₦airaland Forum

There's just no such thing as karma. But, steal enough times and you'll get caught. Mess with enough people and someone will probably strike back.

@CAPSLOCKED, you brought up Hitler as case study of karma but the truth is that if you make yourself the enemy of enough countries, eventually one of them will defeat you.

You may get away with one murder but it gets exponentially harder to cover the evidence up as your body count increases.

So I won't say that what goes around comes around but if you do something that has consequences enough times then you'll probably have to face those consequences at some point.

mujahid777:
False.bin Laden despite his flaws,in the eyes of Allah,is far better than bill gates.

Yup! So you see, in Islam, terrorists are better than atheist philanthropists. What a pathetic belief system!

No wonder Mohammed forbids the eating of pigs, it would be cannibalism.

Says the guy asking why atheists celebrate Christmas.

mujahid777:
Well,ill only speak for Islam.Allah(SWT) doesn't prefer you; how can someone who totally rejects him be better than one who believes in him,albeit,in a distorted form.

Bill Gates is better than Osama bin Laden. True or false?

KingEbukasBlog:
Totally unnecessary. You can pass if you are not interested . You are not being forced to take it up

I know you 's a broke boi.

KingEbukasBlog:
Hehehehehe

I don't believe that a failed blogger has 100k in disposable cash think that whatever argument is thrown at you will simply be disregarded since you are both the custodian of the reward and the umpire of the challenge.

In the event that no one wins the challenge, (since you aren't exactly an unbiased party) why don't you donate the 100k to a charity and document it on this forum?

KingEbukasBlog:
Yeah

I suddenly have a feeling that this challenge is a scam.

Who's giving out the money? You?

I wonder how Isaac Newton's IQ was determined.

DC will release another crappy movie. Let's pay against the spirit of asinine writing and bad acting.

How much do these pastorpreneurs pay for this type of social engineering?

Over two hours now and no response. Not good enough.

I wonder how many of you pastorpreneur apologists are on someone's payroll.

Remember Hilary Clinton's campaign slogan? "Love trumps hate"? It was a poor choice because she made her entire campaign slogan about her opponent. This is the same error that many of the Christian regulars on this section make.

They post rehashed arguments against atheism or highlight the atrocities committed by communist leaders as some sort of "gotcha!" against atheism. A few do it as a genuine attempt to criticize atheism but most just do it for attention.

Christians probably outnumber atheists 10 to 1 on this board but atheism is the leading discussion. It's almost like you guys talk about it more than we do. This thread is one example.

hopefulLandlord:
I fear for Freeze's safety

Underrated comment. If his followership becomes too big or too disruptive, these guys can seriously fvck him up. They have the means.

Anyone talking about the pros and cons of atheism is monumentally mistaken about what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in the existence of God.

Atheism does not lead to any form ideology or way of thinking. Rather, it is ideology that leads to atheism. Atheism is nothing but an answer to a specific question.

Personally, I value logic and empiricism and have found atheism to be the most logical answer to the question of whether God exists or not.

Atheism is not a source of good or evil ideas or actions. Rather it is a conclusion that stems from other ideas. Logic, reason, empiricism, and healthy skepticism are ideas that led me to atheism, they also guide me in many of the decisions I take and conclusions make about the world. Atheism is only one of those conclusions.

The question is flawed.

Modern day philosopher.

KingEbukasBlog:
Utter garbage anyway .

Read this and receive sense

https://www.nairaland.com/3500235/god-without-religion-religion-without/

Atheism DOES NOT REJECT RELIGION . The existence of God is not a religious belief .

Its apparent you don't know who THE DEISTS are , they reject religious beliefs like heaven or hell ; or religious books like the Bible and Koran and still they acknowledge the existence of God ; or anecdotes that suggest that God intervenes in the universe . What you have up there have absolutely nothing to do with the existence of God(the cosmic designer ) .

Looks like someone didn't read number 3.

Shitpost from known shitposter. Welcome back.

Because modern Christianity is less than violent than modern Islam. By moving to a private section, the Muslims in this forum have admitted that Islam is a weak ideology that can't stand up to criticism or mockery. Christianity being in the public section is a triumph for the religion over Islam.

NL isn't discriminating against Christianity, it was bullied into accepting the Muslim users' demands through threats of violence.

dalaman:
Islam uses fear to entrap it's adherent the way other religions do not. It won't die out. It is projected to surpass christianity in the future. [code][/code]

Especially with its apostasy laws. Islam is currently the most evil mainstream ideology in the world.

Islam is a major divisive force in any society that accepts it. See the Middle East where Sunnis and Shiites have been fighting for over a thousand years, look at what it is doing to Europe, bringing it home - see Nigeria - boko haram, Fulani herdsmen, Jos religious crisis, etc.

And it isn't only the terrorists. Women can't go out without a male chaperone in Saudi Arabia, most Islamic countries believe that people should be killed four their sexual preference, paedophilia is encouraged in this religion (since its founder was one). All in all, Islam is a religion that needs to reform or die out.

I'm happy that you've been able to escape from it.

I hope this gets a good number of views. People need to understand how logic almost always makes the God hypothesis unnecessary.

Cooop:
Primates can eat, drink and swallow at the same time because their throats were designed for it. Homo sapiens "evolved" a completely different design of throat structure - one that enabled modulation within a very short space of time. For this kind of evolution to have occurred it would require a very long series of reconstruction and we would see a gradual change occur through the fossils of other prehumans. But we don't see this. What we see are overnight dramatic changes.

How far na? Why did you run away?

Cooop:
Could you please address the content of my main argument and stop trying so effortlessly to fail at straw manning. I could go down this rabbit hole of genetics and offer you some needed education, but I don't want, because I don't want to stray from the subject. If you don't have any cogent argument that erases the credibility of my main argument, then find someone else to quote.

You're talking about how homo sapiens being 'different' from apes means that the prevailing theory of the evolution is wrong. I'm telling you that those differences also occur within our own species. You should address that.

Cooop:
It's funny how you have refused to tackle any of my initial about the disconnect in anatomical characteristics between prehuman and modern humans. The little you did was pathetic, counterproductive(as you only just shot yourself in the foot) and indicative of your ignorance on the subject.

Every primate species has 48 chromosomes. All through their evolution they've had 48. Chimpanzees, our so-called closest relatives also have 48 chromosomes. Suddenly humans emerged with 46, which was as a result of the miraculous fusing of our 2nd and 3rd strands. Primates aren't Salamanders. The DNA of primates possess genetic information of primates - information that encode the characteristics primates exhibit. The point I made was that if every other primate had 48 chromosomes, and given the fact that humans evolved instant new set of phenotypic characteristics that would require an evolution of completely new DNA information, how is it that we evolved these set of new characteristics despite losing so much genetic information?

My argument isn't a conspiracy theory. It's just an obvious fact for anyone to see. If it's all just nonsense pseudoscience why haven't you been able to present any strong argument in refutation to my claim?

Fused are a random genetic anomaly. There are humans who live normal lives with fused chromosomes. To think that the number of chromosomes equates to the number of genetic characteristics is completely asinine. Rather than educate yourself you're accusing mainstream science of lying.

Cooop:
There is no missing link. The cromagnon isn't even a species. Cromagnons are homosapiens just as we are. The term is just used to identify a cultural group of early modern humans that lived in the European upper paleolithic

I'm not bringing intelligent design into anything. I'm just trying to prove to you that western science is deliberately lying to us about our origin. Whether we were designed or not, remains a question, but what's patently obvious is that we didn't evolve from Homo Erectus.

Have you examined the human DNA though? We have 23 pairs unlike the other primates who have 24, because our second and third strands where miraculously fused. The homo erectus had 24 pairs. Going by the amazing set of characteristics we suddenly evolved, shouldn't we need more pairs for this to occur or at least same sets, instead of less?

From that last question it is obvious that your understanding of genetics is flawed. The salamander genome is larger than the human genome, every modern specie is just evolved as another.

Now you're bringing up conspiracy theories and telling me that Western science is lying to us as if science is monolithic in nature and isn't made up of different people from different countries in different fields. chemistry, geology, and biology all agree on the veracity of the evolutionary theory. But let's forget all that and claim that they are lying to us.

Genius.

Cooop:
As you can see from the image you posted, the skull of the Cromagnon homo sapiens is distinctively different from the homo neandathals and others before it. You can clearly see the foreheads of the other skulls are pushed backwards, unlike the cromagnon and the one after it. You can see the big brow ridges of the other skulls with no foreheads whatsoever. You can see their flat nasal cavities.

Thanks for buttressing my point.

What I see is that the Cro-magnon looks like a missing link between the Neanderthal and the modern homo sapien. The skulls look progressively more 'human' as time moves on.

There is also no need to bring intelligent design into this, even if your theory is right--which it isn't-- it doesn't prove that humans didn't evolve from--and still are--apes. DNA evidence clearly shows us this.

Are these the 'identical skeletons' that you speak of?

Listener07:
This case is different and stands out because it was no minor accident like, tripping, falling off from stairs etc as you said. The accident was terrible and he almost bled to death if not for the timely intervention of the nurse.

Correct me if I'm wrong but he never described the nature of the accident.

Listener07:
But we don't have to worry our heads on that now do we? The fact remains that the prophecy happened and that's most paramount.

No, it's not. It would have happened either way. If you read what I you'll see I said that there was no way for the prediction to fail, but since you were there can you tell me how that prediction could have been wrong in any way?
If it is not falsifiable then it is not a prediction.

Ayo001:
I get your point but there is a verse in bible that says we should be wise like serpent but be harmless as dove. I think God also wants us to approach our daily activities intelligently.

Still, Thomas was derided for seeking evidence in the same Bible.