Atheist group to distribute books in schools after bibles were allowed. - Polidicks

Second amendment praised, first amendment told to fuck off

[QUOTE=sHiBaN;39258643]Oh you cunts. The Bible has societal, cultural and historical significance and hence requires a look-over even though you may not agree with the contents. Distributing propaganda like that is just a douche move imo; its not like the students aren't smart enough to make their owned damned decisions[/QUOTE] And free-thinking books don't have societal, cultural and historical significance and hence does not requires a look-over even though you may not agree with the contents?

No prob with the books but I really don't like it when atheism describes itself as "freethinking." I'm all for free thinking, but I don't think that necessarily (and strictly) excludes theistic viewpoints. It's like saying "if you have any spiritual beliefs, you have been brain washed; only atheists think for themselves." I don't think it really helps their cause, just like extremist Christians shouting God hates fags on street corners doesn't help theirs. But in the end I'd rather neither of the groups got their books in schools and we just stuck to educational science textbooks.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39265617]Evolution is starting to become "in doubt" .[/QUOTE] No it isnt. Edit: no really, it isnt.

[QUOTE=Most wanteD;39270412]No prob with the books but I really don't like it when atheism describes itself as "freethinking." I'm all for free thinking, but I don't think that necessarily (and strictly) excludes theistic viewpoints. It's like saying "if you have any spiritual beliefs, you have been brain washed; only atheists think for themselves." I don't think it really helps their cause, just like extremist Christians shouting God hates fags on street corners doesn't help theirs. But in the end I'd rather neither of the groups got their books in schools and we just stuck to educational science textbooks.[/QUOTE] To me "free thinking means" make up your own mind. Let children have access to as much reading material as possible, be it books about atheism, the bible, the quran, torah and what not - let them make up their own mind. But don't hand it out actively, leave it to the library. I don't think organizations should be allowed to provide material to children in school, but if it really has to work that way, everyone should be able to hand their stuff out.

holy shit why do they even care, let them distr. their book without being an asshole and doing the same thing just to piss other people off.

[QUOTE=Sokrates;39271929]holy shit why do they even care, let them distr. their book without being an asshole and doing the same thing just to piss other people off.[/QUOTE] Because it's pretty much breaching the concept of secularism? And why are they assholes for wanting to do the exact same thing? To me it seems very much like a protest and not just silly stuff. Just read the quote: "It's not tit for tat. Our effort is to ensure the county realizes this is the wrong policy." - they're totally right, this is the wrong policy.

What is it with people and attitudes towards athiests of late?. How can anyone see them as the bad guys here? a bunch of christians are constantly trying to teach children, who are too young to know any better, that the tales in their holy book are [b]FACTS[/b]. This is wrong. Not only are they lying to the children, teaching them things that are 100% incorrect, but they are taking away thier chance to choose a religion, or lack of one. So then this athiest group sees this going on, and distributes some leaflets and books encouraging these kids to think about what they are being told, to challenge it, to not just blindly accept what they are being taught and actully ask questions about its legitimacy and enquire about evidence- They are making an attempt at giving the kids a chance the christains are trying to steal from them. but for some reason this makes them "just as bad!".

[QUOTE=Robbobin;39265727]I imagine this has probably been done too; it's just not worth reporting on.[/QUOTE] It was actually reported on in the article OP posted but he doesn't really care about the story, just shitting on atheists. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=fulgrim;39272133]What is it with people and attitudes towards athiests of late?. How can anyone see them as the bad guys here?[/QUOTE] Because atheists did something. The context doesn't matter, exactly what they did doesn't matter. If atheists do anything and it's reported, people will call them aggressive and confrontational and other such nonsense.

Outside groups should have no right to distribute material to 5th graders. High schoolers, maybe, but I don't like that either. Regardless, I think the atheist group here has the right idea asking that no one be allowed to hand out books/pamphlets.

Reminds me of when a jehovas witness gave me a magazine about how cameras and airplanes don't compare to god because god made eyes and birds. The weirdest thing is she handed the magazine to me, I looked at it, looked back up and she was gone...

[QUOTE=_Kent_;39272319]Outside groups should have no right to distribute material to 5th graders. High schoolers, maybe, but I don't like that either. Regardless, I think the atheist group here has the right idea asking that no one be allowed to hand out books/pamphlets.[/QUOTE] I don't think distribution is the answer here. I'm more along the lines of keeping the materials themselves in the library for the students to discover themselves.

[QUOTE=sHiBaN;39258643]Oh you cunts. The Bible has societal, cultural and historical significance and hence requires a look-over even though you may not agree with the contents. Distributing propaganda like that is just a douche move imo; its not like the students aren't smart enough to make their owned damned decisions[/QUOTE] lol, yeah man, because Christians aren't basically doing the same thing. :downs: [QUOTE=Boxbot219;39260087]Yeah those social network browsing scum. They should pick up a fedora and visit a classy site like facepunch.[/QUOTE] fedora in casuals [I][B]swag[/B][/I]

This whole thing(the article and the thread) makes me happy that religion is a very private thing here in denmark.

[QUOTE=Milkdairy;39264679]I doubt many of you have even read the bible, or the fact that you ever intend to. Does this not contradict everyone's claims of indoctrination if they themselves are indoctrinated into an antitheist circlejerk band wagon?? Your opnions are worth as much as some foreigner commenting on a situation they don't even know the corcumstances of if you can't bring yourself to hear your opposition's texts too. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] fuck spelling dumb me you heretics, dumb me[/QUOTE] I was raised a Roman Catholic. I am now an atheist. I'm such a foreigner. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Most wanteD;39270412]No prob with the books but I really don't like it when atheism describes itself as "freethinking." I'm all for free thinking, but I don't think that necessarily (and strictly) excludes theistic viewpoints. It's like saying "if you have any spiritual beliefs, you have been brain washed; only atheists think for themselves." I don't think it really helps their cause, just like extremist Christians shouting God hates fags on street corners doesn't help theirs. But in the end I'd rather neither of the groups got their books in schools and we just stuck to educational science textbooks.[/QUOTE] The little atheist book probably has a ton in common with science textbooks. At least in the manner of thinking. I imagine it teaches the value of justified beliefs, acquiring evidence before coming to a conclusion, etc. I'm just speculating though, I haven't read it.

As a Christian, I'm gonna have to say, putting the Bible into a school is a bad idea if you're not going to put in some other religious texts, too. Like the Quaran, the Torah, some Buddhist texts. Maybe offer up an optional religious studies class for the kids who are religious.

[QUOTE=Bean Shoot;39267115]The Flood, Jericho, pretty much all of Joshua's conquests, the firstborn plague, David and Bathsheba's infant son, etc. Just look at the Old Testament and see how many times they mentioned slaughtering all the men, women, and children in the cities they conquer as a direct order from God. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] No. We might as well be doubting gravity if we are doubting evolution like that. We shouldn't fully believe in anything, yeah, but there's enough evidence to consider it true for all intents and purposes. There's a reason creationists are not being taken seriously. They spew the same arguments over and over again which are shot down every time a creationist group manages to get into court. If there are scientists with evidence for creationism or casting doubt on evolution, then publish a paper on it instead of being interviewed by hacks like Ben Stein.[/QUOTE] Enough evidence? HA. I am laughing at that. There are numerous evidence for creation; I suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" or "Refuting Evolution". They shoot down a lot of atheistic arguments. You sir, believe in something called "spontaneous generation", or, in other words, you are thinking like what people in medieval times thought- that rats came from dirty underwear. Of course, you don't believe that part, but you believe that living creatures came from a non-living chemical, which, at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans. You also believe that you are nothing, you yourself are just a chemical reaction with no purpose or intent of anything. Your shock and insults from this are also chemical reactions, that is, if you believe in the materialistic view which evolution is. Evolution itself is a religion- not only do vast amounts of it comply with the Humanist Manifesto, but evolution requires a lot of faith- the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing. Yes, the same thing can be said about Creation, so neither can really argue about the validity of either of them if they cannot be disproved. Also, there is evidence everywhere for the Flood, I suggest you read a small bit of creation.com . Evolutionist "discoveries" are also shot out of the sky by creationists, mind you, you just don't hear about them due to a thing called "media censorship". Another thing I should add is that atheists use a thing called [I][U]circular reasoning[/U][/I] in the "geological column". The "ages" in it are arranged in the way they should have evolved so that then it proves evolution. Exactly what happens when you guys discover something 2 billion years old on top of something 30 million? Besides, no where on Earth are those rock types found in that exact arrangement. There are plenty of examples. Also, the Earth's rotational speed is slowing down. Should Earth actually be billions of years old, it would be the equivalent of a flat pancake right now due to the speeds it was at so many years ago. If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now. And on the note of those examples you listed, the "baby plague" and Bathsheba and David's son can easily be explained. They were punishments. If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven. Jericho happened because God was with them, He took down the walls. And by "Joshua's conquests" it would be nice to see some in particular, unless that would be too difficult ;) Also, if this discussion would be better in another place, Mods, just say the word and I can continue it elsewhere. Good day to you.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven.[/QUOTE] Sorry, didn't realize you weren't being serious.

[QUOTE=Bean Shoot;39276061]Sorry, didn't realize you weren't being serious.[/QUOTE] I am, actually. The chemicals, in that ocean, would literally dissolve away. And the population thing actually is true, believe it or not.

Please, tell me more about your "chemicals couldn't exist in oceans" idea.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39276180]And the population thing actually is true, believe it or not.[/QUOTE] "But I don't have a source aside from a documentary that is discredited by every scientific institute on the planet!"

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Enough evidence? HA. I am laughing at that. [/QUOTE] We're laughing at you. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]There are numerous evidence for creation; I suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" or "Refuting Evolution". They shoot down a lot of atheistic arguments. [/QUOTE] I can prove evolution to you in a matter of minutes. Do you believe in selective breeding? Like you have 100 dogs and you use them for racing, you know which ones you breed? The fastest ones. You don't let others breed at all. Next generation will be just a tiny bit faster on average than the previous one. Do that for couple of millions of years and those dogs will hardly resemble those that you started with and will be a lot faster. "But who controls the breeding in the wild?" you ask? Predators, limited food supply and otherwise hostile environment. Only those who are best suited for the environment that they are currently in will survive long enough to breed. And the next generation will be just a tiny bit better suited for the environment on average. And so on. Now when it happens that the same species finds itself in 2 different environments, they will evolve in a different way because they need different survival mechanisms. Those on plains have to run fast to get away from predators, those in a forest climb the trees for instance. The changes just take a lot of time. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]You sir, believe in something called "spontaneous generation", or, in other words, you are thinking like what people in medieval times thought- that rats came from dirty underwear. Of course, you don't believe that part, but you believe that living creatures came from a non-living chemical, which, at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans. [/QUOTE] Actual scientific source on that? Oh wait you were about to say something like "the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing" so how do you know that? How can you say a "fact" from that time and then go with "we can't know what was happened then"? [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]You also believe that you are nothing, you yourself are just a chemical reaction with no purpose or intent of anything. Your shock and insults from this are also chemical reactions, that is, if you believe in the materialistic view which evolution is. [/QUOTE] Well yes we are a bunch of chemical reactions. And yea we don't have a purpose or intent. Or you could say that every living organism's purpose is to prolong existence of the species. But other than that you're the one who gives yourself goals and purpose. "I want to go to college" "I want to buy a house" "I want a wife" "I want children" "I want to be happy" "I want to have lvl 85 rouge on pvp server". Your purpose is whatever you want. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Evolution itself is a religion- not only do vast amounts of it comply with the Humanist Manifesto, but evolution requires a lot of faith- the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing.[/QUOTE] Evolution is a scientific fact, you don't believe in facts, you either accept or reject facts. And we can witness microevolution and we "believe" in selective breeding. There's your fucking test. Also if you think that everything that we can't witness is based purely on belief then the entire history is a religion. And I guess we have to take holocaust on faith... [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] Yes, the same thing can be said about Creation, so neither can really argue about the validity of either of them if they cannot be disproved. [/QUOTE] Pretty much everything that creationists came up with can be disproven. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Also, there is evidence everywhere for the Flood, I suggest you read a small bit of creation.com .[/QUOTE] I'm not gonna loose brain cells reading through a bullshit compendium. Post the "evidence" here if it exist. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] Evolutionist "discoveries" are also shot out of the sky by creationists, mind you, you just don't hear about them due to a thing called "media censorship". [/QUOTE] Yes evolutionists control the media. I don't even know what to say to this. If you could scientifically disprove evolution or prove that the earth is 6000 years old or whatever you'd get a nobel price and put the world upside down. The reason why nobody takes you people seriously is because you don't even understand what evolution is, therefore you can't disprove it. I've heard all about the crockoduck, banana fits perfectly your hand and "why aren't we born monkeys" or "why are there still monkeys". [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Another thing I should add is that atheists use a thing called [I][U]circular reasoning[/U][/I] in the "geological column".[/QUOTE] You want to talk circular logic? [B]Bible is infallible[/B] - But how do we know that? - [I]The bible is the word of God[/I] - But how do we know that? - [U]Because the bible tells us that [/U]- But why believe in the bible? - [B]Because bible is infallible [/B]- But how do we know that? -[I] The bible is the word of God[/I] - But how do we know that? - [U]Because the bible tells us that [/U]- [...] [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] The "ages" in it are arranged in the way they should have evolved so that then it proves evolution. Exactly what happens when you guys discover something 2 billion years old on top of something 30 million? Besides, no where on Earth are those rock types found in that exact arrangement. There are plenty of examples.[/QUOTE] What are you even talking about? There are layers of earth and they are perfectly lined up unless there was/is [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orogeny"]orogeny[/URL]. You know masses of land moving over and under each other. [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] Also, the Earth's rotational speed is slowing down. Should Earth actually be billions of years old, it would be the equivalent of a flat pancake right now due to the speeds it was at so many years ago. [/QUOTE] Fucking gravity how does it work? [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now.[/QUOTE] Why? It's not like we've walked out of the ocean at the beginning of life as humans and lived since then. Oh wait you're a creationist and you just applied your bullshit to actual science... [QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]And on the note of those examples you listed, the "baby plague" and Bathsheba and David's son can easily be explained. They were punishments. If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven. Jericho happened because God was with them, He took down the walls. And by "Joshua's conquests" it would be nice to see some in particular, unless that would be too difficult ;) [/QUOTE] The point is God is a cruel motherfucker. All the hardships in the world exist so God can test us right? 1.God is all knowing. If god knows you completely and he creates a test for you, he knows the result before you go through the test. There is no reason to test faith if your god is all knowing. 2.It paints a horrible image for that god. A giant sadist. He creates a test for you that if you fail you go to hell (the test is your entire life), then he puts things to tempt you to fail the test? And then he goes "well it's your own fault"? How fucking twisted is that. It's like putting a carrot and a sausage in front of my dog and killing it in a horrible way if it choses the sausage. Not only I know that it's gonna choose the sausage but I'm also killing it for it. The dog isn't at fault. I've made the test in a way that's certain that the dog is going to fail it. The illusion of choice is just a made up excuse for me to kill the dog.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39265617]Evolution is starting to become "in doubt" by many scientists world-wide. The only reason why most of the never come forward is because they fear for their jobs; a few years ago a worker at NASA got fired after being forced to "shut up" (for lack of better term) after talking to workmates about Creationism and such. I suggest you watch "eXpelled" for a better understanding than I can provide you with.[/QUOTE] You're a screaming retard with no idea what you're talking about, bring evidence to the table that proves your viewpoint or die in a hole, because evolution has over 100 years of scientific evidence as well as evidence in related fields such as genetics to back it up. You better have some fucking impressive evidence to try and prove meiosis wrong. [img]http://images.tutorvista.com/content/cell-reproduction/meiosis-and-mitosis-comparison.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Enough evidence? HA. I am laughing at that. There are numerous evidence for creation; I suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" or "Refuting Evolution". They shoot down a lot of atheistic arguments. You sir, believe in something called "spontaneous generation", or, in other words, you are thinking like what people in medieval times thought- that rats came from dirty underwear. Of course, you don't believe that part, but you believe that living creatures came from a non-living chemical, which, at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans. You also believe that you are nothing, you yourself are just a chemical reaction with no purpose or intent of anything. Your shock and insults from this are also chemical reactions, that is, if you believe in the materialistic view which evolution is. Evolution itself is a religion- not only do vast amounts of it comply with the Humanist Manifesto, but evolution requires a lot of faith- the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing. Yes, the same thing can be said about Creation, so neither can really argue about the validity of either of them if they cannot be disproved. Also, there is evidence everywhere for the Flood, I suggest you read a small bit of creation.com . Evolutionist "discoveries" are also shot out of the sky by creationists, mind you, you just don't hear about them due to a thing called "media censorship". Another thing I should add is that atheists use a thing called [I][U]circular reasoning[/U][/I] in the "geological column". The "ages" in it are arranged in the way they should have evolved so that then it proves evolution. Exactly what happens when you guys discover something 2 billion years old on top of something 30 million? Besides, no where on Earth are those rock types found in that exact arrangement. There are plenty of examples. Also, the Earth's rotational speed is slowing down. Should Earth actually be billions of years old, it would be the equivalent of a flat pancake right now due to the speeds it was at so many years ago. If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now. And on the note of those examples you listed, the "baby plague" and Bathsheba and David's son can easily be explained. They were punishments. If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven. Jericho happened because God was with them, He took down the walls. And by "Joshua's conquests" it would be nice to see some in particular, unless that would be too difficult ;) Also, if this discussion would be better in another place, Mods, just say the word and I can continue it elsewhere. Good day to you.[/QUOTE] Your post is sarcastic and you're trying to prove why what the atheist group in the OP are doing is important right?

[QUOTE=Crimor;39274581]religion is a very private thing here in denmark.[/QUOTE] oh is it now [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yH7De2s.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39276180]I am, actually. The chemicals, in that ocean, would literally dissolve away. And the population thing actually is true, believe it or not.[/QUOTE] Can you stop posting already? There's plenty of other things that you could be arguing about in this thread that are much less stupid.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Enough evidence? HA. I am laughing at that. There are numerous evidence for creation; I suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" or "Refuting Evolution". They shoot down a lot of atheistic arguments.[/quote] I could probably read those books, but I really don't think a Danish library would have a copy of them. [quote] You sir, believe in something called "spontaneous generation", or, in other words, you are thinking like what people in medieval times thought- that rats came from dirty underwear. [/quote] No, I don't. Evolution is everything but spontaneous. It's very much gradual, and I guess you have that "fact" from the aforementioned books. [quote] Of course, you don't believe that part, but you believe that living creatures came from a non-living chemical, which, at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans. [/quote] I believe (until something else with as much evidence should come along) that living creatures came from "non-living" chemicals. And nope, chemicals could very much exist at that time. We have actual living creatures capable of living in temperatures as high as 100C (their enzymes are actually used in human DNA-replication), and while these guys aren't human, they're "alive". And you seem to forget that the circumstances were actually very good for making new stuff: Lots of energy, lots of different chemical elements. Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon and Phosphor were all chemicals present at the time, and this is the building blocks of DNA. [quote] You also believe that you are nothing, you yourself are just a chemical reaction with no purpose or intent of anything. Your shock and insults from this are also chemical reactions, that is, if you believe in the materialistic view which evolution is.[/quote] I'm not nothing. I'm human, made up of millions upon millions of different compounds, making me capable of logical thought. You may find that detestable, but I think it's a quite beautiful thought - we're literally made up of old stars, and due to a couple of billion random events, I'm now alive. You remind me of a review I read of the "Dark matter" trilogy; the writer wrote some tips on how to argue with an atheist over the meaning of the book, and he made a point of saying that the way Phillip Pullman describes death must be rather dull compared to heaven and glory. I disagree, but it's the same argument you're putting up. [quote] Evolution itself is a religion- not only do vast amounts of it comply with the Humanist Manifesto, but evolution requires a lot of faith- the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing. Yes, the same thing can be said about Creation, so neither can really argue about the validity of either of them if they cannot be disproved. [/quote] Evolution is [I]not[/I] a religion. There's no god, and no faith - at least no more than what you find with other scientific theories. Like with the big bang, we can't go back to the source completely and say "This is what happened", but we can get fairly close, and there's evidence left behind that we can analyze. We might one day find evidence that this is not the way stuff happened, but until then it's what stands. [quote] Also, there is evidence everywhere for the Flood, I suggest you read a small bit of creation.com . Evolutionist "discoveries" are also shot out of the sky by creationists, mind you, you just don't hear about them due to a thing called "media censorship". Another thing I should add is that atheists use a thing called [I][U]circular reasoning[/U][/I] in the "geological column". The "ages" in it are arranged in the way they should have evolved so that then it proves evolution. Exactly what happens when you guys discover something 2 billion years old on top of something 30 million? Besides, no where on Earth are those rock types found in that exact arrangement. There are plenty of examples. [/quote] Give me an example, then. And maybe the "ages" are arranged in that way, because that's how it was found? Go out in your backyard and start digging. [quote] Also, the Earth's rotational speed is slowing down. Should Earth actually be billions of years old, it would be the equivalent of a flat pancake right now due to the speeds it was at so many years ago. If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now. [/quote] No, there shouldn't. The human as we know it first walked the earth some 200,000 years ago, and it's only in the last few hundred years that we've had this kind of growth. Humans in the past didn't have the same tools we have today, and it's not until some 200 years ago that we started figuring out medicine. Naturally they would have died at much faster pace than today, and it's clear that humans weren't "meant" to last for more than 50 years - just look at old people, would they be successful 10,000 years ago? Teeth, links and muscles are weakened rather fast, and it's only because of the way we live today that people live that long. Take rural Africa for example - people live under conditions reminiscent of those you'd encounter more than a few hundred years back. The average live span in those parts are not much more than 35 years. [quote] And on the note of those examples you listed, the "baby plague" and Bathsheba and David's son can easily be explained. They were punishments. If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven. Jericho happened because God was with them, He took down the walls. And by "Joshua's conquests" it would be nice to see some in particular, unless that would be too difficult ;) [/quote] I really don't know where this part came from, and I'm not here to disprove what's said in the bible or whatever. [quote] Also, if this discussion would be better in another place, Mods, just say the word and I can continue it elsewhere. Good day to you.[/QUOTE] You too. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;39277397]oh is it now [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yH7De2s.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] I suppose that's in conjunction with the 12 Muhammad drawings? And religion is a private thing here in Denmark, you don't go around talking about it - it's not important. Making fun of it? Happens all the time.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850]Enough evidence? HA. I am laughing at that. There are numerous evidence for creation; I suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" or "Refuting Evolution". They shoot down a lot of atheistic arguments. You sir, believe in something called "spontaneous generation", or, in other words, you are thinking like what people in medieval times thought- that rats came from dirty underwear. Of course, you don't believe that part, but you believe that living creatures came from a non-living chemical, which, at the time this happened, had conditions too hostile for chemicals to even exist in the oceans. You also believe that you are nothing, you yourself are just a chemical reaction with no purpose or intent of anything. Your shock and insults from this are also chemical reactions, that is, if you believe in the materialistic view which evolution is. Evolution itself is a religion- not only do vast amounts of it comply with the Humanist Manifesto, but evolution requires a lot of faith- the base subjects of it are unavailable for testing. Yes, the same thing can be said about Creation, so neither can really argue about the validity of either of them if they cannot be disproved. Also, there is evidence everywhere for the Flood, I suggest you read a small bit of creation.com . Evolutionist "discoveries" are also shot out of the sky by creationists, mind you, you just don't hear about them due to a thing called "media censorship". Another thing I should add is that atheists use a thing called [I][U]circular reasoning[/U][/I] in the "geological column". The "ages" in it are arranged in the way they should have evolved so that then it proves evolution. Exactly what happens when you guys discover something 2 billion years old on top of something 30 million? Besides, no where on Earth are those rock types found in that exact arrangement. There are plenty of examples. Also, the Earth's rotational speed is slowing down. Should Earth actually be billions of years old, it would be the equivalent of a flat pancake right now due to the speeds it was at so many years ago. If the Earth were so old anyway, there would literally be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people on Earth right now. And on the note of those examples you listed, the "baby plague" and Bathsheba and David's son can easily be explained. They were punishments. If a child has bad parents should the child stay with them? Besides, due to the age of the child, it is safe to assume they went to Heaven. Jericho happened because God was with them, He took down the walls. And by "Joshua's conquests" it would be nice to see some in particular, unless that would be too difficult ;) Also, if this discussion would be better in another place, Mods, just say the word and I can continue it elsewhere. Good day to you.[/QUOTE] This post is so dumb that it has somehow transcends dumbness itself and becomes dumb on a level of which we cannot conceive.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;39277803]This post is so dumb that it has somehow transcends dumbness itself and because dumb on a level of which we cannot conceive.[/QUOTE] His stupidity goes beyond even willful ignorance to the point where his mind crushing idiocy becomes a force of nature in its own right. It's actually impressive.

[QUOTE=EpicRandomnes;39275850] *stuff that is so wrong it makes me a bit sad. * [/QUOTE] [b]WHO DID THIS TO YOU?[/b] let me guess bro, you have exactly the same story as an old friend of mine- you were raised as a creationist by your family, kept out of science classes for religious reasons, taught the bible is 100% fact, and given stupid false awnsers to your legitmate questions about evolution, that seem to make sence to you, but only becuase you never had a clue how evolution worked in the first place. my friend was literally taught men and women are indipendant speices and used "IF WE EVOLVED- HOW DID MEN AND WOMEN EVOLOVE ALONGSIDE EACHOTHER!!" to try and disproove it. he ended up cutting contact with me as a friend on the grounds i was an agent of satan and an agressive athiest- becuase i explained how crude oil is produced to my little brother in front of him. Dude all i can say is- what you have been taught is so massively and glaringly wrong, for reasons so kindly pointed out by posters before me- that its literally uspetting for me - whoever taught you this stuff has, in my mind, done somthing incredibly harsh and spiteful to you.