-
Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
Donations can be made via here
I DARE ANY atheists answer my simple Question !!!!
- Thread starter Waza-Minooo44
- Start date
- Status
AndyfromMonday
New Member
Gnug215 said:
He also posted on my channel today and I quote: "haha funny who told you i lost ? still I HAVEN'T show you the Thermodynamic argument and the Quran if i use it I will silence you up ^_^ !!!!, still we have time i'm not in hurry ! the failure, the one who isn't able to answer MY SIMPLE QUESTION ! and i'm waiting for weeks and i haven't receive the answer .This is show how atheists doesn't use their rationality !"
I just love this dude. Makes me laugh every time.
This is either a troll, or a comically stupid religious person.
I'm sure ten people have already trashed his arguments, but I'll go anyways, troll or not.
1. Atheist means "non theist". Theist being a believer in any god(s). The real definition of atheist is "one who lacks belief in any god(s)", or possible rewordings of that. This is the true and publicly accepted definition, and can be found as such in any credible dictionary or on any credible dictionary-themed websites.
So what the hell is this?
No that's not the definition of atheism. That definition is obviously fabricated by a theist who is not objective. That's the kind of trash you'd read on conservapedia or some dogshit like that.
2. You are making the assumption that atheists need to disprove something, and we can confirm that thing's existence by atheists not being able to disprove it. If we used that logic elsewhere, then we would have to consider the existence of my imaginary friend, a magical bear-wizard. Your logic says that since we can't disprove the bear-wizard, then we must consider it's existence as a possibility, without otherwise having any reason to believe in it at all, other than me telling you he's very real and why I think so.
It isn't up to atheists to disprove. That would mean that there is some supporting evidence in favour of God that needs evidence against it as well to tip the tides in our favour. But there is no evidence for God, it's just as absurd as every other bronze-aged superstition.
Now to release this post into an ocean of what I'm sure is plenty of other atheists refuting the OP.
I'm sure ten people have already trashed his arguments, but I'll go anyways, troll or not.
1. Atheist means "non theist". Theist being a believer in any god(s). The real definition of atheist is "one who lacks belief in any god(s)", or possible rewordings of that. This is the true and publicly accepted definition, and can be found as such in any credible dictionary or on any credible dictionary-themed websites.
So what the hell is this?
No that's not the definition of atheism. That definition is obviously fabricated by a theist who is not objective. That's the kind of trash you'd read on conservapedia or some dogshit like that.
2. You are making the assumption that atheists need to disprove something, and we can confirm that thing's existence by atheists not being able to disprove it. If we used that logic elsewhere, then we would have to consider the existence of my imaginary friend, a magical bear-wizard. Your logic says that since we can't disprove the bear-wizard, then we must consider it's existence as a possibility, without otherwise having any reason to believe in it at all, other than me telling you he's very real and why I think so.
It isn't up to atheists to disprove. That would mean that there is some supporting evidence in favour of God that needs evidence against it as well to tip the tides in our favour. But there is no evidence for God, it's just as absurd as every other bronze-aged superstition.
Now to release this post into an ocean of what I'm sure is plenty of other atheists refuting the OP.
5810Singer
New Member
Sorry, my mistake, I spoke in haste.
TheFearmonger
New Member
Actually, he seemd to be feeling completely dismissal of his claims, so we've been having a discussion via long pm's. he'll pm me with something that alledgedly proves the quran, and I'll attempt a rebuttal. I've refuted all his points so far, but we are having a profitable discussion. What struck me as most odd was his grammer in pm's. He is much more english-savvy in those than he is in here. I wonder if the translators have something to do with it...?
Anyway, we've effectively relegated this to a peronal messaging system, and he is responding much better than in our forums. I hope we can help him...wish me luck!! :mrgreen:
Anyway, we've effectively relegated this to a peronal messaging system, and he is responding much better than in our forums. I hope we can help him...wish me luck!! :mrgreen:
TheFearmonger said:
from the way he fluently speaks english in his video's, i am starting to doubt his inability to write down a proper sentence.
its seems more a defense he uses for the argument he proclaims but which can easily be refuted, but then he has an excuse for what he types.
what also is a possibility is that he doesn't check the grammar of something he copies from other pages, we have evidence that ATLEAST once he copied something from somewhere else.
TheFearmonger
New Member
...I sent him a several paragraph explanation of how the quran embryology is false, as is it's world view, and it's assertions, along with several pairs. This is what he sent, with a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDhrcg-yydo
then you have to ask your self why would god in the quran would utter these words ?? do you think he utter it without purpose ???
[Quran 4:82 ]
Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradictions.
Now i'm asking why God want to tell you this ??? if there is contradiction it would be silly & ridiculous for him to utter these words .
Your answer had been refuted ( for each inch you brought is here ) in this site about Embryology.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm
didn't i told you before these aren't error but these are miss understanding ??? then you have to explain it to me why would professor from America would utter these words ? ONLY PROFESSOR KAITH MOORE ?? WHAT ABOUT THE OTHERS scientists ???
Top Professors Confirm: Quran is a Miracle in Science
The unique style of the Qur'an, which was revealed 14 centuries ago, and the superior wisdom it represents are definite proof that it is the word of Allah. Additionally, the Qur'an has many miraculous aspects which prove that it is sent by Allah. ...
Anyone think this is worth going on with? This doesn't address my point. The quran contadicts itself and reality when it talks of embryos...
then you have to ask your self why would god in the quran would utter these words ?? do you think he utter it without purpose ???
[Quran 4:82 ]
Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradictions.
Now i'm asking why God want to tell you this ??? if there is contradiction it would be silly & ridiculous for him to utter these words .
Your answer had been refuted ( for each inch you brought is here ) in this site about Embryology.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm
didn't i told you before these aren't error but these are miss understanding ??? then you have to explain it to me why would professor from America would utter these words ? ONLY PROFESSOR KAITH MOORE ?? WHAT ABOUT THE OTHERS scientists ???
Top Professors Confirm: Quran is a Miracle in Science
The unique style of the Qur'an, which was revealed 14 centuries ago, and the superior wisdom it represents are definite proof that it is the word of Allah. Additionally, the Qur'an has many miraculous aspects which prove that it is sent by Allah. ...
Anyone think this is worth going on with? This doesn't address my point. The quran contadicts itself and reality when it talks of embryos...
TheFearmonger said:
the answer is quite simple; quite alot of "scientific" knowledge in the qu'ran was already known and copied, including the errors in them. most of the knowledge was copied from the greeks as far is known (but some knowledge of that knowledge was also known by other cultures), though most people are not aware of the knowledge the greeks had build up which makes it difficult to disprove the so-called divine knowledge. "its quite humor that ONLY NOW we have the technology to proof the qu'ran's divine knowledge"... right.... i have heard better bullshit.
edit: if their is indeed truely divine knowledge in the qu'ran... proof it by providing something that hasn't been discovered yet and couldn't be discovered without the qu'ran.
Waza-Minooo44
New Member
Mr.TheFearmonger i refute your point about embrology :mrgreen: and i provded the link .On the contrary you PLAGIARIZED :mrgreen: ! but just wait .......... i need time to respond Million atheists against one it's Absurd .
Waza-Minooo44
New Member
Greek ??? it's really funny when you say a man who doesn't know read nor write he got the ability to plagiarized !
The Great difference between Galen and the rest of the Greeks and the Quran :
http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/medical-miracles/does-the-quran-plagiarise-ancient-greek-embryology.html
Waza-Minooo44 said:
Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.
source: http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&defl=en&q=define
lagiarism&ei=JWIlS7fYNYfQ-Qa0z7zGBg&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved=0CAcQkAEas far i can tell from fearmongerer's post regarding the Personal Message, he hasn't commited plagiarism.
if he did, the easiest way would be to post the original unedited content of that Personal Message to proof your point.
as for the point of adressing millions of atheists, i doubt this site has a million accounts let alone atheists since there are also theists amoung us. if you thinks its too difficult to address all of us, i wont mind if you take one point at a time, but i then i would like to you work it out as best as possible to make it a full argument... not just one weak sentence which can be taken apart easily.
perhaps THEN, you might find your answer.
also, if you think this has been an unfair battle... you were the one who picked it.
if you wish your friends and fellow theists to join the fight, be our guest... they are welcome.
some parts then need to seperated into sub topics, but thats to be expected.
TheFearmonger
New Member
Waza-Minooo44 said:
You didn't refute the point. You had a video of people refusing to admit the book fail happening in the quran. That link is just like the hovind lectures people post for creationism, and it has about as much sense. And I did not plagiarize. I never said it was my original thought, even though I took the article and added my thoughts to it. So, no. Accusation FAIL. And, we aren't against you. YOU came on our forums, and posted things that have been refuted for years. This is of your doing. Don't make yourself out to be some victim. You asked for this.
Waza-Minooo44
New Member
fine i will expose you :mrgreen: :lol:
answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/embryo.html
so tell me what is your comment :mrgreen: ???
And speaking of "you didn't refute the point " i think you didn't visit the site that i give it to you but of course you ignorant it
http://www.answering-christianity.com/nadeem_embryology.htm
Waza-Minooo44
New Member
Mr. Catytheist just wait.......... i told you i need time to respond respond.
in mean while enjoy this video
#1. The statements of that paper are very interpretive. Any time you have to interpret something that much it loses credibility, but lets just say that what you are saying it said is what it said.
#2. The Qu'ran was written in the 7th century CE by people who slaughtered any non-virginal women and all men. This was also done by some of the more brilliant minds at the time. Figuring out that if you masturbate and produce sperm and then when you do that in a woman and produce a baby it doesn't take a genius to figure out that sperm creates baby and further it is not all that hard to figure out how a baby forms in the womb when you can just slice people up and look at different stages.
The fact of the matter is even if what you are saying on that point is right it doesn't prove your case as that knowledge is easy to come by.
Proving advanced knowledge is easy but hard at the same time as it has to fit into a category that we now know it, the people at the time couldn't have known it, and it is written in a clear enough way as to not need extensive interpretation.
For example if you were to say the bible and the Qu'ran say the world is round at that is proof I'd laugh because that is largely known and accept by the educated as far back as at least 600BCE ... that's nearly 300 years before the old testament was put together if memory serves, and ~1000 years before the Qu'ran.
So try again... the worst that can happen is that you fail.
#2. The Qu'ran was written in the 7th century CE by people who slaughtered any non-virginal women and all men. This was also done by some of the more brilliant minds at the time. Figuring out that if you masturbate and produce sperm and then when you do that in a woman and produce a baby it doesn't take a genius to figure out that sperm creates baby and further it is not all that hard to figure out how a baby forms in the womb when you can just slice people up and look at different stages.
The fact of the matter is even if what you are saying on that point is right it doesn't prove your case as that knowledge is easy to come by.
Proving advanced knowledge is easy but hard at the same time as it has to fit into a category that we now know it, the people at the time couldn't have known it, and it is written in a clear enough way as to not need extensive interpretation.
For example if you were to say the bible and the Qu'ran say the world is round at that is proof I'd laugh because that is largely known and accept by the educated as far back as at least 600BCE ... that's nearly 300 years before the old testament was put together if memory serves, and ~1000 years before the Qu'ran.
So try again... the worst that can happen is that you fail.
AndyfromMonday
New Member
Waza-Minooo44 said:
Way. To. Easy.
1: Nonsensical question. Not knowing the cause of something does not prove a god. We used not to know where lightning came from... So people thought it was Thor swinging his hammer. We now smile at that concept as cute and misinformed, while still filling in the gap of creation with yet another "diety".
2. Ditto.
3. Ditto.
4. Why do we regarded certain things has evil and certain things has good? Because society regards them has such and if a human is to not regard those things evil and good then he will be shunned, reducing his chances of survival. Humans are programed to adapt, and that is what they are doing when they regard something has evil or something has good. They regard it because the rest regard it.
Where did this concept first originate? Why, the need for survival:
For e.g. let's say there's a group of 20 people. Each human contributes to a granary with grain so they may survive the winter. Some of the people in the group are greedy and want more grain than the other part of the group so they attempt to steal. The other part, realizing that if those people steal the entire group will have lesser chances of surviving, put in order certain rules and penalties of the rules are broken. "Do not steal" is a rule which they realize will benefit the entire group and has such put it in order and then put penalties if broken. If one man deviates from the rule of the group, he will be shunned and exiled.
This is how "good and evil" concepts were started, because of the need to survive.
You might say: "Well why did the part of the group wanted more grain?" Because they wanted to be sure they would survive. The more grain avalible to one person, the bigger the chances of that person surviving. Why did the other part create rules? Because they realized that by fighting each other for grain would not do them any good at surviving and has such it would be better if they would distribute the grain equally between the people that are part of that group.
Eventually, over the years, more concepts like this developed. Certain things were regarded has evil and certain things were regarded has good.
5. The supernatural? The supernatural does not exist. It's the name given to processes humanity does not currently understand. No, if science can't observe it doesn't mean it doesn't exist has long has evidence more than "Well I heard my dead Uncle talk to me and it was true" is presented. If it happened, it left behind traces.
- Status