only said something about the whether some website made it seem as if Mr. Tour was an expert or not. And as you pointed out he said that he wasn’t. If you don’t remember one or two Scientists have commented that they aren’t sure whether anyone is an expert. And that they feel that no one is able to understand the evidence that many Evolutionists are using to support Evolution as what they claim it is. But at least Mr. Tour said it out front, that he doesn’t feel as if he is an expert. But that didn’t me that he hasn’t commented about what he thought about the subject. And that is exactly what he did. In those articles he commented that, “I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution could have happened. Hence, am I not free to join the ranks of the skeptical and to sign such a statement without reprisals from those that disagree with me? … Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution? If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me.

        In a more recent talk, entitled, Nanotech and Jesus Christ, given on 1 November 2012 at Georgia Tech, Professor Tour went further, and declared that no scientist that he has spoken to understands macroevolution – and that includes Nobel Prize winners! Here’s what he said when a student in the audience asked him about evolution:

        … I will tell you as a scientist and a synthetic chemist: if anybody should be able to understand evolution, it is me, because I make molecules for a living, and I don’t just buy a kit, and mix this and mix this, and get that. I mean, ab initio, I make molecules. I understand how hard it is to make molecules. I understand that if I take Nature’s tool kit, it could be much easier, because all the tools are already there, and I just mix it in the proportions, and I do it under these conditions, but ab initio is very, very hard.

        I don’t understand evolution, and I will confess that to you. Is that OK, for me to say, “I don’t understand this”? Is that all right? I know that there’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand anything about organic synthesis, but they understand evolution. I understand a lot about making molecules; I don’t understand evolution. And you would just say that, wow, I must be really unusual.

        Let me tell you what goes on in the back rooms of science – with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. I have sat with them, and when I get them alone, not in public – because it’s a scary thing, if you say what I just said – I say, “Do you understand all of this, where all of this came from, and how this happens?” Every time that I have sat with people who are synthetic chemists, who understand this, they go “Uh-uh. Nope.” These people are just so far off, on how to believe this stuff came together. I’ve sat with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. Sometimes I will say, “Do you understand this?”And if they’re afraid to say “Yes,” they say nothing. They just stare at me, because they can’t sincerely do it.

        I was once brought in by the Dean of the Department, many years ago, and he was a chemist. He was kind of concerned about some things. I said, “Let me ask you something. You’re a chemist. Do you understand this? How do you get DNA without a cell membrane? And how do you get a cell membrane without a DNA? And how does all this come together from this piece of jelly?” We have no idea, we have no idea. I said, “Isn’t it interesting that you, the Dean of science, and I, the chemistry professor, can talk about this quietly in your office, but we can’t go out there and talk about this?”

        If you understand evolution, I am fine with that. I’m not going to try to change you – not at all. In fact, I wish I had the understanding that you have.

        But about seven or eight years ago I posted on my Web site that I don’t understand. And I said, “I will buy lunch for anyone that will sit with me and explain to me evolution, and I won’t argue with you until I don’t understand something – I will ask you to clarify. But you can’t wave by and say, “This enzyme does that.” You’ve got to get down in the details of where molecules are built, for me. Nobody has come forward.”.

        You used part of the “truth” to make your point that he doesn’t feel qualified to support or not support ID or Evolution. But don’t go just halfway. Talk about all the rest that he said. He has asked other Evolutionists who feels as if they understand what he didn’t that he would buy them lunch to give them a chance to explain to him what the think they know. He openly stated that it doen’t make sense to him. Now that is what he said. And not just him. Please open up that closed mind and objectively look at the evidence other side is offering as a reason, not to settle for evolution and why ID, makes more sense. To look at the evidence and logically go through it, doesn’t harm you. It enlightens you. It will either provide you with more ammunition to disarm the Creationists or and support your views, or it will set you on the path for truth. Don’t be afraid of the truth. It will be the truth no matter who or what comes against it.

        1. The point is he said what he said. Whether he believes himself the best person to seek advice for a subject on not, he said what he said. And to tell you the truth, he spoke volumes. Now if he didn’t say what is being published as he saying it, then get him to say so in public. He never once said that he didn’t say what is supplied that he said. And he is not the only one saying it. There are scientists from all fields of science that state categorically that evolution is not science. It does not satisfy the demands of the scientific model. It skips from one assumption to another without providing any kind of evidence to support each of the assumptions, except for hear say’s.
          Where is the proof that Evolution is the reason all life except maybe the first life, came to be as they did? Some say life originated from nothing. This was thrown out by scientists and their Scientific model. They said that Spontaneous Generation is whack. It could not be proven. So Spontaneous Generation was deep six’ed. Then others said that life could have come from the random combining of chemical with chanceful encounters of energy of some sort. This has not been shown or duplicated any more than the Spontaneous Generation. So even though these questions have been left on the burner, the Evolutionists proceed with as yet an unproven assumption, and they reach up beyond their as yet unproven sub assumptions, going on with their base assumptions, that Evolution is how all species appeared. They make this assumption and run with it saying that they are headed for a touch down, when as yet their sub assumptions have no physical proof, and in order for the base assumption, or their main assumption to have credibility their sub assumptions must be proved credible. But even their main assumption that all species little by little made other species is pocked mark with serious high hurdles. One, We don’t see any species making any other species. And no one has reported observing any species making any new species. All horses only make horses. All bacteria only make bacteria. In short, the origin of species is not showing any kind of origin, at all. All we see is all organisms producing themselves. This would be the classic model of how Science has maintained its credibility. The Scientific body as it did for the Spontaneous Generation, should come together and looking at the lack of evidence as it is, except for the “we believes and look at this fossil it looks as if it could have come from this animal. Or the chemicals look as if they are getting horny for each other and so we believe’s” No, there is no evidence for life ever coming from nothing or from chemical, other than the simple statements of one supposed scientist making their statements but failing to offer any kind of evidence, and twisting the idea of what evidence is, to include assumptions as physical proof.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *