Aemmyjah:


Keep fooling yourself

LoLz. Says the believer in a magic sky daddy. Bwahahahahahaha!

LordReed:


LoLz. Says the believer in a magic sky daddy. Bwahahahahahaha!

An igtheist claiming to have hopes
It seems interesting atheism may be having different schools of thoughts or denominations

Aemmyjah:


An igtheist claiming to have hopes
It seems interesting atheism may be having different schools of thoughts or denominations

Yes park that in your head very well. LoLz.

LordReed:


Yes park that in your head very well. LoLz.

Fake igtheist atheist

Aemmyjah:


Fake igtheist atheist

LoLz. Ahhh now you are gatekeeping atheism. Bwahahahahahaha!

LordReed:


LoLz. Ahhh now you are gatekeeping atheism. Bwahahahahahaha!

Go amd read what Richard Dawkins says about you guys and your hope

Aemmyjah:


Go amd read what Richard Dawkins says about you guys and your hope

Who told you Richard Dawkins is the gatekeeper for atheism? LoLz!

LordReed:


Where in natural selection does it suggest that it is always beneficial impulses that carry forward?

Your failure to understand what the theory of evolution by natural selection says is yours to remedy.

((As you folks can guess, I was banned again by the "antispam bot" (wink, wink) - any time you don't see my posts, know I was banned))
*I'll continue my response to moniker JessicaRabbit from my next post. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens

LordReed, natural selection is simple, it is people like you that try to complicate it for your own agenda.
Simple: those with heritable traits that favor survival and reproduction will tend to leave more offspring than their peers, causing those traits to skyrocket in frequency over generations, while unfavorable ones die off.

In humans those traits would be: loving broccoli and hating juicy, sumptuous steak; loving going to the gym more than chilling and watching TV; loving drinking lots of plain water instead of sweet drinks; loving bland foods instead of salty, tasty foods.

Well, if you look around you you'd notice hardly any humans have those traits, yet according to natural selection those should be traits of over 90% of humans!

Natural selection sounds very good on paper, and very logical but it often doesn't pan out in real life.

You have a feeling humans have always liked those things and will always like those things. Just as lions have always liked meat, and sheep have always liked grass - none of that is from natural selection!

FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, MaxInDHouse, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2,  kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

LordReed:


Who told you Richard Dawkins is the gatekeeper for atheism? LoLz!

He's actually like an archbishop

b]*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens[/b]

Now, in response to your enormous faith in science and "reality", and your treatise on "genuine faith", "fictional being", "confirmation bias", etc., let me say the following:

Consider: more than 95% of our universe is made up of dark matter/dark energy, yet we don't know what it is. We know it is there but we don't have the foggiest idea what it is!

PoliteActivist:
b]*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens[/b]

Now, in response to your enormous faith in science and "reality", and your treatise on "genuine faith", "fictional being", "confirmation bias", etc., let me say the following:

Consider: more than 95% of our universe is made up of dark matter/dark energy, yet we don't know what it is. We know it is there but we don't have the foggiest idea what it is!

U just repeat shit from google

Then u think u saying wats new

U cant question it till u
See theres no universe

PoliteActivist:


((As you folks can guess, I was banned again by the "antispam bot" (wink, wink) - any time you don't see my posts, know I was banned))
*I'll continue my response to moniker JessicaRabbit from my next post. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens

LordReed, natural selection is simple, it is people like you that try to complicate it for your own agenda.
Simple: those with heritable traits that favor survival and reproduction will tend to leave more offspring than their peers, causing those traits to skyrocket in frequency over generations, while unfavorable ones die off.

In humans those traits would be: loving broccoli and hating juicy, sumptuous steak; loving going to the gym more than chilling and watching TV; loving drinking lots of plain water instead of sweet drinks; loving bland foods instead of salty, tasty foods.

Well, if you look around you you'd notice hardly any humans have those traits, yet according to natural selection those should be traits of over 90% of humans!

Natural selection sounds very good on paper, and very logical but it often doesn't pan out in real life.

You have a feeling humans have always liked those things and will always like those things. Just as lions have always liked meat, and sheep have always liked grass - none of that is from natural selection!

Evolution by natural selection is largely based on survival. That's where instinct and adaptation comes in; evolve (learn to adapt and thrive in your environment)

For natural selection to act on a feature, there must already be variation (differences among individuals) for that feature. Also, the differences have to be heritable, determined by the organisms' genes.

loving broccoli and hating juicy, sumptuous steak; loving going to the gym more than chilling and watching TV; loving drinking lots of plain water instead of sweet drinks; loving bland foods instead of salty, tasty foods.

All these that you've listed up there are habits. And habits are not inherited in the same way that genetic traits or physical characteristics are passed down from parents to their children. Habits are behaviours that individuals develop over time through personal experiences, environmental influences, and learned behaviors.

Habits are not passed down like genes. The reason we inherit our parents habits is because we live and grow up with them, they teach and correct us. A child learns from ha environment .

Even in somatic mutations – DNA changes not present in eggs or sperm. Somatic changes only affect certain cells or tissues and cannot be passed on to offspring as they are not inherited from parents. They are due to environmental impacts.

Life acquired characteristics cannot be passed down to offspring they can only influence the habits the offsprings pick.

Lemme use simple terms to explain Natural Selection.

"In the jungle. A cheetah hunts a baby giraffe. Without that food the cheetah will not survive.

The baby giraffe has to eat Mimosa tree leaves and the Acacia tree to survive.

The Mimosa and the Acacia trees need their leaves to survive.

A baby giraffe must be able to run fast enough to survive because it's not not powerful enough to kill a cheetah yet.

Once it grows into adulthood, he doesn't need that speed, just a kick and "RIP" to the Cheetah. (Hence giraffes evolved to be faster at infant lest it will not survive into reproductive stage). And cheetahs avoid hunting adult giraffes.

•Giraffes that are not fast enough at infant will be hunted and killed by cheetahs. Therefore, species of slow giraffes could not reach a reproductive stage. They were wiped out by cheetah.

A cheetah on the other hand must evolve to run faster than a baby giraffe lest it dies of hunger and won't survive into reproductive
stage (hence new generations of cheetah become faster than the previous)

• Species of slower cheetah could not reach a reproductive stage, thus wiped out by hunger.

A giraffe feeds on leaves from the mimosa tree and the Acacia tree to survive. Therefore, the
mimosa tree on the other hand must evolve to grow very fast and tall to avoid losing her leaves to giraffes.

•Species of Mimosa trees that refused to grow fast and tall could not reach a reproductive stage, thus wiped out.

The Acacia tree on the other hand evolved to modify her morphology and grow thorns to avoid being eaten out by giraffes.

•The species of Acacia tree that refused to evolve to grow more thorns couldn't reach the reproductive stage and are wiped out by giraffes.

• A giraffe that must survive must evolve to grow longer neck than the previous generation to eat the Mimosa leaves(from a tree which
are now taller), and a longer tongue to eat the Acacia leaves(from trees which now have more thorns).

•Any specie of giraffe that fails to evolve in these two aspects will die of hunger before reaching the reproductive stage thus wiped out.

Therefore. A cheetah evolved to be faster than the previous generations because the survival instinct is passed down to offsprings.

A giraffe evolved to be faster at infant, to grow longer necks and tongues as it grows than the previous generations because the instinct is passed down to offsprings.

A Mimosa tree evolved to grow taller than the previous generations to survive now taller giraffes that evolved. Same as the Acacia tree with more thorns than the previous generations.

This evolution is strongly based on survival.

Even humans are now taller and more intelligent than our generations 100 years ago.

Evolution is as sure as death. But most times it's always very slow and almost not noticeable.

PoliteActivist:
I don't know why you are arguing against the obvious.

Maybe it's because the "obvious" isn't quite as self-evident as you believe. After all, even the Earth appeared flat for a long time.

anything an atheists can do or have, a religionist can also do or have PLUS also possess faith in God

Faith is not a quantifiable object to be "gained" or "possessed." It's a complex belief system with its own set of pros and cons, which you conveniently ignore.

the way our reality is set up it is more beneficial to believe in God than not. Example: two fighters equally matched but one believes he can't lose because God is with him. Or old people who live alone but one has God. Or people who are sick - placebo. Or affirmations (prayers). All these are of proven benefits.

These anecdotes lack scientific rigor and fail to account for the countless examples of individuals who find immense strength and purpose outside of religion. Faith does not automatically guarantee positive outcomes.

the way our society is set up, it is more beneficial to be a religionist

Bandwagon fallacy. You claim that by what individuals have internalized, it's more beneficial to be perceived as religious. This perpetuates harmful stereotypes and ignores the fact that morality and ethical behavior are not exclusive to any single faith system.

by what individuals have internalized, it is more beneficial to be perceived a devout, say, Christian than an atheist. Even you yourself know which one you'd feel safer with, or you'd feel won't cheat you.

This is not an "either/or" situation, my dear. You are ignoring the vast spectrum of human experience and belief systems. Many individuals find meaning and purpose through human connection, philosophical pursuits, or a love for science and the natural world.

You can't muddy any of it up by citing complexity - everything is "all things being equal" or you can't have a discussion. Or by citing subjectivity - life itself is subjective!

Any meaningful discussion requires acknowledging the nuances of the topic, not resorting to oversimplification and faulty logic. You have no point here.

PoliteActivist:
b]*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens[/b]

Now, in response to your enormous faith in science and "reality", and your treatise on "genuine faith", "fictional being", "confirmation bias", etc., let me say the following:

Consider: more than 95% of our universe is made up of dark matter/dark energy, yet we don't know what it is. We know it is there but we don't have the foggiest idea what it is!

The dark matter and dark energy conundrum is only a perfect example of how much we don't know about the universe! Unlike faith, science embraces the unknown and actively seeks answers through observation and experimentation. At the end of the day, it's far more interesting to admit we have much to learn than to fill the gaps with fantastical explanations.

Aemmyjah:


He's actually like an archbishop

Really? It was you who ordained him? LoLz.

PoliteActivist:


((As you folks can guess, I was banned again by the "antispam bot" (wink, wink) - any time you don't see my posts, know I was banned))
*I'll continue my response to moniker JessicaRabbit from my next post. I'll break it up into very small pieces, let's see what happens

LordReed, natural selection is simple, it is people like you that try to complicate it for your own agenda.
Simple: those with heritable traits that favor survival and reproduction will tend to leave more offspring than their peers, causing those traits to skyrocket in frequency over generations, while unfavorable ones die off.

In humans those traits would be: loving broccoli and hating juicy, sumptuous steak; loving going to the gym more than chilling and watching TV; loving drinking lots of plain water instead of sweet drinks; loving bland foods instead of salty, tasty foods.

Well, if you look around you you'd notice hardly any humans have those traits, yet according to natural selection those should be traits of over 90% of humans!

Natural selection sounds very good on paper, and very logical but it often doesn't pan out in real life.

You have a feeling humans have always liked those things and will always like those things. Just as lions have always liked meat, and sheep have always liked grass - none of that is from natural selection!

How does loving broccoli aid your reproductive dominance?

HellVictorinho6:


U just repeat shit from google

Then u think u saying wats new

U cant question it till u
See theres no universe

**( I was banned for 24hrs right after that my response to JessiaRabbit few hours ago, and the response was deleted. I just checked only to find out I HAVE BEEN MYSTERIOUSLY UNBANNED AND THE POST RESTORED!!! Since it seems the madness has ended, here's the half post. Following this, I'll post the rest of it if not banned):

Consider: more than 95% of our universe is made up of dark matter/dark energy, yet we don't know what it is. We know it is there but we don't have the foggiest idea what it is!
Consider: scientists have determined there are at least 10 dimensions, and possibly up to a thousand. Yet we can perceive only 4. FOUR!
Consider: our earth is is so infinitestimally small compared to the observable universe you can almost say it doesn't exist (on a universe scale, you can't see the earth even with the strogest microscope). Yet the observable universe is only one 64 millionth of the estimated size of our universe. Then there is the multiverse theory - there could be unlimited number of universes!
Compound all that with the fact that: limitations and manipulations could have been built into our perception of reality such that we only perceive what "they" want us to perceive. Scientists have no way of knowing what is really there!
Add to all that, brains and circumstances could be being manipulated on a day-to-day ongoing basis, while studies and observations are being done (we still don't know how or where our dreams come from!).

Add all that up and you'll realize, when Einstein and other geniuses said they knew nothing, maybe they were not as stupid as you think!

FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, MaxInDHouse, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2,  kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

*(HOORAYYY!!! I wasn't banned!!! Here's more of the JessicaRabbit response. The rest to follow if I'm not banned)

Before such unimaginable immensity, complexity, and unknowability, what a wise human ought exhibit is absolute AWE, followed by HUMILITY, followed by acknowledgement he knows almost NOTHING.
NOT start spouting about lowly human science - science that can barely answer the most rudimentary questions about existence and human psyche (see "spirit attachment" below - by a top-notch scientist), and at same time dismissing first hand experiences of the divine and of spiritual attacks and experiences people have had over the ages. We are completely defenseless when asleep, and we have no say as to what type of dream we'd have. If someone says a fetish imam or pastor comes into their dreams to have sex with them and then in real life the imam acts and talks as if they knew what they did, the right response is to say you don't know anything about such, and that you hope such never happens to you. Not start spouting about lowly human science!

LordReed:


Really? It was you who ordained him? LoLz.

Ask the atheists body

Aemmyjah:


Ask the atheists body

Which atheist body,the one you formed? LoLz.

Aemmyjah:


Ask the atheists body

Religion don block this one head.
Who formed the atheists' body?

Aemmyjah:


He's actually like an archbishop

Archbishop ko. Ark of God ni.

FRANCISTOWN:

Religion don block this one head.
Who formed the atheists' body?

Your African fathers na
Shebi we are foolishly accepting white man religion and rejecting atheism cos na black man start am

Aemmyjah:


An igtheist claiming to have hopes
It seems interesting atheism may be having different schools of thoughts or denominations

Atheism is not a body. That's why there are different kinds of atheists. As long as you do not believe in the existence of Supernatural Divine God. You are an atheist.

Whatever any atheist decides to do with ha lack of believe is basically subjective.

Hope, on the other hand is not a religious tool.
Though, religion is largely based on hope especially christianity and islam. That's why they are more evil.

Some religions practice just as lil as 5% hope. Because they consider it useless.
Ma' fact, there is a denomination of christianity that preaches against hope. That doesn't make them less delusional, as long as they follow Jesus.

Anybody can have hope. What they channel their hope towards should be the case study.

FRANCISTOWN:


Atheism is not a body. That's why there are different kinds of atheists. As long as you do not believe in the existence of Supernatural Divine God. You are an atheist.

Whatever any atheist decides to do with ha lack of believe is basically subjective.

Hope, on the other hand is not a religious tool.
Though, religion is largely based on hope especially christianity and islam. That's why they are more evil.

Some religions practice just as lil as 5% hope. Because they consider it useless.
Ma' fact, there is a denomination of christianity that preaches against hope. That doesn't make them less delusional, as long as they follow Jesus.

Anybody can have hope. What they channel their hope towards should be the case study.

You said hope is the most stupid
Now anyone can have hope

Who's the stupid one now?

Aemmyjah:


Your African fathers na
Shebi we are foolishly accepting white man religion and rejecting atheism cos na black man start am

I already addressed this on a whole thread. Believe whatever you want to believe. Me I Sha know say no foreign man preached the gospel of atheism to me.

Aemmyjah:



You said hope is the most stupid
Now anyone can have hope

Who's the stupid one now?

Myself and many other people believe that hope is stupid and useless.

Others think hope is useful and good.

Anyone who thinks hope is good for him can engage it.

Now who is the stupid one?

FRANCISTOWN:


Myself and many other people believe that hope is stupid and useless.

Others think hope is useful and good.

Anyone who thinks hope is good for him can engage it.

Now who is the stupid one?

Do you have hopes or ambition for your children
Why do you provide him with proper education?

FRANCISTOWN:

I already addressed this on a whole thread. Believe whatever you want to believe. Me I Sha know say no foreign man preached the gospel of atheism to me.

Atheism comes from Africa

Aemmyjah:


Do you have hopes or ambition for your children
Why do you provide him with proper education?

Hope for my children? What stupidity and uselessness!

Stupid people raise kids.
Intentional people build kids; these are the people who know what they are doing .

If you have a house under construction and you see a part you don't like. What do you do? Do you leave it hoping it doesn't spoil the design, become noticeable or later come out nice or you tell the engineer to break it and remould it to your satisfaction? Your answer is the difference between you and I.

I will build my children into what I want them to be. You can raise your own children and hope they turn out well. Mtcheeeeew! For this kind generation? Dey play!

Why I provide them with the necessary education is because it is necessary for building. Cements are necessary for building. Have you been to the Ajah-Eleko Express way recently?

Aemmyjah:


Atheism comes from Africa

I never said atheism came from Africa.
I only laid emphasis on the fact that atheism is a thing of self reflection and realisation by stating that there were atheists before we had contacts with the white.

Can we say the same for your religion?