STUPUDTHEISTS's Posts
Nairaland Forum › STUPUDTHEISTS's Profile › STUPUDTHEISTS's Posts
YelloweWest: ![]() |
aonag:You got me laughing hard with your comment. I agree with everything you said. Quora is repleted with smart folks with astonishing erudition. The site is my go-to spot for well analyzed - and researched - answers to questions. I just hope these our naija brothers don't reduce the site to a pitiable state like Nairaland. |
adepeter2027:Feigning ignorance huh? ![]() |
dalaman:Well, the truth about evolution is refusing to accept it doesn't make it a bunk. Trust me friend there are thousands of people - scientists mostly in the past - who's tried to disprove it but instead the theory keeps getting stronger amassing more evidence. Theory of evolution by natural selection is one of those theories in science - just like heliocentric theory - that can never be disproved. |
.. |
adepeter2027:My 'following' notification brought me here. And guess whose monicker it was? |
adepeter2027: |
Egbon is a suspect until proven innocent. He might have had a beef with the group and decided to expose 'em. |
DeeTus:Girls considers a compliment on their makeup an insult. You have to pretend and lie to her about how good she look without a makeup - even if she's wearing one. |
Evidence keeps amassing that supports the argument Religion - Christianity here - is a form of mental injury. @Seun we hardly get to see the harms of religion on the front page. Please take threads like this to Front-page. Thank you. Cc: Lalasticlala |
Martinez19:Hi Martinez19, believe the historicity of Abraham at your own peril. All respectable archeologists considers him, Isaac and Jacob as purely mythical characters. |
paiz:Actually Jesus is a dud. |
Gorthy:All pastors are fake. |
dalaman:Hi dalaman, if you think evolution is utter bunk. How do you explain the fact that modern species still carry a DNA coding for complex features that are not expressed because the DNA is switched off? For instance Whales carry gene for four limbs and land mammal olfactory genes. Some whales have the gene for teeth. Several species of bird also have all the gene for making teeth. The kiwi bird has tiny insignificant wings which are completely useless. How do you explain all these with a creationist POV? How do you explain evolution correctly predicting those common ancestors before we even know that there are some genes in the new species that supports the ancestry? Even before we knew about genetics? We've gotta respect that bro. The fact evolution is missing some link isn't enough to label it as outright nonsense because so far none has come close to explaining the diversity in our world today like the theory of evolution. Again when you take a closer and deeper look at organisms you'd realize they've gone through some amendments/modifications which nullifies the argument for a designer who creates from a fresh start. What kind of designer would want to make a plane but draw a bus then modify it to become a plane, and leave some bus features in his new plane like a gearstick? instead of just making a plane? It makes no sense. Creationism is the complete bunk my good friend dalaman, and not evolution. |
OliviaPope:Hello Sherlock, may the invisible flying calabash shower you with blessings. ![]() |
Another formulated story to extol a dud omniabsent god. |
This thread is a sorta epiphany - an exposition of the uncritical and atrophied mind of the Christian zombies. The point raised by the OP is a very simple one, but for some reasons ranging from indoctrination to selective bias, the Christians have been making some irrational and meaningless rationalization for one of the - if not the - stupidest story in the Bible. I shall paint a similar picture - a very simplified one. Imagine a father who's said to be omniscient - he has foreknowledge of events. Decidedly he set to go out, and his innocent little child lays on the bed. Remember he has the power to know things before they happen. So our guy knew that if he lit a candle on the table, his child will be burnt badly before he return. At this point, common sense entails he should take away the candle or avoid lighting one right? But our omniscient guy said in his mind, "let me test my child and see if he will pass" so he struck a match. It happened that the came back and met his kid with a scarred hand. He got so 'angry' when he saw this and then proceeded to curse the child before throwing him out of his house. You might be fuming at this point "what kinda stupid, wicked and evil father is this?" What if I tell you this is your god - the Christian god. This is the stupid, wicked and evil thing you call a loving merciful father. Why plant the fuc`king tree when he already know Adam and Eve can't resist it? Why put up a test he know is capable of blotching his 'perfect plan'? Why create the serpent when he's already informed this animal will ruin his plan for a perfect world? Why was he surprised and angry when he's seen them eat the apple before it happened? Why create the devil when he's seen with his power that this guy will wrestle him one day - this one is a funny one actually. Finally where's the mercy you guys talk about when he punished two innocent people for something that was clearly his fault - and their first 'crime' actually? Why do you call him a merciful father? Then again there's another possible logical deduction apart from the guy being evil, confused and plain stupid. Do you want to know? It's simple. This story did not happen. If you disagree with this option then be honest at least and admit your god is a wicked dumb thing who bungles whatever he does. |
Nukualofa:False story. Debunked since February http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-fact-about-cheetah-and-impala-story-going-viral-on-social-media-2321249 |
vaxx:Stop quoting me please. I dread sharing the cyber space with super reta`r`ded, blithely ignorant and annoyingly stubborn nitwits like you. You had the chance for a confabulation but you blew it. Adios dumbass. |
adepeter2027:Man, I'm so gutted. I thought the guy was different from Felix and his cronies. He said — and foolishly restated, even when shown to be wrong — that religion started mummification. Lol I've been wasting my time on the wrong person. ![]() |
vaxx:What a circus clown! Someone who thinks religion progressed and aided science by mentioning mummification is talking of enlightenment ![]() |
vaxx:So these are the scientific discoveries? Lol Be that as it may, how has these got anything to do with religion? Ancient Egyptians also made toothpaste then, was religion behind that too? It's important to note that the first cases of mummy in ancient Egypt happened naturally — they buried their dead in pit graves which are shallow, this allows for the hot dry desert sand to dry the body. Is this what you consider as religion progressing science? ![]() Please don't say this elsewhere, abacus wasn't invented by pagans — even if that was the case — asserting that because they were pagans so paganism made them achieve that is a fallacy. Go to Google and type butterfly logic —a logical fallacy. It goes like this: A is associated with B, so A causes B; Many homosexuals have aids therefore homosexuality causes aids. This sums your argument. I won't indulge you further if you can't acknowledge the fault in your line of reasoning. |
vaxx:This guy, I'm really restraining myself from describing you with words you regards as insult, and you've not been helping matter. You said the middle age witnessed religion advancing science. I know this is not true, being someone who is well informed of what happened during those years. So I asked you to go ahead and give examples of those discoveries, then you started foaming — probably because you made a false claim and lacks evidence to adduce for it. There's nothing for me to argue against since you've not mention a single scientific discovery that religion progressed, but we have myriads of evidence that limned how religion empoisoned and slowed scientific progress. What are you on about mate? Please save me some effort if you ain't got no clue. HAGN |
Niflheim:Hello frater, being a while. Do you know the satanic temple commandments are better and morally superior when juxtaposed with that of the Bible? Surprising eh? |
vaxx:Your post didn't address that. Perhaps you should paste it here — how religion progressed science during the Middle ages. The way I see it, you don't have an inkling of what you're saying. |
@Vaxx, I expect to hear from you. Those scientific discoveries — as you claimed — that were progressed by religion during the medieval period. You have a big job to do here, good luck ![]() Y'all Christian niqqaz ain't gon' quit lying for Yeshua |
vaxx:Smoking me a good joint here, I'm not sure I've dissed you yet. What happened during the medieval period. Do I have to remind you I'm not your church brother? |
vaxx:Brother I'm getting stoned right now, I don't have any issue with you. I simply described you with those adjectives you termed insults because of your dishonesty, hypocrisy and unwillingness to recant the falsehood cached within your post even in the light of abundant evidence against it. Actually I didn't intend to go back and forth with you 'cause — speaking from experience — nothin' can be so awful and daunting like engaging an intellectually dishonest person or a dogmatic mind. And many of your brethen around here — especially the vocal ones — seems to be proficient in that aspect. I instead quoted you to correct the impression you made that scientific discoveries were made possible/progressed by religion. I only had to show you cases of religion impeding on scientific breakthrough which nullifies your argument. A honest person will refute my arguments if they were untrue or recant his earlier assertion, but you obstinately, cunningly and stupidly brought up irrelevant talk about democracy and ancient Egypt as though they're related to the bone of contention: "most scientific discovery were progressed by religion" It's funny how you keep latching on paganism like it's the new smoking gun. I always thought you guys argued it was Christianity that aided the progress of science, but you — in a bid to dissociate and avoid the gargantuan evidence stacked against Christianity — dishonesty shifted to paganism — it's okay though. In light of your new stand, I dare you to mention one single scientific breakthrough that was made possible by paganism (not pagans) —religion is an institution not a person. You don't realize how ridiculous your claim is, do you? |
. Double post |
vaxx:This is one of the reasons I barely reply thick-headed and incoherent folks like you. I attacked your claim that religion as a body progresses science by detailing and showing you how it's false. Noting that some famous scientists were religious is irrelevant, invalid and a non sequitur 'cause whatever they did — all their achievements, theories etc — were a product of applications of logic, reason, observation, experimentation and inferences. None of them were able to achieve or propose anything with the aid of religious faith, scriptures or revelations. When you argue for religion progressing science, you should outline ways in which religion as a body has systematically aided in scientific progression. I centered on Christianity because it's a religion, — the largest as a matter of fact, and also your religion — denying/eliding your religion for her past antagonism to science shows you have no point to make. Lastly majority of your quotes here are a desperate attempt at red herrings. I can easily refute all but they have no relevance to the discussion. We're not discussing democracy or politics here. Show me how religion embraced, welcomed and aided critical thinking and the scientific method. Simple! |
vaxx:Stop saying nonsense here, we ain't your airheaded church members. What happened after the western Roman Empire collapsed when Christianity — a religion — took over? How about you read up on the dark age — the period Christianity did the most damage to scientific advancement. The dark ages according to historians saw many scientific advancement stymied by Christianity. Where do I start from? Is it the Greco-Roman achievements that were destroyed and lost? — for example the Archimedes codex which contains the greatest scientific treatise of the pagan scientist had it inked words scraped off and reinscribed with hymns to God. Or do I go about the books and libraries that were burned? Are you informed Copernicus feared for his life when he noted that the sun is at the center instead of earth? — reinventing Aristarchus model which was against that of the Bible. He almost gave up publishing his work save for a young aficionado aliased Rheticus who believed the truth lies with science rather than scripture. During the printing of Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium cælestium, a clergyman inserted some pages which are not of Copernicus to undermine, reta`rd and weaken his work — another blow on scientific advancement. It seems like Copernicus was right for his staunch follower known as Bruno who took up — and adopted — Copernicus model instead of the church's was striped naked, tied and burned to death. And what has this noble man done to attract such barbarism? He simply argued the universe is infinite, stars have their planets and there are lifeforms on these other planets. Do I have to tell the story of Galileo? What the fu'c`k do you mean by religion advances science? |
This is a blatant display of brownnose. |



