Image123:


There's one Samuel boy that climaxes on hearing things like this. It helps assuage his fantasies of there is no God. i am sure he will soon be here if he's not here already. Kingsamz or something

mployer:


You are so Daft.

Who created what science is copying?

Even your esteemed scientist, Eistein, believed in a created universe.

He said he believes in God that manifest himself in orderliness of the universe, But he doesn't believe in God that interferes in the affairs of humans.

He saw the handwork of God in the beauty of creation but God wasn't revealed to him personally.

kingxsamz:

Going by your poor logic, I could say " A Unicorn with five heads that sh!ts rainbows lives beneath the sea, (even though I haven't seen one) and that would be a fact. Do you agree?

MrColdsweat:


Spot on. More like a doctrine having falsism as its fuel.

As long as your path to the truth involves using new truth claims or new proven truths to falsify old truths, you will never find the absolute truth.

Facts are eventually falsified.

Ayilara1:


Because God has manifested Himself to be perfect while science has always been inconsistent.

A law today and tomorrow a refutation... How do we believe such a system?

Before the discovery of the microscope, scientist won't have believed in microorgAnisms since they don't see it.

That's how you all will regret denying God when you eventually see feel him in the hereafter.

80million�

kingxsamz:


No one is claiming smart here lol.
We're all learning bro.
Now @bolded. It shows you are not bright.
What has being an atheist or not got to do with facts?
When Eistein did his research, did he open the bible and pray and all the answers he was looking for appear on the wall?
So when you said Eistein believed in a god so as to validate your god claim, I pointed out how dumb that was, because Eistein never dropped any proof or scientific research that this god exists.

danyero:
You are not deserving of a reply, but look up something called 'appeal to authority'.

RemoveKebab:
With the comments am seeing above I can say that we have a lot of illiterates on NL, no wonder it full of bizarre comments at times.

There is something called carbon dating,Ok

Golan007:
It is easier for a black man to believe a tribe of people are God's chosen, a woman had a child without intercourse and the product of that birth ended up walking on water, dying and thereafter resurrecting and ascended unto to a place called heaven, than to accept that dinosaurs whose remains we see all the time ever existed.

Ayilara1:


Your poor logic is that you don't believe what you don't see and I'm telling you some of your ancestors in atheism would have argued that microbes don't exist which is tantamount to stupidity today. I'm only taking you on by your logic not mine. As a believer in almost every religion, belief in unseen is essential.

To your question, to be frank I wouldn't believe because it has no or negligible consequence whether I did or not but I will be reasonable enough not to rule out its possibility.

And how is it possible for ants to comprehend the existence of men? How then do we want to comprehend with our little sense the one that created us?

The cup you use in drinking is oblivious of your existence though you're it creator.

Not believing in science has a negligible consequence on me but not believing in God has a very regrettable consequence for you ... Please, who's smarter?

Juliusmomoh:

Hahahaha... U better start dat stuff now oo....

davidtemi:
no mind dem, Dem go dey call years as if in the beginning na dem b4 God

mployer:


Believing in existence of God and worshipping God are two different things.

Eistein didn't worship God, he didn't see the need for it, but he believed in existence of God. He saw his handiwork in the orderliness of the universe.

I have no problem with someone choosing not to worship God, but saying he doesn't exist is quite unreasonable. His evidence of existence abound everywhere.

nedzuby:



How old do you think the earth is?

Passionatebabe:


But as a believer in "science" one of your most trusted subjects is "evolution". The big bang happened, rocks and other inanimate pieces suddenly became single and multi celled organisms. Fish, frogs and other amphibians quickly transformed to lions and monkeys. These ones in turn became YOUR ancestors. When reminded that goats continue to be goats and fish continue to be fish, you claim there were "missing links".

You refuse to believe in God and his son Jesus even archeological and other evidences confirm so many things written in the Bible. True Christians believe in the "right science" not just any science. So stop condemning what you don't know or what you refuse to know, only to believe in "unproven science"

Moreover, in your understanding, it is only "black man" that believes in God! What more can I say!?

Ayilara1:


Evolution of science in itself makes it gullible, imagine you telling a scientist before the discovery of microorganisms that they do exist he'll argue to the greatest stretch that they don't since he didn't see them. How gullible will that person be in this age?

So, not seeing God isn't a justification of him not being I existence since there's a possibility of seeing him one day - Youll never see him tho

Those part of the space you people haven't been to before might be where he resides.

I'm a biologist and I know how little of the ocean has been examined.. DDoesn't that suggest to you there are somethings right in the ocean scientist have no clue about?

Barbsamiin:
hmmm, nairaland and million years of dinosaurus.

how can someone sit at the comfort of his environ creating 3D imagineries and telling stories of 80m years ago.
Anyway, man must chop.

YoungDaNaval:
80million what? How did you come up with that? Is there a device to know how long the egg has been into existence

kingxsamz:


You're not bright at all.
Where in my comment did I say only visible evidence is credible?
Can you see air, no. But can you prove that it exists, yes. Evidence does not end with visibility.
Now, if I ask you to provide proof of your god, where or what would you direct me to?
If Microorganisms haven't been discovered by scientists or anyone, and someone says Microorganisms exists, how did that person arrive at that conclusion?
What evidence can he provide for its existence?
Your analogy is too poor, but you don't see it.
Going by your logic, I can say anything exists without providing proof and it would be a fact.
Stop reading to reply, read to comprehend.

jaxxy:


There are traces of biblical footprints bt where is the traces of the 80million years old dinosaurs and besides nobody said they didn’t exist just not way they are putting up this info anyhow.

Notatribalist:
It's actually 80billion years ago,even before God was born..

nextstep:


The differences are:
- the science makes sense, if you understand the background, and follow the argument
- the scientists actually have a good idea of the theory, and tend to produce repeatable experiments
- the theory can be disproved/revised with better insights
- there is often physical proof (e.g. dinosaur bones, very old rocks, impact craters, radiation)
- unexplainable things are just said to be so. There's no "magical God" as the fallback answer

danyero:
1. How many so called believer doctors follow their archaic holy book when administering treatment?

2. Where did I mention cell phones in relation to evolution or the big bang? Read slowly and comprehend.

3. Please take some time to read up on the big bang, it will save you the embarrassment of voicing uninformed opinions.

4. I apologise if I came off as condescending, but the truth is the truth.

5. Science has a check and balancing mechanism, if a scientist comes up with a theory, there are always others looking to prove and disprove it.

Xbee007:

It is true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, without evidence, a lot of ridiculous and unproven can be made, like talking snake, walking on water, virgin birth, Noah's ark where 8 people feed millions possibly billions of animals for several days. This is why scientists seek evidence.

And your claim that scientist didn't accept the existence of microorganisms because they claim they can't see it is false. Scientists will simply ask you to prove it.

Topmaike007:
I am disappointed in your comments

ugodson:
Can someone educate me... These creatures were not recorded in d Bible

True or false?
Scriptures pleasssssss

dalass:


And many people will buy it.....The lies that from few broken bones, a long-necked ostrich-looking giant of a dinosaur can exist...

Who even sold the idea of Dinosaurs to mankind self?

Ayilara1:


You get me laughing everytime you reply.

How do you prove microbes exist without microscope? You would hAve given many theory for whatever microbes cause as in the antipathy of disease in which it was believed to happen through disbalance in the four believed component of the body before the microscope.

And your questions above will be questions been asked then to disproof it's existence before microscope.

That's my logic

You not feeling God is due to your adamant blindness of the soul, the rest of us do feel it.

And in proofing the existence of God, theseare things perfectly done by professional that debate atheist and at the moment I don't know it and I'm not even eager to know .

How will your glasscup proof that you it's creator exist?

madridguy:
The whites don't want to rest about the dinosaur God we need this animal back on earth.