₦airaland Forum

The ChatGPT civil war. 😂😂😂

Well, damn.

FIFA 07 on PSP
Because nostalgia

Zionmdde:
I might be a coward and a hypocrite, but I have made your mother scream my name a thousand times. Your sister too can attest what joy this hypocrite brought to her.
Now if you won't bold to say exactly what you belief is the origin of life, then fvck off.
But before then lemme know when your mother wants me again

Dude. This is low.

LordReed:
Bwahahahahahaha! You need glasses. That is a fork you dope. LoLz.

😭😭😭😭😭

Zionmdde:
1st paragraph, if the person's story doesn't contradict itself, and there are no witnesses, or evidences, or established laws to negate the story, it will fly. I don't know how you understand things
You call it "absurd" why is it absurd?

My belief is subjective, your own belief in your ignorance is also subjective. There is no objective evidence anywhere, why do I keep repeating that?

You that is a man of science and many researchers, what is the origin of creation? Is that too much for an Albert Einstein like you
.that time you are using to research a lie, why don't you use the same time research the truth and cure yourself of your ignorance

If somebody told you that there is an invisible dragon living inside their house, is it a plausible story? There's no way to refute it, obviously because you can't disprove a negative, but does that make it a plausible story?

Absurdity or stupidity is a function of the internal inconsistencies within a story. If it defies established knowledge of things we're already accept as fact, then it is reasonable to label it as an absurd story.

Me being a skeptic is not a belief system. That's just you mixing up simple concepts again for no reason.

Skepticism is a methodological approach to any claims being made. It's simply the application of reason and logic and verification to see if the claim is valid or not.

So, is there anything else you want to complain about? 😁

Zionmdde:
In a court case no story sounds stupid. Every story is xrayed with the lens of another story from probably a witness. If no story or evidence or established law contradicts that stupid story, then the story teller will walk free.

I have been clear from the beginning, every belief on creation is purely subjective, do what you want to do with that
And yes the Bible is my own truth. It's laziness for someone who claims he is ignorant in a matter he has keen interest in and yet he cannot do his own research and draw conclusions.
He is just lazying about, looking who other people's belief to criticize

Nope. Still wrong.

In the law court, it is always the plausibility of a narrative that sways a team of jurors. So if your story as a defendant is absurd or far-fetched, it can be dismissed as such.

As I told you earlier, everyone is entitled to a belief. But if you bring it into the realm of objective reality, don't cry blue murder when people tear it to shreds. Even if you're emotionally attached to your religion, nobody will be held responsible for the damage to your ego.

I've done plenty of research into the claims of the Bible. That's how I know it's full of shít, because the stories don't add up.

Do I know how the universe came to be? I don't know. But as time goes on, we uncover new knowledge that disproves what we used to think was the absolute truth. That's the first step to knowledge: your willingness to admit you don't know it all.

If I come across a theory that doesn't make sense, I'll treat it as such. I don't need to have an alternative to know that it makes no sense.

Every claim should be taken with a grain of salt.
Nothing should be taken as a 100% guarantee.
That is reasoned skepticism. That is intellectual honesty. That is self-awareness. That is telling yourself the truth: that you are ignorant and you still have a lot to learn about the universe.

But you can keep on lying to yourself that reasoned skepticism is the same as laziness. It only betrays your poor knowledge of scientific epistemology as a so-called "man of science".

Zionmdde:
Nah I said what I Said in the calmest possible way after I initially warned you

The Bible is my own truth, since you oppose come out with your own version of truth.
Since you don't know about the origin of creation, won't it be wise to remain ignorant and allow other people live with what they believe?

You said something, someone said it's a lie. Oya what is the truth then, the Person says "I don't know" doesn't that sound senseless?

I find it hard to imagine you were just calmly typing "Hot gay bitch", but anyway, you do you. 🤣 🤣

There's a difference between calling something "my truth" and calling something "the truth". The latter suggests an objective fact that is grounded in reality.

Like I said before, I don't have a problem with your faith. I only challenge people when it seems like they want to imply that their belief is objective, which you did when you asked Omoawoke: "what's your own claim that negates THE TRUTH of the Bible" (paraphrased).

Your problem is that you keep falling prey to dichotomous thinking. I.e if it's not A, then it must be B. It's a logical fallacy called False Dichotomy. Google it.

If you're watching a court case, and the defendant cooks up a story that obviously sounds stupid, won't you agree that his story is stupid? Does it mean you really know what happened in the case?

Zionmdde:
First, my believe cannot be tested with empirical evidence. That's why it's called faith. And that's why it's called spiritual. Anybody that engages in such discussions is not wise at all. Even the Bible says people like you won't understand

And that's okay. We already settled on the fact that your belief is subjective in nature. It's you who (maybe unconsciously) seems to forget this simple fact from time to time by claiming the Bible is the "truth". If it is "the truth", then surely it's claims should withstand scrutiny no?

Zionmdde:
Now you that assume your believe is backed with physical evidence, why don't we go through those your evidence. Stop whining like a Hot gay bitch and present what you think you know

First, I don't know anything about the origin of the universe. I don't know how you're struggling with this simple concept.

Secondly, insults only reveal your emotional state. You're getting heated over a simple discussion and it's hilarious to see because I'm just sitting here cool, calm and collected. 🤣

We don't need to be vulgar with each other. We just need to come to an agreement based on sound reason and logic instead of telling lies or being dishonest. Is that too much to ask? 🤔

Zionmdde:
Oga all this grammar just to evade the question "what is the origin of life?" If you don't know the answer, I have no business discussing genesis with you

And lest I forget to tell you, I am asking "origin of life" not "origin of man" so since biology has the answer, extract it and post here

The simple reason you don't want to discuss Genesis is because you're dishonest. You want to reverse the burden of proof and avoid defending your beliefs.

You believe the world was created a certain way. I don't claim to know anything about how the world was created. I readily admit my ignorance and I'm not ashamed of it. That's the basic difference between the both of us.

The fact that your belief cannot even rest on its own premise to validate itself should tell you everything you need to know about it, but if lies and intellectual cowardice is more convenient for you, then that's your cup of tea.

Zionmdde:
Lol just know you ve started introducing insults ohhh on a civil conversation. Am not quite a nice person. Just a little warning

Meanwhile I will pick whichever point I wish to from your write up

You're going to pick and choose... because you're dishonest. I said that already.

Anything else?

Zionmdde:
Lol
I have no business with a biologist. Because biology is the study of "life" not the "origin"

Lol. I knew it was only a matter of time before you started telling bold faced lies. Are you sure biology as a topic doesn't cover life's origin? Can you put your money where your mouth is?

You've already goofed up once. Do you want to take this risk?

Zionmdde:
I thought atheists claim they know more than religious people.

I personally don't claim to know more than religious people. I know many knowledgeable Christians both in and out of this forum. But even knowledgeable people can say stupid shít from time to time. It's called being human and prone to errors.

My simple reason for rejecting the Bible's account as false is because the story doesn't add up. That's it. If you insist the story is true, then present the evidence and we can look at it.

Zionmdde:
At least religious people have an answer to the origin of life

It's not really an "answer" if it is scientifically inaccurate or cannot be verified. 🤷🏽

Zionmdde:
while those who claim to have superior knowledge run away from the question.

Where did I claim to have knowledge? Why do you Christians always resort to cheap lies when push comes to shove?

Zionmdde:
They only find strength in criticizing something they know absolutely nothing about

Do I need to know how, when or where a meal was prepared to judge how it feels in my taste buds?

Zionmdde:
So oga, based on the overwhelming theory of evolution, what is the origin of life?

Ask a biologist. I'm not a biologist.

Can we now get back to the story of Genesis?

Zionmdde:
The only thing I pick from here

It's not surprising that you pick and choose from my comments. It's just proof of your dishonesty, like I've already noted.

You didn't address your flip flopping about moral rights.

You didn't address the point about scientific epistemology.

It's the one that doesn't make you look like an ignorant doofus you will address. Shocker! 😱

Zionmdde:
The only thing I pick from here is your tale of overwhelming evidence of evolution
Now let's focus there
According to the overwhelming evidence within your reach, what is the origin of "life"
Question you and your likes always run away from because you cannot defend what you will say

The irony of being accused of evasion by someone who's literally running away from defending the story of the Bible.

Your self awareness is in complete shambles. Lol.

Zionmdde:
The only thing I pick from here is your tale of overwhelming evidence of evolution
Now let's focus there
According to the overwhelming evidence within your reach, what is the origin of "life"

I don't believe in the theory of evolution, so you're wasting your time, and mine.

If you have a question relating to evolution or abiogenesis, you can ask a biologist. I'm an atheist. Do those two words sound alike to you?

At any rate, even if you discuss with a biologist, you're already off to a poor start because evolution doesn't deal with the origin of life. It's abiogenesis that deals with the origin of life.

Zionmdde:
Lol
You want to mark a script without marking scheme. You believe nothing but you are eager say my own believe is wrong
As I told your other guys,I have nothing to discuss with someone who can't be bold to declare what he believes about the origin of life

I have numerous things I believe in. However when it comes to claims about God and religion that deal with truth claims about reality, I see no point in believing them if there's no evidence to support them. It's very simple. I don't need to have my own explanation. I follow the evidence, and the theory of evolution is supported by overwhelming evidence. But even if it wasn't, it wouldn't make the book of Genesis true by default, and it wouldn't make me any less of an atheist. That's skepticism and intellectual honesty - a concept you and your cheerleader in the peanut gallery seem to have problem with.

And you keep flip flopping with your story. After picking your brain, you eventually admitted that I have the moral right to question others beliefs when you made it clear that code of ethics has nothing to do with belief.

But now you've gone back to your original claim because it's convenient for you. Is it that hard for you to be honest?

You're only demonstrating your poor knowledge of scientific epistemology by framing skepticism and science based reasoning as evasion, which is ironically funny for someone who claims he's a man of science.

But don't worry. You have ignorant and dishonest praise singers blowing sweet light breeze up your ass crack to keep deceiving you, so you have nothing to worry about. Lol

Zionmdde:
Am talking about your evidence backed belief about the origin of life that negates the creation account in genesis

Disclaimer: what ever you mention here should be able to scale through when put into physical scientific scrutiny, laws and theories

I don't need an alternative explanation for how life came about to reject creation narratives if they're demonstrably false. I only need to rely on the lack of evidence from creationist proponents.

So again, is your interpretation of the book of Genesis literal or metaphorical?

What else is new?

Zionmdde:
OK what is the truth that negates the Bible's tale of creation?

I'll take up for Omoawoke here.

Firstly, are you talking about the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis? Or a metaphorical one?

DeepSight:
Ha!

Pity am na.

Na wetin make me like Jakumo be that. Poetic, scathing and devastatingly ruthless. 😭😭😭

DaddyCoool:
Mr Reed you posted a video without watching it!! WATCH THE VIDEO!! How was he exposed as fraud?? He did NOT fail the water test AND he dented the spoon despite the pressure.
Go and WATCH THE ENTIRE VIDEO! Stop making FOOLS of yourselves, you and that woman (or is it man) FourFootNinja!

** AS for Noah's Ark, there are holes in the story (from human perspective) just like Adam and Eve BUT that doesn't mean it didn't happen!!!

I thought you said I lost, so why are you still here flailing about in anguish?

I don't care to watch your silly videos or read your nonsensical stories. There have been numerous instances of them always being shown out to be frauds in the end, and we get to see the mechanism behind their actions.

If you care that much to prove your case, maybe you can go show your superpowers and accept James Randi's One Million Dollar Challenge (if it's still active)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge

Or better yet, we can arrange a physical meeting to verify your claims. You went AWOL for 24 hours only to come back and bicker over nothing.

You called me FourFootNinja. 🤣🤣

That's cute. But it won't change the fact that you have no evidence. 🤷🏽

So it's not by crying online. If you don't have evidence for your assertions that we can all verify, please move on with your life. As you can see, we've all moved on from topic before you resurrected it for no reason. 🙂

Omoawoke:
Cure your confirmation bias and dig deeper into that bullshite beliefs you hold.
Don’t be afraid to question anything

This guy sef, you too funny 🤣🤣🤣

He say na "tell me the truth, I can take it". 😭😭😭

On a normal day, there's actually nothing weird or off about guys or girls having friends of the opposite gender. It all comes down to trust. How well do you know your babe to know that he or she won't fúck up? 🤔

I have a girlfriend, and all the while I've also had female friends whom I've never ever seen or looked at in a sexual light cause I don see them finish - as in dem don turn to my bros. Lol. 🤣

Zionmdde:
OK in summary, we are all confused
Now embrace your confusion and let others embrace theirs
There is nothing plausible anywhere, we are confused on the matter of creation, so let's keep that way

Exactly. We're all wallowing in mystery and confusion. There's a lot we don't understand about the universe and that's why we rely on the scientific method. It's not perfect, but it gets the job done far better than any religion out there.

I'm usually suspicious of people who lay claim to universal truth. That's why I'm relieved that you understand the subjectivity of your faith.

Honestly the only reason I even quoted you is because of this sentiment you've been expressing on this thread:

If you don't believe anything about creation, then you have no moral rights or grounds to criticize what others believe.

This statement you made here is terribly false, and that's why I took you to task for it.

Although somehow you've gone ahead to contradict yourself later by admitting that belief in something has nothing to do with the code of ethics.

I'm not sure what prompted your strange and funny volte face. But I'm happy you agree that I don't have to believe in something to call it out for its flaws. So thanks, I guess. 👍🏽

Zionmdde:
Those hypothesis contradicts or physical laws
There is no possible scientific explanation that life can come out from a non living thing. No theory has ever pointed objectively to the origin of "life"

It's none of my business. Like I said before, none of that has anything to do with my atheism. So the truth status of the ToE, Big Bang, etc is irrelevant to me.

And for all the flaws you "think" evolution or abiogenesis (which you described here) has, its postulates are still far more plausible than anything from religion. That's my point.

So Occam's Razor applies.

Zionmdde:
I didn't say my belief is objective, infact no believe on creation is objective and can be scientifically proven. So my believe is plainly subjective. If you have an objective belief on that, you can come up.with it

It's perfectly fine that your belief is subjective.

As for me, I don't have any "beliefs" about creation. I simply follow the evidence. There are hypotheses and theories that exist within the scientific community that perfectly explain creation better than practically all religions out there. But ultimately, none of it has to do with my atheism.

Zionmdde:
We are talking about creation, and every human believes something at least, so the question is, what do you believe? Believe and code of ethics are different

Exactly. Belief in something is different from having a code of ethics.

So since you agree with this fact, why then did you say this?:

Zionmdde:
If you don't believe anything about creation, then you have no moral rights or grounds to criticize what others believe.

Zionmdde:
Sure as long as you argue with your own beliefs

Do you seriously think that rejecting religious beliefs means lacking a code of ethics? Think carefully before you answer.

Zionmdde:
It is my opinion
But sorry to burst your bubbles, if I believe the Bible is right then I also believe that I cannot scientifically prove everything in the Bible, because that won't be spiritual at all and I believe most thunder in the Bible are spiritual

You don't need to be sorry because my bubbles are still intact. You already admitted that you can't show scientific evidence for your faith. And I already know your Bible isn't grounded in reality so there's nothing to argue with you there.

I'm just wondering - since you didn't arrive at your belief via evidence, what reasoning or methodology did you use, that convinced you that it was objectively true?

Zionmdde:
Sure they have the right based on what they believe, as long as they won't scream foul when theirs is also criticized

Very good.

So therefore, you accept that your beliefs, just like those of people outside your faith are fair game for criticism and evaluation. Correct?

Zionmdde:
Because I believe my Bible is right.

Belief is not knowledge by the way, in the conventional sense. So at the end of the day, it is your OPINION that the Bible is right. Keep that in mind.

Zionmdde:
I personally don't criticize beliefs but the behaviour that emanates from beliefs

Let me even say I criticize other people's belief, I do it based on the standard of my belief. Because I believe my Bible is right. So at least I am holding on to something

Okay. So what about those people from other religions or worldviews that don't share your beliefs? Do they not have the right to criticize or evaluate your beliefs based on their own standards? Or do you think there aren't others out their who believe their code of ethics supersedes all?