| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david" |
| Date: |
17 Jan 2005 12:28:36 AM |
| Object: |
for pro-humanist |
I asked you who/what created life and for what reason and you told me to
check out this website:
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/science/how_life_began.htm
Here are some excerpts from said website citing Andrew Knoll, a
professor of biology at Harvard and author of Life on a Young Planet:
The First Three Billion Years of Life.
As interviewed by NOVA.
Knoll: "The deeper history of life and the greater diversity of life on
this planet is microorganisms-bacteria, protozoans, algae. One way to
put it is that animals might be evolution's icing, but bacteria are
really the cake."
Knoll: "The short answer is we don't really know how life originated on
this planet."
Knoll: "People have tried to find more general, more universal
definitions of life. They're speculative, because we don't know about
any life other than ourselves. But one definition that I kind of like
says life is a system that's capable of Darwinian evolution."
Knoll: "If we try to summarize by just saying what, at the end of the
day, do we know about the deep history of life on Earth, about its
origin, about its formative stages that gave rise to the biology we
see around us today, I think we have to admit that we're looking through
a glass darkly here."
Knoll: "I imagine my grandchildren will still be sitting around saying
that it's a great mystery."
Knoll: "We don't know how life started on this planet."
Knoll: "We don't know exactly when it started, we don't know under what
circumstances."
NOVA: Will we ever solve the problem?
Knoll: I don't know.
Contrast against Pro-human'ist explanation of who/what created life as
science knows, or doesn't know regarding who/what created life.
David asked: Who/what created life, and for what reason?
Pro-human'ist answered: Life is a naturalistic result of the processes
which occur in a naturalistic realm. The details are currently being
researched by a particular life form that has, about 13.7 billion years
or so after the expansion of space-time in this particular region of the
cosmos, reached a point of curiosity and exploration that just might
enable it to figure out details regarding the initiation of motile
replicatory matter on the 3rd rock from an average star in an average
galaxy.
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
.
|
|
| User: "Pro-Humanist FREELOVER" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 10:19:46 PM |
|
|
"david" <dgordon@ak.net> wrote ...
I asked you who/what created life and for
what reason and you told me to check out
this website:
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/science/how_life_began.htm
[...]
David asks again: Who/what created the
naturalistic realm if not Creator/God/Allah?
Naturalism -- Infinite, per scientific theories being
investigated, with the expansion of the space-
time continuum we exist within (in and of itself, so
vast that it's beyond the capability of most to grasp)
being but a tiny part of an incomprehensibly larger
play ...
... a couple of pertinent references:
The Myth of the Beginning of Time
May 2004 issue (Scientific American)
http://tinyurl.com/2f9du
Universe(s) Origin(s) - Nothing / Everything
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/universes_origins_7_of_7.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Religion's views on the matters at issue?
---
Religion on the Origin of the Universe/Life:
- Religious version: God did it.
How did God do it? Unknown, though irreconcilable
myths offer ancient views:
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/history/top_11_creation_myths.htm
What is God? Unknown (opinions vary widely and
are irreconcilable -- no evidence available on God
actually existing, irreconcilable claims are abundant).
How did God come into existence? Unknown, but
many religionists claim it always has been around.
When did God do it? Unknown, but some say 6,000
or so years ago, some rely on science to provide that
time estimate.
Does God intervene in nature? Opinions differ, with
some saying yes, on occasion, some saying yes, all
the time, some saying no or rarely, some saying once
to get the show started, some saying twice, once to
get the universe started, and a 2nd time to spank life
on earth into existence.
And one fundamental bedrock of religion, from its
inception to the present day, is if humans cannot fully
explain it, God gets credit for it (or blame for it). If
human understanding improves, God's role is usually
lessened, though some cling to God being the master
conductor behind the scenes no matter what scientific
discoveries are made.
- - -
Religion on the recent tsunami:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.misc/msg/607b9db210c13f47
- Religious version: Some say God did it, some say
God allowed it, some say God was not involved.
What is God? Unknown (opinions vary widely and
are irreconcilable -- no evidence available on God
actually existing, irreconcilable claims are abundant).
How did God 'do' the tsunami? See above for as-
sorted versions of God intervening or not intervening
in nature.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Some naturalistic perspectives on the matters at issue?
---
Naturalism on Origin of Universe(s)/Life:
- Universe(s) Origin(s)
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/universes_origins_preface.htm
- How Does Life Begin and Develop?
http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/roadmap/objectives/index.html
- Understand how life arose on earth:
http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/roadmap/goals/g1_life_arose.html
- Determine the General Principles Governing
the Organization of Matter into Living Systems:
http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/roadmap/goals/g2_organiz_matter.html
- Explore How Life Evolves on the Molecular,
Organism, and Ecosystem Levels:
http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/roadmap/goals/g3_life_evolves.html
- Determine How the Terrestrial Biosphere has
Co-Evolved with the Earth:
http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/roadmap/goals/g4_biosphere_earth.html
- - -
Naturalism on the recent tsunami:
- Scientists Explain Origin of
South Asia's Deadly Tsunami:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec04/tsunami_12-30.html
- - -
¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤
~~~
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman
(Freethinking Realist Exploring
Expressive Liberty, Openness,
Verity, Enlightenment, & Rationality)
~~~
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Shaun aRe" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
09 Feb 2005 08:36:48 AM |
|
|
"david" <dgordon@ak.net> wrote in message news:41EB5B14.20306@ak.net...
I asked you who/what created life and for what reason and you told me to
check out this website:
http://fire.prohosting.com/prohuman/science/how_life_began.htm
Here are some excerpts from said website citing Andrew Knoll, a
professor of biology at Harvard and author of Life on a Young Planet:
The First Three Billion Years of Life.
As interviewed by NOVA.
Knoll: "The deeper history of life and the greater diversity of life on
this planet is microorganisms-bacteria, protozoans, algae. One way to
put it is that animals might be evolution's icing, but bacteria are
really the cake."
Knoll: "The short answer is we don't really know how life originated on
this planet."
Knoll: "People have tried to find more general, more universal
definitions of life. They're speculative, because we don't know about
any life other than ourselves. But one definition that I kind of like
says life is a system that's capable of Darwinian evolution."
Knoll: "If we try to summarize by just saying what, at the end of the
day, do we know about the deep history of life on Earth, about its
origin, about its formative stages that gave rise to the biology we
see around us today, I think we have to admit that we're looking through
a glass darkly here."
Knoll: "I imagine my grandchildren will still be sitting around saying
that it's a great mystery."
Knoll: "We don't know how life started on this planet."
Knoll: "We don't know exactly when it started, we don't know under what
circumstances."
NOVA: Will we ever solve the problem?
Knoll: I don't know.
Contrast against Pro-human'ist explanation of who/what created life as
science knows, or doesn't know regarding who/what created life.
David asked: Who/what created life, and for what reason?
Pro-human'ist answered: Life is a naturalistic result of the processes
which occur in a naturalistic realm. The details are currently being
researched by a particular life form that has, about 13.7 billion years
or so after the expansion of space-time in this particular region of the
cosmos, reached a point of curiosity and exploration that just might
enable it to figure out details regarding the initiation of motile
replicatory matter on the 3rd rock from an average star in an average
galaxy.
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
The forgotten dreamer. 'We'. God. The 'All', the 'One'. Life has always
been, only form is created.
Maybe, just maybe, heheheheheh...
Shaun aRe
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "FreeThink" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 04:21:31 PM |
|
|
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 05:02:33 PM |
|
|
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 07:52:13 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
Not if you keep assuming your conclusion.
--
"Every sensible man, every honest man, must hold the christian sect in horror. 'But what
shall we substitute in its place?' you say. What? A ferocious animal has sucked the
blood of my relatives. I tell you to rid yourselves of this beast and you ask me what
you shall put in its place?" - Voltaire
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:17:38 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
Not if you keep assuming your conclusion.
Enter 'logic'...
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 05:04:04 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
More question begging. What "the One [and why capitalise it?] that
knows the truth"?
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 05:25:05 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
More question begging. What "the One [and why capitalise it?] that
knows the truth"?
Logic...and respect.
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 05:36:42 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:25:05 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
More question begging. What "the One [and why capitalise it?] that
knows the truth"?
Logic...and respect.
What logic, moron,?
And respect for what, moron?
Once again, WHAT "THE ONE THAT KNOWS THE TRUTH", QUESTION-BEGGING
MORON?
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:13:08 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:25:05 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
More question begging. What "the One [and why capitalise it?] that
knows the truth"?
Logic...and respect.
What logic, moron,?
Scientific logic.
And respect for what, moron?
For God and all God has created.
Once again, WHAT "THE ONE THAT KNOWS THE TRUTH", QUESTION-BEGGING
MORON?
Your question makes no sense...could you restate the question please?
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:40:30 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:13:08 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:25:05 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:02:33 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Something or someone else if it was created at all. Why do you need to
know? Why do you think you would understand if the truth was presented
to you?
If the truth were presented to me, said truth would logic'ly have to
come from the One who knows the truth.
More question begging. What "the One [and why capitalise it?] that
knows the truth"?
Logic...and respect.
What logic, moron,?
Scientific logic.
Eh? How does that answer the question you begged?
And respect for what, moron?
For God and all God has created.
WHAT FUCKING GOD, MORON?
Look up "begging the question" and stop being so silly.
Once again, WHAT "THE ONE THAT KNOWS THE TRUTH", QUESTION-BEGGING
MORON?
Your question makes no sense...could you restate the question please?
Are you really this stupid, or just pretending?
You answered a question with "the One that knows the truth".
You have yet to demonstrate that there is "One that knows the truth".
So either put up or shut up.
Preferably the latter when y ou realise you can't do the former.
I want to get to know that 'person'...inquiring minds and all that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "FreeThink" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 07:29:10 PM |
|
|
Why is your amazement/wonder proof of omnipotent design? That is a
really egotistical conclusion. Do you really think we are so capable as
be able to recognize miracles from the material? If you showed a light
bulb to an infant it might think it was a miracle but it's not is it?
Do you really think you have learned that much in your development to
have gone from the "out of site, out of mind" mentality of an infant to
recognizing the work of an omnipotent being? Get real man.
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:16:46 PM |
|
|
FreeThink wrote:
Why is your amazement/wonder proof of omnipotent design? That is a
really egotistical conclusion. Do you really think we are so capable as
be able to recognize miracles from the material? If you showed a light
bulb to an infant it might think it was a miracle but it's not is it?
Do you really think you have learned that much in your development to
have gone from the "out of site, out of mind" mentality of an infant to
recognizing the work of an omnipotent being? Get real man.
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
20 Jan 2005 03:00:08 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
Proof by personal incredulity. Idiotic.
--
"The doctrine that the earth is neither the center of the universe nor immovable, but
moves even with a daily rotation, is absurd, and both philosophically and theologically
false, and at the least an error of faith."
- Catholic Church's decision against Galileo Galilei
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
20 Jan 2005 09:47:36 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:00:08 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
Proof by personal incredulity. Idiotic.
That's cretinism.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
21 Jan 2005 03:09:08 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:47:36 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> said in
alt.atheism:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:00:08 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
Proof by personal incredulity. Idiotic.
That's cretinism.
Or Fundidiocy.
--
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is human
concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot
begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old
religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has
been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its
simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
21 Jan 2005 07:24:41 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:09:08 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:47:36 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> said in
alt.atheism:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:00:08 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> said in
alt.atheism:
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
Proof by personal incredulity. Idiotic.
That's cretinism.
Or Fundidiocy.
Empty craniumism.....
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 04:41:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
why, then, have so many gods been believed by humans if it's so easy
to figure out who he is? goats, chickens, mountains, hills, the US air
force...all have been considered gods.
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:42:24 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:16:46 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
Why is your amazement/wonder proof of omnipotent design? That is a
really egotistical conclusion. Do you really think we are so capable as
be able to recognize miracles from the material? If you showed a light
bulb to an infant it might think it was a miracle but it's not is it?
Do you really think you have learned that much in your development to
have gone from the "out of site, out of mind" mentality of an infant to
recognizing the work of an omnipotent being? Get real man.
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
So explain how, moron.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
How is this demonstrated to be the work of an omnipotent being, moron?
Seek, and ye shall find.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:25:51 PM |
|
|
david wrote:
FreeThink wrote:
Why is your amazement/wonder proof of omnipotent design? That is a
really egotistical conclusion. Do you really think we are so capable as
be able to recognize miracles from the material? If you showed a light
bulb to an infant it might think it was a miracle but it's not is it?
Do you really think you have learned that much in your development to
have gone from the "out of site, out of mind" mentality of an infant to
recognizing the work of an omnipotent being? Get real man.
Its not difficult to recognize the work of an omnipotent being.
All one need do is to look around ones surroundings and wonder why, how,
who, etc. Every moment in life contains/is a miracle.
Seek, and ye shall find.
or you can have a different opinion on the matter, like how amazing it
is that billions of years have led up to this moment, for no real
reason. the meanings i give it are my own, of course, and isnt that
fascinating? i say wow to the copious chaos of reality and know that,
as in all things, this amusing diversion of earth and humanity will pass
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 10:01:26 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <41EB5B14.20306@ak.net>, david lept out of the bushes
shouting:
Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Why does there have to be a "who" at all?
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
| User: "Agki Strodon" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 12:21:15 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:HMCdnUl7Aoa0fXbcRVn-sw@megapath.net...
In our last episode <41EB5B14.20306@ak.net>, david lept out of the bushes
shouting:
Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Why does there have to be a "who" at all?
Even if a who existed, we'd have to ask where she came from.
Agkistrodon
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
20 Jan 2005 09:33:06 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:21:15 GMT, "Agki Strodon"
<agkistrodon@mindspring.com> wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:HMCdnUl7Aoa0fXbcRVn-sw@megapath.net...
In our last episode <41EB5B14.20306@ak.net>, david lept out of the bushes
shouting:
Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Why does there have to be a "who" at all?
Even if a who existed, we'd have to ask where she came from.
Exactly. The cretins grasp of that lacks opposible thumbs.
Agkistrodon
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 01:43:43 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:28:36 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> drained his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed
the following
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Why does there need to be a creator? Is the concept that life started
at some point over a billion years so hard to grasp?
Almost sixty years ago, an experiment was done where the conditions of
the early Earth were simulated. Electrical discharges were then shot
into this tank. Within *days* amino acids had formed inside the
sealed tank. Within a month, 17 of the essential amino acids had been
identifed. That was in one tank about the size of a Volkswagen Beetle
over one month's time. Imagine what could have happened on an entire
planet over a billion years.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 02:38:06 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:28:36 -0900, david <dgordon@ak.net> drained his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed
the following
David asks again: Who/what created the naturalistic realm if not
Creator/God/Allah?
Why does there need to be a creator? Is the concept that life started
at some point over a billion years so hard to grasp?
Why does there need to be a creator you ask? uhmm, because without one,
we would not be here discussing the why's who's what's how's...
I would like to know who/what that 'some point' you mention was/is.
Don't you?
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make. Are you satisfied with your
'some point' explanation Mr Berry?
Almost sixty years ago, an experiment was done where the conditions of
the early Earth were simulated. Electrical discharges were then shot
into this tank. Within *days* amino acids had formed inside the
sealed tank. Within a month, 17 of the essential amino acids had been
identifed. That was in one tank about the size of a Volkswagen Beetle
over one month's time. Imagine what could have happened on an entire
planet over a billion years.
Who/what created the conditions that allowed the creation of amino acids
from the beginning?
Who/what created the tank called earth that enabled the amino acids to form?
Who/what created the energy from the beginning that zapped the amino
acids into existence?
Who/what was observing the amino acids form from the beginning?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
17 Jan 2005 08:02:14 PM |
|
|
In our last episode <41EC222E.9010308@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make.
No, it's an act of willful ignorance.
So you're ignorant. Why are posting this to alt.atheism?
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
| User: "david" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 03:49:16 PM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
In our last episode <41EC222E.9010308@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make.
No, it's an act of willful ignorance.
Asserting that others are willfully ignorant is a sure sign that the one
asserting willful ignorance is guilty of willful ignorance.
So you're ignorant. Why are posting this to alt.atheism?
Consider the source.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
19 Jan 2005 04:29:17 PM |
|
|
In our last episode <41EED5DC.7090303@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
In our last episode <41EC222E.9010308@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make.
No, it's an act of willful ignorance.
Asserting that others are willfully ignorant is a sure sign that the one
asserting willful ignorance is guilty of willful ignorance.
So you're ignorant. Why are posting this to alt.atheism?
Consider the source.
Oh I am.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
20 Jan 2005 09:46:06 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:29:17 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <41EED5DC.7090303@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
In our last episode <41EC222E.9010308@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make.
No, it's an act of willful ignorance.
Asserting that others are willfully ignorant is a sure sign that the one
asserting willful ignorance is guilty of willful ignorance.
So you're ignorant. Why are posting this to alt.atheism?
Consider the source.
Oh I am.
(howling with laughter @ David)
Lovely skewer work, Mark.
<snicker>
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: for pro-humanist |
20 Jan 2005 10:03:21 PM |
|
|
In our last episode <gmu0v0dusrshg5mqrfngqe3c8c0i2qjqb7@4ax.com>, stoney
lumbered into the room and mumbled:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:29:17 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <41EED5DC.7090303@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
In our last episode <41EC222E.9010308@ak.net>, david lept out of the
bushes shouting:
The concept that all life occured without an all powerful creator is a
leap of faith that I am unable to make.
No, it's an act of willful ignorance.
Asserting that others are willfully ignorant is a sure sign that the
one asserting willful ignorance is guilty of willful ignorance.
So you're ignorant. Why are posting this to alt.atheism?
Consider the source.
Oh I am.
(howling with laughter @ David)
Lovely skewer work, Mark.
<snicker>
Every now and then, the muse is kind...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
