₦airaland Forum

Akin1212:
Have you married bro? You are a very cunny person. To be honest I cannot deal with you in real life.

The vets said pets(dogs and cats) can see what humans can't see. Graycoder already said this even before you brought the link. He explained with radiations. He, however, told you the instruments that science has developed to see in the radiations these pets use to see.

Why do you find that very hard to understand? It simply means Graycoder agrees with the Vets, but he went further to tell you the developments that have made it possible for humans to also see through these radiations. But to own one, you must order or buy it. I remember he even asked you to order for one.

Please for once, be sincere with yourself.

And I am honestly asking again..are these instruments of today complete and accurate when you compare them to the future instruments of the next 50 years?

The instruments of today is still limited in scope and hence, not the best standard to judge with.

For example we know how irrelevant floppy disks are today...but they were the hot cakes in the 90s and early 2000s.

Graycoder:
You have maintained that I am saying a different thing from what the vets said.

So you knew all along that I was on the same page with them, but you chose to argue that we have conflicts of opinions.

I am sorry, I don't argue this way. I am here to learn from you which you must also do from me. If we start using false claims, we will not get anywhere.

You are not on the same page with them if the human eye alone is concerned.
You are on the same page with them where you mentioned how scientific tools can help the humans see what cannot be seen with the naked eye...

Please ride on..so we do not derail from the point you are trying to make. I AM WAITING

Meanwhile is there anyone that can explain the logic on the possibility of life existing without a conscious and or intelligent creator?

OkaiCorne:
And I am honestly asking again..are these instruments of today complete and accurate when you compare them to the future instruments of the next 50 years?

The instruments of today is still limited in scope and hence, not the best standard to judge with.

For example we know how irrelevant floppy disks are today...but they were the hot cakes in the 90s and early 2000s.

See I have come to a point that I have come to understand the way you think.

Are you basically saying the science of today is limited in the future? Lol, that's funny bro. Leave the future and worry about today.


Let's talk about today, are the instruments of today not better than yesterday or the last 50 years?

Someone would have thought we would never have something better than floppy disks, but where are they today?

But you have decided to talk about the future we have not lived.
Oga, when you reflect, do you reflect into the future or the past?

OkaiCorne:
You are not on the same page with them if the human eye alone is concerned.
You are on the same page with them where you mentioned how scientific tools can help the humans see what cannot be seen with the naked eye...

Please ride on..so we do not derail from the point you are trying to make. I AM WAITING

Meanwhile is there anyone that can explain the logic on the possibility of life existing without a conscious and or intelligent creator?

Akin1212:
Have you married bro? You are a very cunny person. To be honest I cannot deal with you in real life.

The vets said pets(dogs and cats) can see what humans can't see. Graycoder already said this even before you brought the link. He explained with radiations. He, however, told you the instruments that science has developed to see in the radiations these pets use to see.

Why do you find that very hard to understand? It simply means Graycoder agrees with the Vets, but he went further to tell you the developments that have made it possible for humans to also see through these radiations. But to own one, you must order or buy it. I remember he even asked you to order for one.

Please for once, be sincere with yourself.

I have work tomorrow, I have to leave you two to it. I cannot continue this discussion, it's not benefitting me. Goodnight guys.

Akin1212:
See I have come to a point that I have come to understand the way you think.

Are you basically saying the science of today is limited in the future? Lol, that's funny bro. Leave the future and worry about today.


Let's talk about today, are the instruments of today not better than yesterday or the last 50 years?

Someone would have thought we would never have something better than floppy disks, but where are they today?

But you have decided to talk about the future we have not lived.


Oga, when you reflect, do you reflect into the future or the past?

Thank you for agreeing with me...the instruments of today are only right to the extent they are limited in their function

Asking me if I reflect into the future or the past is a funny question;

I LEARN from the Past;
ENJOY the Present and;
PREPARE for the Future

So yes, I consider the past, present and future before concluding on issues...and I expect same from an intelligent scientist

Science has not discovered the Eternal Creator today and you are an atheist...when Science discovers the Eternal Creator in the future...what becomes of atheism?

Graycoder:
I have work tomorrow, I have to leave you two to it. I cannot continue this discussion, it's not benefitting me. Goodnight guys.

You have tried your best. Do have a refreshing night rest.

Akin1212...this is your thread not mine. I hope I am welcome to come around anytime

Graycoder:
I have work tomorrow, I have to leave you two to it. I cannot continue this discussion, it's not benefitting me. Goodnight guys.

Goodnight boss.

OkaiCorne:
Thank you for agreeing with me...the instruments of today are only right to the extent they are limited in their function

Asking me if I reflect into the future or the past is a funny question;

I LEARN from the Past;
ENJOY the Present and;
PREPARE for the Future

So yes, I consider the past, present and future before concluding on issues...and I expect same from an intelligent scientist

Why are you always forcing an agreement? I did not agree with you on any grounds

Instead, I countered your grounds, which are once again not reasonable at all.

It's very simple, many years ago, floppy disk was sufficient and not limited. Today, we have DVD disks and memory cards which are better than floppy disks of the past and sufficient for now and not limited. We can't say DVD disks are limited to the future because we have not lived the future yet.


This your ideology is really wonderful, bros.

Akin1212:
Why are you always forcing an agreement? I did not agree with you on any grounds

Instead, I countered your grounds, which are once again not reasonable at all.

It's very simple, many years ago, floppy disk was sufficient and not limited. Today, we have DVD disks and memory cards which are better than floppy disks of the past and sufficient for now and not limited. We can't say DVD disks are limited to the future because we have not lived the future yet.


This your ideology is really wonderful, bros.

Do you use a floppy disk today? that tells you of a limitation in scope of what floppy disk could do in terms of memory and portability compared to the flash drives of today. Do you understand me?

IF YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON CAN GIVE A BASIC EXAMPLE OF LIFE EXISTING WITHOUT A CONSCIOUS AND OR INTELLIGENT CREATOR, THAT WOULD REALLY GO A LONG WAY IN KEEPING ME QUIET.

Good night boss...your fellow atheists are proud of you for keeping up this long. I am a Human being and not a machine the last time I checked.


If you cannot answer the question...let others give it a shot...

OkaiCorne:
Do you use a floppy disk today? that tells you of a limitation in scope of what floppy disk could do in terms of memory and portability compared to the flash drives of today. Do you understand me?

Why are you talking like this for fuck_ sake?

We used floppy disk in the past, that's why we both know the name. We are using Flash drives today, that's why we know the names. But what are we going to use in the future? Do you know the names?

That's not called limitation sir, it's called sufficiency. We are not in the future yet, leave it alone. Let's live today first.

Flash drives are sufficient and enough for us today or are they limited for today's use?

If you want to check for limitation, you consider the present and not the future.

Akin1212:
Why are you talking like this for fuck_ sake?

We used floppy disk in the past, that's why we both know the names. We are using Flash drives today, that's why we know the names. But what are we going to use in the future? Do you know the names?

That's not called limitation sir, it's called sufficiency. We are not in the future yet, leave it alone. Let's live today first.

Flash drives are sufficient and enough for us today or are they limited for today's use?

If you want to check for limitation, you consider the present and not the future.

Based on the bolded, the present imposes a limitation on what you can achieve if you want to rely on logic(100% details)...hence your conclusion on the absence of God is...ILLOGICAL Or do you want me to open Encarta dictionary is to remind on what ILLOGICAL means?

You are only making a gamble on the absence of God...therefore leave theists in peace with their conclusion as well.

Best Regards

OkaiCorne:
Based on the bolded, the present imposes a limitation on what you can achieve if you want to rely on logic(100% details)...hence your conclusion on the absence of God is...ILLOGICAL

You are only making a gamble on the absence of God...therefore leave theists in peace with their conclusion as well.

Best Regards

Laughable, look at what you are resorting to again.

Well, I am not even going to discuss God with you anymore. I have reached my conclusions based on our discussions.

But God is not in the past, he's not in the present that we are even considering, of course, he can't be in the future. Is that what you call illogical? I think you should think again.

In fact, logical reasoning which insists on correctness must be considered using the past and the present, which I have just done. Using the future you don't know anything about is what is illogical. I caught you there again.

Goodbye, sir.

Graycoder:
You have maintained that I am saying a different thing from what the vets said.

So you knew all along that I was on the same page with them, but you chose to argue that we have conflicts of opinions.

I am sorry, I don't argue this way. I am here to learn from you which you must also do from me. If we start using false claims, we will not get anywhere.

I also told you science is unlimited, if science is limited, then why has it not reached its limits? You cannot say something that has not reached its limits is limited.

You said fresh things are being discovered everyday, if something will discover a fresh thing tomorrow, does it seem limited to you?

I thought you said you wanted to sleep...As for me, I am tired. We shall continue another time. Goodnight and Bye Bye

Akin1212...over to you...I am off to bed.

Akin1212:
Laughable, look at what you are resorting to again.

Well, I am not even going to discuss God with you anymore. I have reached my conclusions based on our discussions.

But God is not in the past, he's not in the present that we are even considering, of course, he can't be in the future. Is that what you call illogical? I think you should think again.

In fact, logical reasoning which insists on correctness must be considered using the past and the present, which I have just done. Using the future you don't know anything about is what is illogical. I caught you there again.

Goodbye, sir.

I wonder if Scientists never predicted the future with algorithms to forecast accurately... Anyways, Good night and sweet nightmares dreams

Whatever is not in the past, present or future either;

1) Does not Exist OR
2) Abides in the realm of Eternity (Which is a higher plane of existence above TIME)

#PEACE

OkaiCorne:
I wonder if Scientists never predicted the future with algorithms to forecast accurately... Anyways, Good night and sweet nightmares dreams

Wait it seems you have everything mixed up together. Now I am getting to understand you.

So forecasting the future now is now logic to you again?

People forecast the future, and they fail or pass. Uncertainty, what does that tell you? Incorrect logic + intuition = always uncertain.

Please just tell me, do I need to explain everything to you? This your further maths PHD is seeming like elementary school arithmetics PHD ooo

It seems my formula always come out correct.

Akin1212:
Wait it seems you have everything mixed up together. Now I am getting to understand you.

So forecasting the future now is now logic to you again?

People forecast the future, and they fail or pass. Uncertainty, what does that tell you? Incorrect logic + intuition = always uncertain.

Please just tell me, do I need to explain everything to you? This your further maths PHD is seeming like elementary school arithmetics PHD ooo

I thought forecasting the future through algorithms is a logical process an "intelligent" scientist should know. Do you want more sources on this subject matter?

Once and for all...Good night. No more from me today...Akin1212 carry on with your thread

OkaiCorne:
I wonder if Scientists never predicted the future with algorithms to forecast accurately... Anyways, Good night and sweet nightmares dreams

Whatever is not in the past, present or future either;

1) Does not Exist OR
2) Abides in the realm of Eternity (Which is a higher plane of existence above TIME)

#PEACE

Forecasting the future is different from knowing the future, except if you define forecasting as knowing. I'm sure people will like to learn from you. Please tell us now.

What's not in the past, the present and can't be in the future is either dead or non-existent. Simple

Akin1212:
Forecasting the future is different from knowing the future, except if you define forecasting as knowing. I'm sure people will like to learn from you. Please tell us now.

What's not in the past, the present and can't be in the future is either dead or non-existent. Simple

Please post encarta definition of the bolded words and get your answers...

Having an idea[/b]of what the future would be has an impact on your current decisions. DO YOU PLAN FOR YOUR FUTURE AND DOES IT AFFECT THE DECISIONS YOU TAKE IN THE PRESENT?

[b]AND FOR THE VERY LAST TIME Akin1212 GOOD NIGHT

OkaiCorne:
I thought forecasting the future through algorithms is a logical process an "intelligent" scientist should know. Do you want more sources on this subject matter?

Once and for all...Good night. No more from me today...Akin1212 carry on with your thread

You know you cannot go so quit the forming. Tell us if forecasting is the same as knowing the future.

A few minutes ago you were talking about knowing the future, now you have jumped to forecasting.

Can you define forecasting for us?

Whether they forecast through algorithms or zombies, they are still predicting it and not knowing it.

OkaiCorne:
Please post encarta definition of the bolded words and get your answers...

Having an idea[/b]of what the future would be has an impact on your current decisions. DO YOU PLAN FOR YOUR FUTURE AND DOES IT AFFECT THE DECISIONS YOU TAKE IN THE PRESENT?

[b]AND FOR THE VERY LAST TIME Akin1212 GOOD NIGHT

I will gladly oblige you once more to expose you, bros. You know I like doing this.

After seeing the two definitions below, Sir OkaiCorne, tell us. Can you know(certain) if you will live tomorrow or you can forecast(suggest) that you will live? You must answer oo. Chai English is really hard oo

Forecast - To suggest what will happen
Know - To be certain of what will happen

Akin1212:
I will gladly oblige you once more to expose you, bros. You know I like doing this.

After seeing the two definitions below, Sir OkaiCorne, tell us. Can you know(certain) if you will live tomorrow or you can forecast(suggest) that you will live? You must answer oo. Chai English is really hard oo

Forecast - To suggest what will happen
Know - To be certain of what will happen

To have an idea of your future now means you are certain of it abi?

Thanks for using your hands to expose yourself.

Meanwhile 100% of your time has been spent trying to prove me wrong without a single basic example to explain the absence of a Conscious and intelligent Creator responsible for the Universe as we see it.

OkaiCorne:
To have an idea of your future now means you are certain of it abi?

Thanks for using your hands to expose yourself.
Meanwhile 100% of your time has been spent trying to prove me wrong without a single basic example to explain the absence of a Conscious and intelligent Creator responsible for the Universe as we see it.

Don't shy away by using your usual tactics of injecting an unrelated topic. I showed you the pictures from Encarta dictionaries. You said forecasting means knowing the future, now do you know better?

Or do you want me to upload the definition of an idea too? Having an idea is still the same thing as having a suggestion.

I told you that people forecasting the future is different from people knowing the future. But you want to prove my logic to be wrong. I guess you failed already because logic is not used when forecasting as I stated above. I told you people may be right or wrong when forecasting because they use incorrect logic. While we both know that logic insists on correctness. In case you forgot, see it below

Akin1212:
Wait it seems you have everything mixed up together. Now I am getting to understand you.

So forecasting the future now is now logic to you again?

People forecast the future, and they fail or pass. Uncertainty, what does that tell you? Incorrect logic + intuition = always uncertain.

Please just tell me, do I need to explain everything to you? This your further maths PHD is seeming like elementary school arithmetics PHD ooo

It seems my formula always come out correct.

Since you cannot be sincere at all, please just stop coming here to disturb me.

Akin1212:
Don't shy away by using your usual tactics of injecting an unrelated topic. I showed you the pictures from Encarta dictionaries. You said forecasting means knowing the future, now do you know better?

Or do you want me to upload the definition of an idea too? Having an idea is still the same thing as having a suggestion.

I told you that people forecasting the future is different from people knowing the future. But you want to prove my logic to be wrong. I guess you failed already because logic is not used when forecasting as I stated above. I told you people may be right or wrong when forecasting because they use incorrect logic. While we both know that logic insists on correctness. In case you forgot, see it below


Since you cannot be sincere at all, please just stop coming here to disturb me.

Kindly quote where I stated forecasting (predicting or having an idea of the future) is the same thing as knowing (being certain) of the future.

Are you looking for someone that is certain about the future before you start planning for your future?

Based on your statement which I bolded, I will leave your thread with very basic unanswered questions theists will continue asking you.

You are the boss of this playground. Bye (but if you think I'm running away...I can return for us to continue). Cheers



https://www.nairaland.com/1097054/how-atheism-evolved-jesoul-into

The above link shows how atheism played a key role in helping a theist (Christian) JeSoul to be what she is now.

Please note that I am not inviting JeSoul to add her point of view to this discussion. She is just an example of what Akin1212 might become

Graycoder:
We are all students, and we learn everyday. Science is an ideology and everybody don't need to accept it. Nobody is being forced

But everybody not accepting science is barbaric. If anybody uses the amenities science has been able to spring up, like internet, electricity, phones, electronics etc. and you still don't accept its logic then the person is STUPID, really stupid.

Now I will not agree with you on the statement you made that science is a growing body, why? Here is why, every ideology is growing, speaking of religion, philosophy, Science etc. No ideology can be pointed to that is not growing. For instance, in the days of old in religion, people don't go into trance. But these days trance is the concept. Tomorrow we don't know what the new concept would be. So Idon't agree based on the fact that you mentioned science alone, all ideologies are growing is more appropriate.

On the answer to all questions, I saw Akin told you something 3 days ago that science does answer everything. Let me put it better.

Nothing can answer everything, do you agree? For example, if I ask you that since everything must be created, then who created the eternal creator? You will definitely find one answer for me, but I will not accept it.

If you ask me a question also, and I give you an answer, you will also not accept it. So you cannot be answered, I also cannot be answered. So nothing answers everything. That's how life is.
Science doesn't, Religion doesn't, nothing does.
The mistake Akin made was trying to relate scientifically with someone who doesn't accept science.

And we don't use opinions to reach conclusions in science. Every scientific work must be backed up by hypothesis, theories and facts. Where we disagree is when these premises are wrong. Some people go wrong and others correct them, We don't call that disagreement based on opinions, we don't.

On the instruments, I never did tell you that the instruments created to see in other radiations can see everything. Please don't misquote me. I said the instruments can see what other animals can see. Don't conclude out of point. Please.

The knowledge in science is not limited. Please don't commit fallacy. I really don't want to know what's between you and Akin, it would just be wise to stop dragging issues long. That's all.

Is Science a growing body of knowledge or not?

Also sir, did I state it anywhere that any ideology under Heaven is fully grown (knows everything)? Please do not make an assumption on something I never stated. (my apologies if this is only an observation you are making)

All I am saying is Science is limited to the total number of discoveries and inventions made as at now. You cannot objectively conclude on what Science is yet to discover.

That is my humble opinion sir.

OkaiCorne:
Kindly quote where I stated forecasting (predicting or having an idea of the future) is the same thing as knowing (being certain) of the future.

Are you looking for someone that is certain about the future before you start planning for your future?

Based on your statement which I bolded, I will leave your thread with very basic unanswered questions theists will continue asking you.

You are the boss of this playground. Bye (but if you think I'm running away...I can return for us to continue). Cheers



https://www.nairaland.com/1097054/how-atheism-evolved-jesoul-into

The above link shows how atheism played a key role in helping a theist (Christian) JeSoul to be what she is now.

Please note that I am not inviting JeSoul to add her point of view to this discussion. She is just an example of what Akin1212 might become

A double standard is characteristic of a confused person. You are just jumping from right to left without making any point. If you're caught somewhere, you jump to the opposite side. I have stopped worrying since it has become clear that you are insincere and not straightforward. Graycoder also confirmed it so I am not the only person who saw it.

I am not going to be dragging forecasting and knowing with you. I have a knack for detecting a fruitless discussion, I have so much on my table to worry about. If me proving theists wrong is what disturbs you, sorry it's paining you. It's not my fault, I just don't like it when people cry and pray to a giant non-existent being. It doesn't make sense for a thinking man to believe in what's not there. Look around you and see how the belief in God has dragged us back, it has really affected humanity negatively. If you theists cannot see it, we can. We all can't be blind. Some people must lead humanity to advancement. Scientists are doing well in that regards. The only ideology that gives humanity hope is Science.

I don't want to assume with intuition the ideology you belong to, and my information on you is not complete so logic will fail me too. It's clear you're not a Christian or a Muslim, but since you are still one of those who still believe in a God, that makes you a theist. You may have another religion, but you're a theist. That's the confusion rocking you people, nonalignment when it comes to this imaginary ghost you people serve. You can't reach a conclusion on it. Unlike atheists who have a definite stand that this imaginary ghost is not there. IT IS NOT THERE.

Akin1212:
A double standard is characteristic of a confused person. You are just jumping from right to left without making any point. If you're caught somewhere, you jump to the opposite side. I have stopped worrying since it has become clear that you are insincere and not straightforward. Graycoder also confirmed it so I am not the only person who saw it.

I am not going to be dragging forecasting and knowing with you. I have a knack for detecting a fruitless discussion, I have so much on my table to worry about. If me proving theists wrong is what disturbs you, sorry it's paining you. It's not my fault, I just don't like it when people cry and pray to a giant non-existent being. It doesn't make sense for a thinking man to believe in what's not there. Look around you and see how the belief in God has dragged us back, it has really affected humanity negatively. If you theists cannot see it, we can. We all can't be blind. Some people must lead humanity to advancement. Scientists are doing well in that regards. The only ideology that gives humanity hope is Science.

I don't want to assume with intuition the ideology you belong to, and my information on you is not complete so logic will fail me too. It's clear you're not a Christian or a Muslim, but since you are still one of those who still believe in a God, that makes you a theist. You may have another religion, but you're a theist. That's the confusion rocking you people, nonalignment when it comes to this imaginary ghost you people serve. You can't reach a conclusion on it. Unlike atheists who have a definite stand that this imaginary ghost is not there. IT IS NOT THERE.

The dumbest thing I have heard in my entire life is how unconscious and unintelligent energy is solely responsible for conscious and intelligent life.

Energy alone cannot create anything

The Eternal Creator = (Consciousness + Intellect + Energy) is responsible for the Creation of the Universe

If what I just typed doesn't ring a bell in your head...then your intelligence is really unique.


An intelligent person never shouts he is intelligent ... ONLY EMPTY BARRELS MAKE THE LOUDEST NOISE

Now act predictably by throwing up another insult

Akin1212:
No, I don't. Why? Because the universe is full of errors. If a God programmed this Universe, then he is incompetent. Vey very incompetent looking around it's very easy to see that. Have you ever seen the universe full fledge? If you believe you God created this universe, then I am disappointed in the creator. But on the other hand, Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Energy is the Alpha and the Omega. You can only convert it from one form to the other. Energy is what most of you perceive as God and worships. But this Energy is not self-aware or conscious, it just acts. This Energy is not a being, it doesn't have angels, does not have a fierce enemy. Is not omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Does not control human beings. Did not create hellfire, Did not do a lot of things.



What's wrong with just coming to be? Don't you believe it can just come to be? Why believe God then just came to be?



Hahahaha, let me laugh a little. No that's actually an irony. This Energy is what you people now call God, and God that you people are going crazy about now has probably always been energy and is not worth being worshipped or feared. You just have to appreciate it.



Well, my viewpoint is plain. If God exists, then he's got to be perfect. But he is not as you have agreed he is only omniscient "to an extent" of which there is nothing as that. Energy has flaws and we know, so we in the science world have discovered how to use this energy to perfection.
I still maintain there is no being called God, because all these flaws are too cheap for a would be God. Is there anyway you want to explain the deficiencies of an Almighty who is not perfect? brother, we are truly not arguing, we are just enlightening each other.

I quoted this just to remind you that you stated Energy alone (Alpha & Omega) is responsible for the creation of the Universe.

Energy without intellect and consciousness is useless.

OkaiCorne:
The dumbest thing I have heard in my entire life is how unconscious and unintelligent energy is solely responsible for conscious and intelligent life.

Energy alone cannot create anything

The Eternal Creator = (Consciousness + Intellect + Energy) is responsible for the Creation of the Universe

If what I just typed doesn't ring a bell in your head...then your intelligence is really unique.


An intelligent person never shouts he is intelligent ... ONLY EMPTY BARRELS MAKE THE LOUDEST NOISE

Now act predictably by throwing up another insult

YOU ARE SO QUACK. Reason this out, Let's assume the eternal creator is the most intelligent being, for what purpose then id he create the Bermuda triangle? It bemuses me that a so much intelligent creator couldn't realize the consequences of the Bermuda triangle before creating it. Even after creating it and it started killing its creatures, it still can't change. That's really intelligence at its most ridiculous showing. You can keep dancing with this your imaginary, intuitive and unverifiable creator while I sip my tea. It's none of my business.


On the other hand, what makes sense is that the not conscious energy was the one that formed the Bermuda triangle and it doesn't care if it kills people or not. I have told you that a billion times but you will NEVER sink in your head. I am sorry you can't understand it, it's beyond your reasoning.

Akin1212:
YOU ARE SO QUACK. Reason this out, Let's assume the eternal creator is the most intelligent being, for what purpose then id he create the Bermuda triangle? It bemuses me that a so much intelligent creator couldn't realize the consequences of the Bermuda triangle before creating it. Even after creating it and it started killing its creatures, it still can't change. That's really intelligence at its most ridiculous showing. You can keep dancing with this your imaginary, intuitive and unverifiable creator while I sip my tea. It's none of my business.


On the other hand, what makes sense is that the not conscious energy was the one that formed the Bermuda triangle and it doesn't care if it kills people or not. I have told you that a billion times but you will NEVER sink in your head. I am sorry you can't understand it, it's beyond your reasoning.

If you are a mind reader...you can answer the question you just asked.

The last time I checked...I cannot read your mind nor that of the Eternal Creator... if you were once a Pastor like you claimed...why not ask the Eternal Creator? AN INTELLIGENT PERSON SHOULD CONSIDER MOTIVES AND ACTIONS before concluding on certain issues...but an "intelligent" person like you considers only actions

When you are ready to read Stephen Hawking's (a global leading Scientific Atheist) thoughts on the parallel universe, you can have a clue to the answer you need Mr. Energy expert...

If you disagree with the guy..that concludes you Scientists ARE CONFUSED .... or perhaps you are just wrong...

Next set of insults please you are so predictable

OkaiCorne:
If you are a mind reader...you can answer the question you just asked.

The last time I checked...I cannot read your mind nor that of the Eternal Creator... if you were once a Pastor like you claimed...why not ask the Eternal Creator? AN INTELLIGENT PERSON SHOULD CONSIDER MOTIVES AND ACTIONS before concluding on certain issues...but an "intelligent" person like you considers only actions

When you are ready to read Stephen Hawking's (a global leading Scientific Atheist) thoughts on the parallel universe, you can have a clue to the answer you need Mr. Energy expert...

If you disagree with the guy..that concludes you Scientists are confused .... or you are wrong...

Next set of insults please you are so predictable

You keep bringing up matters I'm done with, what the eff is wrong with you?

You cannot even tell us the non-existent creator's motives or actions on planes of existence, now you want to talk about his motives on Bermuda triangle. Can you talk about the motives of SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST?

Come off it and tell us the motives for creating Bermuda, to kill the people it has already killed, right?

If I was once a pastor and I asked the non-existent creator and he could say a word because he is not there, do you want me to keep fetching water in a basket? Lol, I am not like who talk to a giant spirit. Your giant spirit cannot even say simple "Hi." Yet he is all powerful. It's really a joke I like hearing always.

While I sip my tea, keep ranting bro. I'll keep reading, I'm done addressing your ignorance. Good day sir.

Akin1212:
You keep bringing up matters I'm done with, what the eff is wrong with you?

You cannot even tell us the non-existent creator's motives or actions on planes of existence, now you want to talk about his motives on Bermuda triangle. Can you talk about the motives of SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST?

Come off it and tell us the motives for creating Bermuda, to kill the people it has already killed, right?

If I was once a pastor and I asked the non-existent creator and he could say a word because he is not there, do you want me to keep fetching water in a basket? Lol, I am not like who talk to a giant spirit. Your giant spirit cannot even say simple "Hi." [/b]Yet he is all powerful. It's really a joke I like hearing always.

While I sip my tea, keep ranting bro. I'll keep reading, I'm done addressing your ignorance. Good day sir.

[b]When your senses are attuned enough...you will understand certain things you don't know today.

In the absence of any answer to explain how;

1) Unintelligent and Unconscious energy can create something Intelligent and Conscious (unless your very existence proves this),
2) Many other basic questions I asked on this thread which theists will eventually use to haunt you.

Do have a great day believing energy can wake up on its own to create stuffs

Energy (alone) is the Alpha and Omega my arse...

OkaiCorne:
When your senses are attuned enough...you will understand certain things you don't know today.

In the absence of any answer to explain how;

1) Unintelligent and Unconscious energy can create something Intelligent and Conscious (unless your very existence proves this),
2) Many other basic questions I asked on this thread which theists will eventually use to haunt you.

Do have a great day believing energy can wake up on its own to create stuffs

Energy (alone) is the Alpha and Omega my arse...

Lol Chai...

[b]See someone who doesn't know pinch about energy ranting on what energy can do. You just cannot understand the concept and it has started paining you.

Gullibly, you even went and brought links of Stephen Hawking talking about other universes, the Professor does not even give a fuck_ about your eternal creator, how is his work going to prove that there is a God? I have said it that you don't have a working brain.

Graycoder was able to testify that you don't have a working brain, he had to leave you to rot in your ignorance. Do you know how long it took that man to explain how sight works to you?

You will be countering facts that you know zilch about. You are a lost sheep, I swear. Does it make you cum to say the things you don't know?

Stephen Hawking said God does not exist, now as obtuse as you are you want to use his work to prove a spirit exists. Lol, you're a he-goat, sir.

How Energy formed the world is something you and your coming generations might not understand, except if you're lucky that you will have someone more intelligent than you in your generations who will discover these things. Else, hmm it's a pity.

You don't even know what constitutes consciousness, the link between biological molecules. Just give me one reason I should keep dragging matters with a novice and an ignoramus like you?

Please, don't come back. We have had enough of your obliviousness. Good day Mr low IQ.[/b]