maclatunji:

Review the thread, you came late.

I had already done that before posting my questions. Now if you would stop prevaricating and answer directly it will be very much appreciated

cold:
I had already done that before posting my questions. Now if you would stop prevaricating and answer directly it will be very much appreciated

u will hav to wait till eternity expecting a direct answer from him.

cold:
I had already done that before posting my questions. Now if you would stop prevaricating and answer directly it will be very much appreciated

So you did and did not find that I had already answered most of your points already raised by other people?

Sorry cold but you bring very little that is new to this discussion/debate. The part that I feel is worth addressing is predicated on your belief in the existence of God and is outside the scope of this thread.

ninja4life:
u will hav to wait till eternity expecting a direct answer from him.

#Yawns

maclatunji:

So you did and did not find that I had already answered most of your points already raised by other people?

Sorry cold but you bring very little that is new to this discussion/debate. The part that I feel is worth addressing is predicated on your belief in the existence of God and is outside the scope of this thread.

More appropriately,outside the scope of your intelligence. It's ok,i get it

@texanomaly,

Just like the average theist, your post only further underlines the point I was making. Stop judging atheists based on your own narrow confines. An atheist becomes an atheist because he/she feels having done some honest deep thinking of all the facts available to the human race, the most intellectually honest thing to do is to be an atheist/agnostic. Because the underlying basis for coming to such a conclusion is knowledge, it only presupposes that if you theists can find a way to resolve your myriad of contradictions and proffer an intellectually honest & convincing knowledge-based logic to theism, we would be willing to consider your points on their merits.

Atheists don't feel a need to defend their space because basically it's a free space but when quasi-intellectuals like the OP create a thread to 'lecture atheists', you guys can not run away from the challenge of beating us on a purely logical basis rather than leaning on the disprovable basis of your theism and simply expecting us to eat what you are dishing because ultimately to you, your faith says so

texanomaly:

Don't Atheists employ this same strategy? I've seen it here on this thread, and others throughout the religion section. It's a vicious cycle on both sides of the debate.

I think K 17 is the only one that doesn't fall into it. Although he/she does use similar strategies to maneuver people where intended. This person only jumps in where it is strategically advantages. Then retreats in wait for the next opportunity. There is no struggle for superiority. Once a foothold is gotten, it is held till further advancement is a possibility. Genius! Is this person a military strategist? I have to wonder. Of all the arguments I see in this section, this person is the only who could convince me that Atheism is even a possibility for me. It is not. I'm just sayin'. 'Following'

@ maclatunji
Great job here. Also 'Following'

lorddeni: @texanomaly,

Just like the average theist, your post only further underlines the point I was making. Stop judging atheists based on your own narrow confines. An atheist becomes an atheist because he/she feels having done some honest deep thinking of all the facts available to the human race, the most intellectually honest thing for him/her to do is to be an atheist/agnostic.

Because the underlying basis for coming to such a conclusion is knowledge, it only presupposes that if you theists can find a way to resolve your myriad of contradictions and proffer an intellectually honest & convincing knowledge-based logic to theism, we would be willing to consider your points on their merits.

Atheists don't feel a need to defend their space because basically it's a free space but when quasi-intellectuals like the OP create a thread to 'lecture atheists', you guys can not run away from the challenge of beating us on a purely logical basis rather than leaning on the disprovable basis of your atheism and simply expecting us to eat what you are dishing because ultimately to you, your faith says so

Did you read my post? I honestly can't tell. I did not Judge anyone. If anything, I was complimentary to Kay 17. In the beginning I said Atheist use the same strategies for getting their point across as the others on this tread. Then I mentioned that it is a vicious cycle. Meaning both sides do it, and it just goes around and around, getting neither side anywhere. Ask any of the noteable Atheists here in NL. They will tell you that I am one of the least judgemental people you will ever meet.

Seems you just want to find a way to muddle things up. My point in the last post was once again, you are judging atheists based on your own theistic understanding by claiming most atheists here save for your precious Kay 17 use the same strategies for getting their point across as you theistic folks. This statement itself betrays your insistence on judging atheists from your own point of view-whether accurate or not.

I bet you if we take a poll of the atheists who have commented here, not one will agree with your point of imitating you theists in getting their points across- not even Kay 17 will agree with you here my dear.

texanomaly:

Did you read my post? I honestly can't tell. I did not Judge anyone. If anything, I was complimentary to Kay 17. In the beginning I said Atheist use the same strategies for getting their point across as the others on this tread. Then I mentioned that it is a vicious cycle. Meaning both sides do it, and it just goes around and around, getting neither side anywhere. Ask any of the noteable Atheists here in NL. They will tell you that I am one of the least judgemental people you will ever meet.

lorddeni: Seems you just want to find a way to muddle things up. My point in the last post was once again, you are judging atheists based on your own theistic understanding by claiming most atheists here save for your precious Kay 17 use the same strategies for getting their point across as you theistic folks. This statement itself betrays your insistence on judging atheists from your own point of view-whether accurate or not.

I bet you if we take a poll of the atheists who have commented here, not one will agree with your point of imitating you theists in getting their points across- not even Kay 17 will agree with you here my dear.

Ok...I'm judging...Are you happy? You know what? Maybe I am, because I swear both sides have some kind of playbook. I've seen enough of these debates to know the canned responses of both sides before I see them here. If I'm being judgmental, I'm measuring both side with the same stick. I'd say that is fair.

btw...K17 uses the same strategies, he/she just does it better.

@texanomaly

At least we can agree on you judging from your theistic perspective

texanomaly:

Ok...I'm judging...Are you happy? You know what? Maybe I am, because I swear both sides have some kind of playbook. I've seen enough of these debates to know the canned responses of both sides before I see them here. If I'm being judgmental, I'm measuring both side with the same stick. I'd say that is fair.

btw...K17 uses the same strategies, he/she just does it better.

lorddeni: @texanomaly

At least we can agree on you judging from your theistic perspective

...and there it is.


Thank you

Can any of you who claim to be atheists explain the theory behind 'psychokinesis' or 'miracles'.
Believe it or not, science has failed in many ways to provide suitable answers to human complications and existence.

There is obviously mighty invincible hands behind the scenes of the universe. He is the living God.

Fear God !

www.tortoise:
Can any of you who claim to be atheists explain the theory behind 'psychokinesis' or 'miracles'.
Believe it or not, science has failed in many ways to provide suitable answers to human complications and existence.

There is obviously mighty invincible hands behind the scenes of the universe. He is the living God.

Fear God !

Someone on this forum drank water from osun river (inhabited by river goddess osun) and got healed. Whatever explanation you have for that miracle, consider it an explanation for your miracles

rationalmind:

Someone on this forum drank water from osun river (inhabited by river goddess osun) and got healed. Whatever explanation you have for that miracle, consider it an explanation for your miracles

As I got to Awka for xmas the word around town is that there is a river in Enugu with healing powers!! Guess river goddesses are out bless us this xmas!

cold:
More appropriately,outside the scope of your intelligence. It's ok,i get it

Whatever makes you happy. #LOL

Mr Troll: It is better to keep mute and seem intelligent than to speak and remove all doubt.

Lecturing Atheists...lmao!

maclatunji:

You cannot determine the exact moment for example to say: I slept at 10pm last night is impossible, anybody that claims to know is simply estimating. You could go to bed at 10pm but actual time of drifting into sleep is impossible to tell.

there are devices that can track the exact time you fall asleep.. on the other hand, i can't seem to understand how that proves the existence of your god

www.tortoise:
Can any of you who claim to be atheists explain the theory behind 'psychokinesis' or 'miracles'.
Believe it or not, science has failed in many ways to provide suitable answers to human complications and existence.

There is obviously mighty invincible hands behind the scenes of the universe. He is the living God.

Fear God !

Give me one psychokinesis experiment that can/has been reproduced successfully. As far as I know they all tend to fail under outside scrutiny.

Do Atheists even believe PK/TK is even a possibility?

texanomaly: Do Atheists even believe PK/TK is even a possibility?

I am an atheist,and personally believe it's a possibility. Probably there's a latent powerful human ability that is not yet explored and currently unexplainable but the future sciences may be able bring to fore.

Like electricity was a mystery to a man who lived 200 years ago. Superhuman abilities be a mystery to us now, but may no longer be a mystery in the next 200 years.


I suggest you read these books
1. "Physics of the Impossible" by Michio Kaku (a world renowned physicist)
2. "Beyond Star Trek" by Laurence M. Krauss (also a world renowned astrophysicist)

MeandSum:

there are devices that can track the exact time you fall asleep.. on the other hand, i can't seem to understand how that proves the existence of your god

That is what the manufacturers tell you. Those who know better know that the devices give estimates not actual time of sleep.

How does that prove the existence of God? That post is an analogy, the fact that you do not fully understand a concept does not mean it does not exist.

It is very amusing to see people here resort to personal attacks without being able to debate the topic effectively.

How does your estimation of your opponent's intelligence win a debate?

By every parameter, your estimation is subjective as anyone can say anything about anyone at any time.

#LWKMD

I have to teach you how to debate and then debate with you? Maybe if I want to be amused.

cyrexx:

I am an atheist,and personally believe it's a possibility. Probably there's a latent powerful human ability that is not yet explored and currently unexplainable but the future sciences may be able bring to fore.

Like electricity was a mystery to a man who lived 200 years ago. Superhuman abilities be a mystery to us now, but may no longer be a mystery in the next 200 years.


I suggest you read these books
1. "Physics of the Impossible" by Michio Kaku (a world renowned physicist)
2. "Beyond Star Trek" by Laurence M. Krauss (also a world renowned astrophysicist)

I've read the first. I'll check out the other. Thanks

9jadelta: with the rubbish you r throwing around, I don't think any intelligent person will waste his/ her time debating with u.
I will advice you to move the thread to Islam section where your fellow D***e can debate ur garbage with u

After 5 pages? The import of your conclusion is that you are not intelligent because no "intelligent person would debate with me".

I cannot help but agree with you on several levels.

The second one is: Why would anyone intelligent claim they come from unintelligent sources?

maclatunji:

After 5 pages? The import of your conclusion is that you are not intelligent because no "intelligent person would debate with me".

I cannot help but agree with you on several levels.

The second one is: Why would anyone intelligent claim they come from unintelligent sources?

That is your claim

maclatunji:

After 5 pages? The import of your conclusion is that you are not intelligent because no "intelligent person would debate with me".

I cannot help but agree with you on several levels.

The second one is: Why would anyone intelligent claim they come from unintelligent sources?

That is your claim

Edit: why would anyone claim his intelligent source came from non-intelligent sources

rationalmind:
why would anyone claim his intelligent source came from non-intelligent sources

LOL.
Nice!

But I can bet he won't comprehend what you just said. I can see him grasping strawman and talking about something else totally different from this.

Don't blame him though, he's unable to think beyond the parameters allowed by his holy book.

rationalmind:

That is your claim

Edit: why would anyone claim his intelligent source came from non-intelligent sources

I claim that my source owns everything including intelligence, it is not a reversible idea.

Intelligent source for everything vs. Non-intelligent source for intelligent being.

cyrexx:

LOL.
Nice!

But I can bet he won't comprehend what you just said. I can see him grasping strawman and talking about something else totally different from this.

Don't blame him though, he's unable to think beyond the parameters allowed by his holy book.

@bolded, that is why he failed to answer my question and is asking another?

All I have seen in this thread is you lot claim "intelligence" whilst showing very little of it in your presentations. What has an Atheist got to offer beyond "I do not believe"? That is null from the onset. #LOL

"You do not believe"- null.

"You come from nothing"- null

The conclusion is quite simple- nullity over nullity is nullity a.k.a. 0.

Nobody wants to be a zero or at least smart people don't.