There is no God

[dthmstr254]

You are so unbelievabley off its shocking. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT PERSONALITIES. YOU CLEARLY STATED THAT CHRISTIANANITY IS NOT THE MAJORITY SINCE IF IT WERE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VOTED TO REMOVE TEACHINGS OF EVOLUTION WITH YOUR OWN BELIEFS. THATS A NATIONAL STATEMENT, NOT YOUR PETTY OBSERVATIONS OF A LIMITED, BIASED, CONTROLED, SITUATIONAL, WEBSITE THAT YOU SOMEHOW JUSTIFY AS BEING YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE THAT IS SOMEHOW USED AS AN ARGUMENT. YOUR OBSERVATIONS OR EXPERIENCES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH STATS AND FACTS. YOU ARE ONE PERSON. CONGRESS DOESN'T CARE ABOUT HOW MANY CHRISTIANS YOU MEET ON YOUR BUS. WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH? ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE DISTORTING MY POSTS FOR YOUR OWN SELFISH PURPOSES.

Not only that but you ONCE AGAIN use a statistical fact to argue something when you yourself announced such things as thruthless. You are contradicting yourself as well as arguing with a figment of your hopeless desires to obtain a vulnerable invisible opponent to base your nonsense off of. YOU'RE DEFINITION OF A CHRISTIAN IS IRRELEVANT IN THE SENSE OF A NATIONAL STATISTIC.



That is such nonsense I am beggining to question why I'm arguing with you. But what the heck.

Firstly, let me decipher this mess to show how ridiculous it really is.

"Creationism is more like a forensic case"- Forensic means relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of law. In other words you are announcing creationism on scientific or technologic investigations. Yet you cearly claimed that evolution cannot be proved for it is not observable and cannot be witnessed. Once again, creationism cannot be witnessed either and to tell me it is forensic is meaningless according to your contradicting arguments.

"compiling the minutia with the major facts to support its argument"- Once again, you yourself are now claiming that "minor and major facts" support creationism yet when confronted with the same exact thing directed towards evolution you disregard it as it having no experimental data. I suggest you get your thoughts straight before feeding me this incoherent garbage of aN argument.

"this means it is a scientific argument that SUPPORTS our faith"- Once again, you are infested with flaws in contradiction. Also, if you would, please provide your scientific notions that supports your faith and than tell me why its so valid yet the scientific notions that support evolution are somehow invalidated due to lack of experimental data and than, if you would, justify why creationism is protected from the same logic of a experimental data necessity while evolution is soley vulnerable.

do you have any interest in understanding the use of arguing versus debating. if you want to say that words define the person, than I can't change you, and you can continue living as you are. as it is, you are the quickest person to have ended up on my ignore list in the time I have been on this board.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Glad to hear you can't handle critical analyses. Your post deserved it. Unfortunately, on a debate site like this, you are nothing but the words you use. If you wanted to express something other than your words, you should have thought about that before you hit submit. Now, to ignore me, is very flattering but, it proves something about you as well. If you can't handle harsh criticism on your posts, than don't post them. Especially when I’ve noticed you have a history of insulting people in this site.

[Osborn F Enready]

Lullaby Chainer said:
Glad to hear you can't handle critical analyses. Your post deserved it. Unfortunately, on a debate site like this, you are nothing but the words you use. If you wanted to express something other than your words, you should have thought about that before you hit submit. Now, to ignore me, is very flattering but, it proves something about you as well. If you can't handle harsh criticism on your posts, than don't post them. Especially when I’ve noticed you have a history of insulting people in this site.

I say:
I have to fall in the Athiest category myself as of this point.

I have explored and theorized on religion, and am content in placing my existence in science and understanding of the universe as opposed to manmade control programs and myth.

All I can say is good luck in finding religious debaters who can find a consistent line between facts vs belief. In my experience most (not all) of the religious people I have debated religion with, especially Deathmstr, are all over the chart on where they selectively choose where to draw the line.

Just don't let your experience debating religion here form your idea of all the debate here, as once you get away from religion the debate here is quite good at times, and often scholarly.

That is of course, unless all you want to debate is religion.

Welcome to the site, and I look forward to future debate.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

do you have any interest in understanding the use of arguing versus debating. if you want to say that words define the person, than I can't change you, and you can continue living as you are. as it is, you are the quickest person to have ended up on my ignore list in the time I have been on this board.

I wish you could take debate seriously and stop whining when people show how ignorant you are.

[dthmstr254]

I wish you could take debate seriously and stop whining when people show how ignorant you are.

okay, if a person who murders 6 people, according to scientific studies (forensics for those who are befuddled by what I said.), says he didn't kill anybody, does that mean he didn't kill them?

[Jack]

What does that poorly phrased question have to do with the topic?

[SoccerfreakAB2]

What does that poorly phrased question have to do with the topic?

Nothing, Ish. Maybe that's his point...

[dthmstr254]

What does that poorly phrased question have to do with the topic?

mr lullaby said he holds the census (what people say) over the studies held by Mcgraw-Hill (what they do). the studies disagree with the census, and studies go further than a census. studies reveal that only 25-30% of America actually follow Christian principles.

[Kite]

I certainly dont.

[Matt W]

I certainly dont.

Kite, please add something to the debate. Expand on your 'point' above.

Do not respond to this post with this thread. PM myself or Sean if you have any questions.

[Kite]

I was trying to imply that even if you do not follow all christian principles doesn't mean that you aren't a christian.

[Jack]

only 25-30% of America actually follow Christian principles.

Measured how? Which church's precepts? What if they do all but one of the things they're supposed to? All but two? How do you quantify such a statistic?