monkeyboo2

Their "ignorance"? You mean what they choose to believe? Looking down on the beliefs of others simply because they aren't yours is "ignorance", no matter what your, or the other persons faith, is. This is a debate, not a flamefest, so it'd be right of you to treat it so, before you make atheists look even worse. :| i will laugh a people who use the "god works in mysteries ways" arguement in all debates and dont contributes with new infomation or facts. i am not making atheists looking worse. as i am not an atheists, i never said i was. don't make asumpsions, that will make you look worse ;) and i am not looking down on any religion, as i got over 10 muslims friends and my family is christian. also i am not flaming anyone, i am debating, but so far they have yet to show me any "facts". show me facts or stop talking -.- Agreed; the Ignorance in this instance is expecting us to believe in your beliefs without presenting any evidence, but yet you try to insist (as an excuse for not having evidence, whether you realise it or not) that faith should be enough to make people believe in God. Basically it is ignorant to believe that your argument (with no valid evidence) holds as much weight as an argument that has evidence. And it also ignorant to believe that your argument is correct because nothing has disproved it. A common example: no-one has disproved the existance of invisible unicorns, does it mean that they are real?

As an Atheist, I would avoid making nthose kind of arguments. These kind of weak arguments which question the nature of God will only lead to a form of 'God works in mysterious ways' or some weak possible reason for his actions. Questioning the nature of God gives the religous the upper hand because they are able to invent a theoretical reason (or use a previously invented reason) which cannot be disputed because further reasons, especially self-enforcing (cyclic) reason can be used to 'back up' their point and it'll make them feel awfully smug. Also questioning the nature of God can accept the possiblity that he exists. Basically tread carefully when asking those questions it can lead you into awkward situations where you ask such a question and the religous can make an answer of his choice up. They will always have an (invented) answer. It doesn't really get anybody anywhere.

now where is nomoredead when you need him #-o I'll step in instead for Nomoredead (but not quite as harsh). Well, who says that it can't be the energy leprechaun or any other ficitonal explanation I care to come up with? The unknown is not proof of God, or any other magical being or anything for that matter? I don't know the origin of that Energy; but nor do I take the easy way out to answer the question by using my favourite answer (which for you is 'God'). I will accept that I do not know the answer until I have compelling evidence that strongly suggests/proves how the event and process of the Big Bang came into existance. In this respect, your argumentative skills are dire... And you've been doing so well aswell.

[hide=] Before a 100m race I load up on carbs, and start warning up an hour before. I need to finish practicing my starts at least 20 minutes before the race so I have all my atp-pc, which only lasts 10 seconds. I have to stretch every muscle well, but be sure to not overstretch. I need to do deep breathing to relax my muscles and mind. Visualizing myself getting a quick start and sprinting ahead of everybody else over and over again is also very important. I drink some red bull to get my heart beating quicker, but not too much because it can make my body use a higher glucose to atp-pc ratio which will slow me down. When I race I have to push the butterfly's out of my stomach, get on the blocks and position myself to get maximum power forward when I push off. Before the gun I time my start for when I think it might be exactly on the gun, If I false start it gives me an advantage anyway because if anybody else false starts they are disqualified. I do this because even If I don't get the head start, it gives me a slight advantage as people might hesitate before leaving the blocks, and If I don't then somebody will do it to me. I hold my breath before the gun, and concentrate on exactly what my body is doing for that half of a second out of the blocks. I keep my body down so my center of gravity is low, which lets me accelerate quicker. I have to make sure my arms are pumping properly, and that I am stomping the ground and putting everything I have into the acceleration. I make sure I am forward and low enough to accelerate quickly, but not so much I fall over. It's an extremely narrow 'sweet spot' that changes with the track, weather, wind etc. When I judge that I am at my maximum speed I am upright and resisting the urge to look at anybody else, concentrating on being relaxed, making sure I get the perfect ratio of how long my stride is relative to how quickly I can get my foot on and off the ground. I force all the air out of my body so it stays tight, but relaxed. What my arms, hands and fingers, neck jaw shoulders and chest are doing is very important, and that's before perfecting what is happening with my legs. At 80m I dig deep and push as hard as I can, burning up the tiny amount of atp-pc I have left. At 98m I thrust my upper body forward to slice off a little extra time. If I don't do all of these things perfectly, I run from anywhere between 0.03-0.3 seconds slower. 0.1s is often the difference between first and last. You don't get that kind of time window anywhere else. That's just the basics, and a 200m race is a hell of a lot more complicated than a 100. The training is also complex, seeing as we have 3 energy systems that needs to be perfected at a certain ratio for each event with many weeks of training. The order and time of the year of each training exercise is also important. That's half the reason why a trainer is necessary. It's a little more than "just running faster." (I'm home sick and had nothing better to do than type all that out :? ) Anyway, since every single tiny detail can make a difference it get's pretty complex. 2 years ago, 0.02s was the difference between me going to state and not. Two hundredths of a second made the difference. [/hide] I understand this; I chose the 200m as an example particularly because I also sprint in the local league. I'm naturally quite good at sprinting and i understand all the other work that goes into it. But my point is that everybody does the process that you explained; they'd be silly not to which boils it back down to who can run faster (and no...I'm not bitter because i only came 2nd in the county race). There isn't much scope for doing anything outrageously different. The Wii has the least intense games; Ok there's a bit of waving here and there but nothing actually challenging. I haven't yet played SB:Brawl yet, but i'm expecting it will be the same story as the other Wii games. The other platforms (PC, 360 and PS3) actually have games that I class as mind sports (as previously discussed) such as Age of Empires 3 and Call of Duty 4, both because they allow new tactics to be created so that only the smartest will win. Its the thinking behind the button mashing that wins the game; everybody has more or less equal 'button mashing' skills when you get to a certain level. I'm sure you class Snooker and Pool as a sport. By your definition there has to be some sort of physical activity involved (which there isn't in snooker and pool) but once again its the logic behind the cueing which wins the game; everybody has more or less the same cueing skills at the top level. And yes we can all make derogatory terms for each others sports which clearly miss out the point of the game...but it doesn't get us anywhere. 'clicking and mashing buttons' -Gaming 'kicking a ball' -Soccer 'Throwing a ball' - Basket ball See anybody can do it about any sport :)

I'd actually prefer that job over professional gamer. Simply because that's something I can actually feel proud of and I highly value the numerous benefits of sports. Professional gamer has neither the pride (in my values) or the benefits that sports do. Thats not to say that the benefits of sports can't be gained casually (without being professional). Now, I have pride in my Gaming. I know that when I win tournaments; I'm breaking new ground with new tactics and strategies that nobodies ever seen before and I'm predicting all 4-8 of my opponents moves simultaneously. Its a mind sport, like Chess. I think you can always be proud of outwitting your opponents. With some sports, I think nobody brings anything new to the sport. Athletics imparticular such as the 100m/200m, the athletes can't really add anything new to win-they just have to run faster or throw further or jump higher. This does not go for Sports like Football, Hockey, Basketball etc. THese have strategical elements and are far better. In Mind Sports you can realy pull a new strategy out of the bag and execute it much to the dismay of the other team. You really can have a signature style. We see this in gaming especially because as games change or new games are made; new oppurtunities are made to outwit your opponents and only the smartest will be able to construct them.

According to the bible perhaps...And no doubt he was a 'good' person- but definately exxagerated in the bible IMO. Then again we delve into the Validity of the Bible (how reliable it is and how much we can use it to explain anything) which I do not feel qualified to explain. You are better off researching the topic individually.

I got two ones I can recall atm: 1. Was Goalkeeping in Soccer. Got hit in the face with the ball. ONly noticed when i saved the next one and some red handprints appeared :). 2. Stubbed my toe on the door. Didn't look at it for three days (partly cos i wear socks believe it or not). Next time I look I have Dermatitis. Big inflammation. Need lots of Penicillin.

I agree. We don't really need a whole book to tell us, "Follow Jesus's ways and the world will be a better place." The whole point of Christianity can fit on a T-shirt. Why do we even need the extra stuff? Why can't the Bible be a small book that just tells us about the ways of Jesus (How to be a Perfect Person for Dummies). Go to Page 50 for my post on how being Christian does not make you 'Perfect'. (from Monkeyboo2) I'm not a Christian and I still go by the golden rule. I don't go to church. I don't read the Bible. I don't pray. I don't because none of that ends with a rewarding tangible result, but following the golden rule always does, whether God is real or not. Basically the Golden Rule is common sense; and a generally good rule. There is room for improvement on it. Wouldn't it be so much better if it was: Treat Others as THEY would like to be Treated. If this was in place; not only would gays have their rights, but Atheists like me wouldn't have Christians trying to convert me if I pass by a church amongst other obvious benefits.

Well, after the Pope announced the new 'sins' (or atleast he went through with it); I think my point is valid that the Church can make rules 'on Gods behalf' to suit their own purposes. The new sins seem like a blatent attempt to slow scientific knowledge. And i'm sure we all know that scientific knowledge has disproved areas of religion in the past (such as age of Earth and other Bible stories) and it seems to me like the Catholic Church wants to limit its damage to their religion (which is their motive; with the 'Divine Inspiration' and large Christian Network being their Means) Anyway Lenticular; its nice debating with you. You make good arguments (in general) and you accept losses when you need to :). Can't say the same for Mageman though; he seems to have gone quiet after my butchering post on Morallity and Christian Perceptions of Atheists on page 50.

That doesn't mean we live a completely care-free lifestyle. It means we live only for today, without worrying what tomorrow might hold (at least I do). Religious people MUST worry about tomorrow, because tomorrow might bring judgement. I'm an Atheist and I worry about tomorrow (which i'll assume is interchangable with consequences), but I don't have to worry about God judging me; the law is the one that judges, and I don't want to spend my one, only and therefore valuable mortal life in Prison. Personally I think in that sense; we're more or less the same except we have different 'Judges'. I just (for afore mentioned reasons) don't believe that your judger exists which makes the rules very easy to bend and change under his name (if you get one what I mean). And the law is just another way of judging which I think stands up better because all laws are democratically decided (in the US and UK), instead of made up by the Pope/Church to suit their purposes. [hide=] [/hide] I think those cover Atheists and suggest that Christians are morally superior. You may say that they are taken out of context or misinterpreted but those seem pretty clear cut to me. Many people do take the bible to be the word of God and will believe this. The bible is studied in school and preached in Church. Admittedly, we have come some way from the Church and Bible promoted campaign of 'Burn the Heretics' so lets find some more recent examples to show that Atheists are taught to be Evil other than in direct quotes from the bible. Some more recent examples: Perfect A Sermen from Rev. Peter Faass at Easter 2007. A sugar coated version of Atheists are evil. Of course most churches nowadays would never get away with blatantly saying outtright that Atheists are evil, but they will make suggestions that they are morally challenged such as this sermon. G2g post them later

Sarcastic Gamer Podcast Its the ownage. All fun and games :).

Yeah; he's gonna have a hard time making any reasonable counter-argument for that. Should be interesting :).

Lol I'll still be worrying about what i'm going to do with the body or the money 15 seconds after i've officially woke up. Yeah i get alot of crazy lucid dreams, although I can rarley remember them after a day.

Didn't we win that?I didn't like the movie so much though,pictured the aliens as a squid with giant ear-lobe things... It was a pretty lame film (the remake). The super intelligent aliens forgot to get their cold and flu jabs. Anyway I think a meteroite is the most likely.

[hide=] Let me put it to you this way. We believe that you are not living your lives to the fullest because we feel as though you are wasting your time worrying about what an invisible man in the sky thinks about you. We find it to be a waste of life, as well as a giant waste of time to worship a being who never began, and will never end. A being who knows all, and is all powerful, defying all logic. A being for which there is no explanation, nor any signs of proof regaurding his/her existance. This is why we feel you are "Wasting your life" or "Not living it to the fullest". Another thing I don't understand is why you just assume that living life to the fullest means "Doing drugs, drinking, and being violent". That seems to be an attack with an unfounded basis. As for your idea of what we're "Missing out on", all miracles, healings, and exorcisms are usually either fradulent, or are placebo effects. Nothing so supernaturally profound has happened to disprove any of the scientific or naturalistic explanations for these "Miracles" already laid down by modern science. Sorry, but we're not missing out on anything important. Remember, the unexplained is NOT proof of the supernatural. It is simply a situation where a well founded naturalistic explanation hasn't been found yet. So far, nothing we've encountered on this planet is concrete proof of god. It's all founded on belief. Sorry, I just cannot believe something this profound without proof being put in front of me. So far, a no go. [/hide] Thank you Nomore dead; pretty much hit the nail on the head. Now, as for the Now this is the perception problem. Many Christian churches/schools make Atheists out to be evil and misguided (to scare them away from it without letting them really consider it) and I think we can see the results of that here. Its also part of the false perception that being Christian instantly means that you're a good person, and that everybody else is morally inferior/misguided. That is obviously not reallity, despite how hard people try to defend it. Think of the case of the video where a Christian American Soldier throws a puppy off a cliff. Christians were instantly disowning him and saying that he was not Christian just so they could keep the facade that all Christians were morally perfect. but that guy was a Christian- he was raised as a Christian, and is still a Christian... And agreed this is just one example but i'm sure I could find thousands more of Bad Christians :shock: but thats not saying that there aren't equally proportional amounts of Bad Atheists. The point is that whether you like it or not, being a Christian does not make you a good person by default and being an Atheist does not make you a good person by default. Everybody is morally equal. So get rid of your silly stereotypes of 'Halo Shining Christian' and 'Evil Druggy Atheist' and break back into reallity; you can do it even if your lines between reallity and fantasy are a little blurred. PS isn't it obvious to you why the Church portrays Atheists as evil; its clearly not because they actually are evil, but because the Church does not want you to leave Christianity. In my books, that is called 'LYING for SELF GAIN' which isn't morally correct.

I believe his words were 'I hate the kind of the christians that make that show God Rules.' which does not mean all Christians, it just means a select few. And me personally; I don't hate people for being religous- but when they intrude on my rights/any body elses rights based on their unproved assumptions (which is far more often than its credited for) I go up in arms against it which has made me very sensitive on the whole topic. And yes, it does make me sleep a little less soundly, knowing that people will believe some of that stuff. For the most part I try not to get into religous debates with religous people IRL anyway because I know that they'll never convert thanks to the stubborn defence mechanism of faith (and various other equally weightless counter-arguments) but if they want me to give money to an organisation which supports irrationallity (amongst other problems which I have with it); depending on my mood- i'll give them a good skinning. So no I effectively don't hate any Christians in any way which effects them (most of them are just caught up unfortunately in the whole endocrtination thing anyway- it's not their fault), but I will vent my frustration online at the beliefs which are forced upon them and the stubborness with which they defend them.

Well I will hope that you convert to atheism, because I wouldn't want more of the people on TIF to live under the false hope of a second life in heaven (amongst other problems), and not be able to fully appreciate their first (and only) life to the full. I'd feel... Actually no I wouldn't feel responsible for it. But its a shame anyway. :cry:

My question is how does one arrive at a position where just faith is enough? My guess on answering that question for you... Endoctrinated from birth. And as for the tornado story, did you perhaps misjudge the size/power of the tornado. It is almost impossible to predict its size and power when it is up close; partly because of adrenaline/fear, partly because you can not see its edges (you can just feel the hurling wind). I'm just saying, maybe it wasn't that dangerous a tornado. Now what really makes me have a problem with these personal stories is that each person will accredit their luck in a certain situation to their chosen deity. Can't they just appreciate luck/reallity for what it is? A Muslim would have thanked Allah. A Greek may have thanked Zeus. It works for any religion. It is not proof that the Christian God or any God exists. It is as much proof that aliens intervened or that Leprechauns held you down and then memory wiped you as it is of any Christian God. It just happens that you were endoctrinated as a Christian, so you make unfounded Christian assumptions. And the bible by no means gives a cohesive view of the natural world. If you want that- there are some very good natural biology and animal behaviour books, brought to you by science. What 'cohesive view of the natural world' does it give? Give examples instead of summaries. Anyway what has really frustrated me is the story is the idea that everything should be accredited to God ( it always annoys me when it crops up). Thank God for food...NO- thank the farmers and the transport company and the preparation company and the supermarket/tradesman and the chef and the person in your family who worked to earnt money to buy the food. They are the ones who need the credit. If something good happens , Christians assume that it is God, so thank him. If something bad happens, Christians assume that God is punishing them. This is no proof of God because it is really just an assumption based on childhood endoctrination. And it really annoys me because they thank God for perfectly explainable events (such as the 'food on our plates' example) so the real credit isn't given to the right people. To Christian posters; give examples of what you have thanked god for recently. It should be interesting.

You are using a version of Pascals Wager. The idea that you may as well worship God just incase he exists- you have nothing to lose This argument is fundamentally flawed for the following reasons: 1. It assumes that you haven't lost anything if God doesn't exist. This is not true. I'm not brilliant at explaining this; but think of the time that you spent in religous ways and money spent in religous ways. Think of how you'd had the burden of God and had been unable to live life to the full because you'd assumed there was afterlife. As an atheist i try to enjoy life as much as possible instead of waiting for the next life. 2. It assumes that contributing to religion is not hurting other people; either directly or passively. Passively would be encouraging religion; which if you're wrong could be hurting people as shown in point 1 or it could be that the people that also have been deluded with your religons ideas, go on to be extremists. Or it could be that yuor religous doctrine encourages the beating of women (islam) or happens to discriminate against others including atheists on a lrage scale (see girl who got kicked out of public school for not joining Christian Prayer circle. If you pass on your doctrine to your children, and it turns out to be wrong; you may have spoilt their lives aswell. Passively is basically spreading the doctrine which re-enforces the otrocities Directly would be being so convinced of your religion you become an extremist yourself / commit the otrocities yourself. If you are wrong about, you my have done alot of damage for nothing. If you are right, you might have 'slain the heretics' to please God. 3.It assumes that there are only 2 paths, Christianity and Atheism. It fails to account for the problem that if the Christian God is not the true god; and maybe Zeus is; he will not like you worshipping in a Christian way so may send you to hell anyway. You do not avoid the 'hells' of other possible gods. Oh and you said This is part of the dillusioned principals of religion. No matter how hard you believe in something, it doesn't make it real or not real. At the end of the day if another god such as Zeus exists and you've simply been believing in a Christian god...your going to the Underworld. Can you believe people actually believed they would go to the underworld with Hades to be tantilized? I'm sure yuo think its stupid- but mabe people in the future will look back on your beliefs and find them rather silly aswell.

You know, at this point I can't even remember. But rest assured, somewhere in there is undeniable proof that professional gamers are nerds.. : Of course...undeniable :P :lol:

Solidus i'm still trying to work out which of your post was sarcasm. Obviously some of it was- you can't be serious, but maybe the last paragraph was serious? Well I 'watch' some of the online tournaments first hand :). But yeah i watch some Shadowrun and Gears of War when i can. Halo really isn't for me though- the aiming seems abit too basic, and there isn't much tactical stuff to compensate. There's really no tournaments in the UK though besides Matchbox X3 (which isn't perfect) so i gotta play MLG online. MLG Online Shadowrun Tournament 3 winners- Noob Unit Leader- Monkeyboo2 HNiC Kings XGMx Godsghost Bl4str4di1us

Neither can science be proven before the big bang. Neither side can prove where the universe came from, one follows a book where the world was created in 6 days, the other doesn't have enough evidence earlier than the big bang. You just look stupid by implying people are stupid for believing in a religion. FYI if anybody wants to start some anti-religion thing towards me I'm Atheist. It does hurt people. Look at 9/11 or Northern Ireland or Discrimination against Atheists in many American schools. Take for example, the case of the girl who was kicked out of school for not joining the prayer circle. Disgusting. What the hell does 9/11 and the troubles in Northern Ireland got to do with peoples belief in Religion or Science. Both are religious conflicts, 9/11 is Islam V America essentially, Northern Ireland is portrayed as Catholics V Protestants but it's more really Republicans (majority Catholics) V Loyalists (majority protestants / presbyterian) They are conflicts of a religous cause which cause problems for innocent people. That relevance is that they are examples of how religion does ' hurt other people'; to justify why we need to argue.

It does hurt people. Look at 9/11 or Northern Ireland or Discrimination against Atheists in many American schools. Take for example, the case of the girl who was kicked out of school for not joining the prayer circle. Disgusting.

So why don't you have faith in Zeus or Allah? What if Zeus is the 'true god' and he punishes you for worshipping the false Christian god? I think the idea of the Nigerian Email scams works nicely as proof that faith is not good (losing money because of your faith in the Email). Do you believe in anything else without proof? Do you look everytime a pickpocket says 'Oh look a plane'? Why make an exception for Christianity? Its not rational.

[hide=] whats worse is when it is taught in schools often the theory part is dropped off, and also cannot be proven using the scientific method, because you cannot recreate the so-called big bang Also how does your science explain this? Today I was feeling aweful like :-X aweful and I decided to go to church anyways, and they asked if anyone wanted to be healed (they rarely do, and you can't call it a coincidence) and when they prayed for me I went from feeling like I was poisoned to like hyper active :lol: , please, tell me how your science explains that? don't call it a placebo because trust me, I seem to be unaffected to placebos People are only affected by placebos they believe will work. [/hide] 1. Being a 'theory' does not mean that it is uncertain. Agreed, the Big Bang Theory has less compelling evidence than other 'theories' but the nice thing about science, is if valid evidence is presented; scientists are generally willing to change their views (unlike some people). A theory is an ongoing definition for an event/phenomenom/whatever which develops more knowledge and credibility as more valid evidence supports or counters its existing evidence/conclusions. Some theories have lots of evidence (such as the Theory of Gravity- you believe in Gravity right?), others like the Big Bang Theory have less evidence. IN summary, the theory is an explanation of the peak of our knowledge at the time, based on evidence. Wouldn't you rather have this taught to your children than tell them that the magic man made them- based on no evidence. 2. Universe is very logic bound. We may not understand every last bit of quantum mechanics; but darn t there's a mathematical equation to go with everything. 3.And sorry, but your experience was a very simple placebo. All that happened is you got excited about the event; thus the hyperactivity. The hyperactivity made displaced your discomfort.