₦airaland Forum

davidylan:
Even you claim to have also "engaged" others . . . in what exactly?  

you "support" the deletion of the islamic section but not once have we seen you fools set up threads on the islamic section throwing your vile insults at allah.

Here is one for you, you don't have to keep lying all the time.Mazaje is one of the most avowed atheist on NL and he has on so many occasion displayed his disgust for Islam and the Islamic deity, Here is one

mazaje:
You are a foolish animal abuzola. . , Bleep allah and mohammed and piss on them. . . .stupid idiot. . . . . . . .

But you are too blinded by your ridiculous delusion to ever see anything. Were you not the same person that was supporting mazaje on another thread when he was showing the scientific inaccuracies of the Koran? What a pathetic goon

davidylan:
There is ample evidence from you and others that atheism is PRIMARILY a state of being in permanent, violent, revulsive conflict SPECIFICALLY with the God of the bible.

There many lies you deluded people tell yourselves so that you can sleep comfortably at night while playing the persecution card. All the atheist here were former christians so the bible god and the christian myth and stories is all we know. There are quite a handful of ex-moslem sites on the internet and the ex-moslems ONLY use attack the koran and allah when talking about the non existence of god. By the way there are quite a number of atheist here like Tudor, Mazaje, bomowolo that are always engaging the moslem its just that your delusion makes you too blind to see anything.

Why do you believe and accept that the bible is true and not other religious books?

[quote author=tpia. link=topic=285032.msg4904607#msg4904607 date=1257961814]can someone explain to me how atheists dont believe in evolution? [/quote]Can some one please tell me why theist believe in evolution?

since they dont believe in God/a creator how then do they explain the universe?

Quite a lot of us are happy to say that we do not know how the universe came about. we do not ascribe everything to imaginary gods that have never made them selves knon to the whole of humanity.

Is confusion rocking their camp?

I bet the only camp where confusion abounds in is the theistic camp since all theist do not agree on what exactly this god they love to talk about really is, so far we have various definations and description of what this god is or how he/she supposedly created the universe. Too much confusion I must say since most theist can not give you a coherent defination of what god is.

davidylan:
I will break this into three parts based on your own claims:

1. Evolution does not talk about the origin of life does it? - Evolution, by definition, attempts to shy away from discussing the origin of life because that is something scientists DO NOT UNDERSTAND. But to claim that evolution can exist WITHOUT an origin makes absolutely no sense. For example; evolution by scientific definition (politically correct by the way) is a change in genetic material from generation to generation . . . the problem here though is that evolution MUST NEEDS ACCOUNT for the very first generation where the genes in question appeared from!

The scientist also agree that science does not know all things infact most of them readily agree that there are so many many things that science does not yet know for now. As for the whole evolution thingy I like others have found it wanting in so many places even some scientist that subscribe to it do not completely agree with all its postulations bacause it is filled with wild guesses and speculations.

3. the topic is about science and the light it has shown humanity agsinst the ridiculous old myths - each time we ask for this "light" we are again forced through the ridiculous run around by proponents of nothing but railing against the bible. Science has indeed explained a lot about who we are, precious little about who we will become and virtually NOTHING about who we once were.

Neither has any religion, as mazaje has once said you will expect all the proponents of the god hypothesis(religion) to spend quite some time telling us about the before life, how it is and everything about it and praying to their various gods so that children are not born into families with opposing religious views. Very telling since all religions only claim to know what will happen to people when they die . Something I KNOW all religions do not know, they only love to claim they know

Science has NO answers for what happens after the grave,

That is because non of you proponents of the god hypothesis have any answers either, you all love to pretend that your opinion, hypothesis, fantasies and conjectures alone is what matters and counts about the human race and the afrter life. Non of you have EVER provided any evidence at all for your claims about the after life, all we have are endless hypothesis,fantasies and conjectures that lack any basis in reality.

it has NO answers about how the earth suddenly appeared and why there is no life on mars for instance.

We know that Mars exist only through science and not through carefully studying the bible, koran or the hindu text. At least through science we truly know what the stars are and we know that they can not fall into the earth or fight along side humans as some religions postulate, we know about the planets and we know that our position in the cosmos is completely insignificant when the entire universe is put together because science told us so. Our sun is just one out of the gazillion of suns out there uncountable with stars revolving around them like ours, science gave us that knowledge about the cosmos not any religion and its ludacrious claims.

Science has no answers for cancer, it has NO answers people who have functioning brains and hearts but remain in a coma forever . . .

Neither does religion, the problem is that many christians try to use science to prove the bible, and they spend decades studying science in order to try to prove the bible. If a god truly exists as they will like to have people believe, surely there would be simple easy ways to find good evidence that he exists without using complex scientific findings know. They forget that according to their own bible their god used to have a place of the lords presence where he lives and summons people to go and have conversations with him or offer sacrifices unto him every body around knew that was where he renders his presence and they all revere that place grealtly according to the story, but now they are trying to depend or use complex scientific processes and finding to prove the existence of their god.

really what "light" has science shone?

Every light, If it hasn't you fellow christian apologist will not be trying endlessly to use it to prove the existence of the god you subscribe to. You were able to know about the christian narrative only because science was involved,the colonialists that came with the message of christianity used ships, navagating systems, to get to us, they used science(books, ink, printers) so that a copy of the bible can get to you. You are a christian today only because some science was used at one stage or the other in propagating the message to you, and yet you still ask these very embarassing questions. Science REMAINS the only hope for humanity.

davidylan:
Each time i read this constant whine about "missing verses" it always amuses me. This is because at the end of the day you're basically talking of perhaps 1 or 2 missing verses! Besides the fact that some of the early writers may have consciously omitted a verse perhaps based on the audience they were writing for . . . it is possible that we lose some of these verses due to the level of preservation of these manuscripts. For instance certain books of the bible in the dead sea scrolls have numerous verses missing! That's because some of them are so badly damaged!

I do not even have time for these missing verses, some have argued that the missing parts are not just one or two verses as you will like to have us believe. The bottom line is this, if the god of the bible truly exist as you guys will like to have people believe, is he so weak that he depends only on debates about copies of ancient texts that have been changed, ancient text whose originals we do not have and ancient text that were written in some obscured langauge spoken by very few people to reasonably prove his existence and will? Human effort alone is a poor and inefficient means to spread the supposedly most important and helpful message in history but that is the method that this god whom you guys claim knows all things chose to reach out to the world through writings that have undergone various revisions and have various textual difference? I find this incredible.


Then we are left to deal with people like you constantly trying to come up with excuses for this god and the mysterious ways he works or does not work, this does nothing but tell me it is all made up because if he did exist, there is no way he is that stupid.

The revision of the KJV to the NKJV was primarily because some were no longer comfortable with the old version of English language employed with the KJV. Kinda makes your "point" moot.

This is not true, the reason for the revision was because it contains so many errors. Here is an example.

Gen1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. KJV

Gen1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. NKJV

The KJV made an error when it said heaven the hebrew word was plural(Heavens) not singular and that is an example of the error it contains.

davidylan:
Actually the vast majority of scientists do . . . its the basis for evolution you fool.

I laugh at the rejoinders of this hopeless fool, Evolution does not talk about the origin of life does it? You need to be considerably more specific about what exactly you mean with “statistics.” If you mean for example that somewhere a lizard suddenly grows a pair of wing, some feathers and a beak, and thus “by statistics” turns into a bird then that is a stupid creationist straw man and a very silly one at that. In fact if such a thing were to be observed it would refute evolution according to evolutionist. Strictly speaking evolution according to evolutinist is the study of gene and allele frequencies.

They say that evolution concerns itself with how certain genes (or alleles) become abundant or scarce, and the factors that play a role in it including chance. But that is their theory and I do not subscribe to it completely. By the way they have done more in defending their theory than you have done with your stupid and nonsensical god did it delusion that you are yet to properly defend or provide any evidence for.

The topic here is not just evolution even though I know you will like it to be only about evolution, the topic is about science and the light it has shown humanity agsinst the ridiculous old myths that you goons subscribe to while trying to defame science and all that it has shown and done for humanity, Everything that we know about this universe and the world around us we know through science not through all the various bronze aged myths you subscribe to.

davidylan:
That the original texts appear in different languages makes perfect sense. For instance you wont expect the old testament texts to appear in anything but aramaic or hebrew. The new testament on the other hand would have been copied into different languages to be distributed to the separate churches . . . from greek to roman and even hebrew.

Of course I agree with this.

What is amazing is the fact that barring textual or clerical errors . . . they do not differ at all.

Some of them differ because some foot notes in some english version acknowledge or put some caveat saying that some verses are omitted because they do not appear in some early manuscripts. That constitute some difference. But that is not the point I was trying to make , the point I was trying to make is that even the KJV has been revised.

davidylan:
so its just easier to ascribe it to statistics?

and you call me deluded?

Last time I checked you were the only person ascribing it so statistics not me.

davidylan:
Read the section in highlights . . . first you imply there are NO original manuscripts then go ahead to complain that the "original manuscripts", which dont exist according to you, have different types?

Seriously . . . are these folks screwed on tight?

You did not get the message I was putting accross and you some how believe I am screwed on tight? . What I said is simple, Which original manuscript are you talking about exactly since there are many original manuscripts each with textual differences, You talk about an original manuscript as if only one type exist. But that is not the case there are differnet types of the original manuscripts in existence.

davidylan:
Its funny how you side-step the fact that the original manuscripts are actually available to whine so hard about "versions" of the bible.

But oh well . . . what do you expect from those who are only desperate to disparage the bible?

Which original manuscripts exactly are you talking about? Even the original manuscripts have different types(riddle with copyist errors and all), Do you really know what you are saying? But what then do you expect from people who are wired to believe that any body that points to a problem that exist in their belief system is attacking or disparaging it.

davidylan:
That's quite true . . . Darwin, Watson nor Crick made any contributions to science as scientists-in-training. It takes a while dumbo. Even most nobel laureates in science earn their badges at old age . . . i'm sure you fool dont expect me to be writing nature papers at this stage.

So shut up, crying all day on NL that you are a scientist(even though you have never contributed anything to the scientific process) does not make you one, when you do I will be the first person to congratulate you on your contribution until then be quite and stop crying all the time that you are one when you are not.

Its funny that the more science reveals, the more we realise how much the human body on its own could NEVER have been an accident of chance. But fools like you have no idea no?

So the best thing is to ascribe everything that we see about the human body to a deity who has shown through his revelations that he has no clue about science and how the human body functions? Deluded fool.

davidylan:
Considering the fact that the original manuscripts are available on the internet or on ebay as compilations . . . your bawling is just a sad indictment of your depraved state of mind. Case closed.

Considering that there are as many differences in the original manuscripts available as there are actual words in the bible says that your bawling is really a sad indictment of your very depraved state of mind case closed.

davidylan:
Climb off your high horse . . . many of us are equally scientists too unlike many of you who only embrace a superficial form of "science" merely to use it as a cloak for your unbelief.

Crying all day on NL that you are a scientist does not make you one, studying the work of scientist to know how their theory and postulation work does not make you one of them it only says that you are an observer trying to know how the process works based on what others have done, the last time I checked the name of scientist that have contributed to the field of science and the scientific process your name did not appear there. So get down from you high horse.

If there is anything all the sciences you mention above have told us . . . it is the fact that this world would be entirely impossible based on chance alone. I'm sure you took a course in statistics.

Science has told us more about ourselves than all your make belief superstitions will. In fact what has your superstition told us about the earth or the universe?

davidylan:
No we dont . . . which is why only fools like you see "bible undergoes new revision" and automatically assume it applies for every christian out there.

First of all there are so many bible translations as there are many christian denominations(each with its own agenda), the english bible alone has over 80 different translations that have gone through so many revisions, so every christian has had the bible that he/she subscribes to undergo some kind of revision in one way or the other even the bible you this delused fool subscribe to as the word of god(KJV) has undergone its own revision because the original one is said to contain some errors. So the FACT is most, if not all versions of the bible have undergone some revision in one way or the other.

The KJV contains errors . . . we already know that. We are not too blind to ignore them. Anything new you wanted to pass across to us?

Pass what across to you? You think I have time pandering to your delusions?

davidylan:
thou fool . . . i know. I even have a copy.
I however retain and use exclusively the KJV and ditto for most of my family members and those i know.

So you and your family members now constitute what authority in christianity thou ridiculous and pathetic fool?

The fact that you and your equally deluded friends choose to use the KJV does not mean that it is without errors, it has a lot of errors in it hence the need for it to be reviewed and the birth of the NKJV.

davidylan:
You know these people have a deep-seated psychological problem that goes much deeper than christianity just being a myth. Ifa is a myth but you never see such vicious hatred towards its adherents . . . what is it about Christ and the bible that produces such demonic mindsets?

Hinduism is a myth and hindus are killing christians in Indai and Nepal, I have never seen you and your folks attack hinduism and display the kind of vicious hate you display towards Islam here on the board, what is it about Islam and evolution that gives you sleepless nights all the time? Me thinks that there is a deep-seated psychological problem that goes much deeper than Islam is a false religion.

davidylan:
They have a right to review their own copy of the bible. It doesnt change the fact that a large number of us prefer to continue using the old KJV published first in the 17th century based on original biblical manuscripts.

You despicable liars and sons of satan shld learn to speak the truth.

Is it the same KJV that contains a lot of errors(even in the opening verse) and had to be reviewed? Does this person knows that there is the NKJV?

davidylan:
you make absolutely no sense . . . ditto for jagunlabi, toneyb and negro nations.

When will this empty barrel ever make any sense?

Lets start from here - you claim i am deluded for the reason being i consider a "man" (who is historically proven to have existed) to be God-incarnate, but YET you fools all follow a "god" who is at best an abstract term?

Do you know what it means historically prove something? You can begin to provide your evidence for this FALSE assertion.

when you make a statement such as this - he will worship God by sharing "what is beautiful and noble in the depth of his soul" . . . what does it mean? What "God" are you worshiping? Where are his rules of engagement? When did you meet him? What are these subjective "beautiful and noble" things in the depth of your soul? What of ancient civilizations who genuinely believed it was "godly" to sacrifice humans to idols? What "gods" were they worshiping and were their souls not beautiful?

I can't believe you are saying this, have you ever read your bible at all? What about your bible god who commanded his chosen men to burn humans and sacrifice them (unbelievers) unto him? Where their"souls" not beautiful to your tribal and warrior deity ? Some times you need to read what you have written before you post, do not always rush to sound stupid and obtuse as you do all the time.

A person lower than an animal is what?

lightwalk:
What's so funny

The OP is funny to me.

LOL

noetic15:
cos over and over again your fallacies and fals assumptions have been rebuffed. your ignorance has also been repeatedly educated. one wonders why u have to recycle these baseless claims all over again.

Point number one these are not fallacies but biblical "truths"
Point number two you have never attempted to educate me at all, all you do is offer pointless apologetics that do not make any sense at all but show that you are just desperate in defending something you have no idea of at all, let me give you an example, I have seen you offer apologies like these, there was a time you were debating ecclesiastes 1:5 with mazaje where the bible very clearly talks about the sun moving around the earth and your first explanation was to say that, it was the writers explanation and error and it isn't a biblical fact, when you saw that the explanation will not fly you later said that the passage was a proverb, on what basis you came to that conclusion that it is a proverb I just could not understand, so Neotic the only person whose Ignorance has always been exposed is you.
Point number 3 these claims are not baseless because they are found inside the bible, did the bible claim that a person survived inside a fish for 3 days? Did the bible say that stars in the sky fought along side humans? Did the bible say that clouds have pillars that strecth inot the grounds? The answer is yes so how are my assertions baseless, these are what they bible asserted no?

on a side note: how have u been? its been a while. . .I missed your wahala

I have been good, sure its been a while just came back from Nigeria(The mother land ). Missed your wahala too

noetic15:
same old recycled rubbish

Do you care to tell us why they are recycled rubbish? Do you believe in a talking donkey?

Funny thread

jagunlabi:
If ants believe in god, they will think him to be of their colour . . .

Sure.

jagunlabi:
Yeah, i personally have no problem with him believing in all those things, that is his cup of tea, but does he have to loose his humanity in the process? It is a very tragic state to be in,really.

I bet he is going to tell you that humanity is of no use to him as long as it disagrees with his personal delusions. The personal myth he believss in is what is paramout to him, humanity to him is something that comes from the mythical devil to destroy his mythical beliefs.

Go ask moses, it is written in the bible that moses saw the form of his god, The bible god is definately the color of the people that created him while allah is the color of the arabs that created him also, the same applies to the hindu gods all and all the other gods of man made religions.

jagunlabi:
Lol! Shall we pray for davidylan to get some healthy dose of humanity into his soul. The guy is just empty . . .

Davidylan believes in stories, fairy tales and myths that are FALSE, stories he has absolute no evidence for(Lies and myths), Stories like talking donkeys, talking snakes, stars fighting along side humans, sun that revoles round the earth, mythical global flood, a man living inside a fish for 3 days, clouds that have pillars etc but still calls others deluded, I can not help but laugh with scorn at his pathetic delusion.

mazaje:
What is this talk about if good unbelievers will go to heaven? The TRUTH is that christians dont REALLY believe that they will go to heaven when they die and I mean it. . . . .I have been around christians in a life and death situation and their reaction when faced with death says they do not believe in their mythical heaven at all. . . .My mum is a fundamentalist end of day enthusiast who believe that jesus will come flying in the sky tommorow and take her to the mythical heaven. . .I remember when we were flying from lagos to abuja on my last visit to naija and the plane suddenly began to shake in the air. . .the very scary look on her face says she is just fooling her self about all her end of days talk . . .she was praying and calling on god to help us and take charge of the plane and not to allow it crash. . . .instead of feeling happy that she was going to leave this sinful and corrupt earth which she claims she so much despises and loves to trash all the time as a place of endless evil and no good and go to be with he lovely heavenly makes in the magical heaven that is without evil, pain and suffering. . . .instead she was praying to god to help her and spare her life so that she can continue to live the the world she is always complaing is full of evil of no good. . . . .

Why is it that christians are always talking about heaven, how it is lovely and how they will love to go there but you never hear them say things like" ohh god I am about to receive eternal life please accept me as I come to join you in heaven" when they come face to face with death? You never hear them say "ohh jesus thank you for taking my life and recieve me as I come to join you in heaven" when they are faced with a life or death situation, instead you hear them screaming and shouting for their god to come and save their lives and allow them to continue to live on earth. . . . I once told our heaven enthusaist(OLADEGBUU) that he will die and go to heaven and he began shouting that he shall not die but live to deaclear the glory of his god . . . .The truth is that no matter how much the lie to themselves and pretend all the time they VERY much know that this life is all that they have and the rest is just a baseless belief that has no basis in reality. . . . . . . .

This post says it all, the fact that those that claim they believe in heaven always cry to their god to let them live here on earth when they come face to face with death says they really do not believe in what they are saying.

noetic15:
can u tender the evidences or notes taken after the formation of these polystrate fossils were formed in Nova Scotia? . . .   .u claimed it is a scientific process, as such it must have been observed.
who observed it? when? where and how?

It seems that you are more interested in embarrasing yourself, geologist observed it, John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel have said that the rapid burial and preservation of polystrate fossil trees found at Joggins, Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins.If you have any other scientific evidence to show that the mythical flood did it then you can bring your own scientific findings, you have to fist of all present Just ONE geologist that agrees with your lying position. Please name just ONE geologist.

When will this empty head learn to answer simple questions . . ,   
I am particularly interested in the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia. how come they have no roots? how did they get there? could they not have been transported by a global flood? why not? . . ,   . . .

Why do you keep lying and exposing yourself? . This is what you initially said "tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root?" After I did show you that some were found with roots you are now changing tone and singing another new song. What a dishonest person. There are other polystrate fossils that have roots so that destroys your shameless arguments that they were caused by a mythical global flood that happened only in the pages of the bible. The fact that tree trunks vary greatly in age and strata is enough to show that they were formed at different times and by very different processes. Arguing with people that delibrately choose to mislead themselves is a waste of time. I know that you need to keep deluding yourself that there is some evidence for the mythical flood even though there isn't one. Even christian geologist agree that there is NO evidence for a global flood at all. hydrodynamic sorting which remains the greatest evidence against the global flood was pointed out by a christian geologist. As for the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia scientist have said that it was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin.

noetic15:
Can anyone read and make sense of what this deluded goon is saying? 

1. what evidence supports the ridiculous claims u foolishly stated above as arguments from Rydel and Waldron? who buried this fossils? how were they buried? when?
The process involved in the formation of this fossils as u claim. . .was it scientific? . . . . , does this EMPTY head understand simple english? 

The process is scientific, geologist have explained that there are different geological explanations for the different types of tree trunks(polystrate fossils ) we see around for example the in case of the polystrate trees of the Yellowstone petrified forest, which occur buried within the lahars and other volcanic deposits comprising the Lamar River Formation, the periods of rapid sedimentation are regarded by them to be the result of explosive volcanism.This type of volcanism generates and deposits large quantities of loose volcanic material as a blanket over the slope of a volcano as happened during the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo. Both during and for years after a period of volcanism occurs, lahars and normal stream activity wash this loose volcanic material downslope. These processes result in the rapid burial of large areas of the surrounding countryside beneath several meters of sediment as directly observed during the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo. As is the case of modern lahar deposits, the sedimentary layers containing polystrate trees of the Yellowstone petrified forest and the individual forests, which these polystrate trees comprise, are discontinuous and very limited in their areal extent.

2. Can this deluded Ignorant hunchback show any evidence or research material to suggest that polystrate fossils in Nova Scotia developed where they are without having roots?
can he tell us why it is impossible for this polystrate fossils to have been transported by a global flood? what explanation does the IGNORAMUS have on the numerous locations of the flood?
does this guy have a brain at all? 

First of all you have to name just ONE geologist that agrees that tree trunks(polystrate fossils) were caused by a global flood. There are polystrate fossils that are forming outside Anchorage Alaska in the USA where the earthquake that occured in the 60s sank that section of forest into salt water. Trees are still standing, and they are being buried in layers of sediment as they stand presently. Please NAME JUST ONE geologist that agrees with your position and stop crying all over the place. The explanations for the numerous locations of the polystrate fossils is because some were cause by volcanoes(volcanic deposits), others were caused by Holocene, and others were caused by local floods that is why the polystrate are of DIFFERENT ages and lay in different sediments and strata if they were caused by a global flood they would all be of the same age and lay in the same strata.

3. can this empty head in very simple words . . .for the third time in asking. . .tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root? . ,  . .does your last post make any sense?  does it give any scientific insight on the rootless nature of polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia? are u sick? 

Again you keep displaying your ignorance because tree trunks (polystarte fossils) have been discovered with roots. Geologists who have studied polystrate fossils found in sedimentary rocks exposed in various outcrops for the last 30 years have described polystrate fossil trees as being deeply rooted in place and typically rooted in recognizable paleosols. This is in sharp contrast to the claims made by creationists such as Harold Coffin and N. A. Rupke. Geologists, such as Falcon and Rygel have published detailed field sketches and pictures of polystrate tree fossils with intact root systems, which are rooted within recognizable paleosols. [/b]In case of polystrate fossil trees of the Yellowstone petrified forests, geologists, —again in sharp disagreement with creationists like Harold Coffin— found that the polystrate fossil trees, except for relatively short stumps, are rooted in place within the underlying sediments. Typically, the sediments within which polystrate trees are rooted have paleosols developed within them Either pictures or diagrams of the [b]Yellowstone polystrate fossil trees having intact root systems developed within paleosols found within these strata have been published in Retallack (1981, 1997)

4. how does the support of a geologist support your ridiculous assertions?

You first have to tell me how my assertions are ridiculous, trying away and crying at the same time will do you no good. Geologist are the ONLY scientist that are experts in this field, Name ONE geologist that agrees with your illiterate and shameful position and assertions.