User Tag List

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 182

Thread: Famous Atheist Quotes

  1. #46
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    small Canadian city
    Posts
    113
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Enyart View Post
    RE: Bob's List of scientists
    Bob,

    Don't you find it curious that your list ends in the mid 1800's? And your other list of those believing in a created origins only has a single genetics scientist who also worked and died in the 1800's. Science has come a long way since then, and it has proved that natural means provides explanation for life diversity. The best you could make claim to is origin of life, and even that is a dangerous area to rest your faith in. Your most recent scientist is an agriculturalist....Need I say more?

    I'm curious as to why you don't use modern god believing scientists in your list? Is it because they are all "evolutionists" as well? (other than the quack Dr. Micheal Behe who was humiliated in the Dover Trials.)

  2. #47
    Trainee
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion View Post
    That's not bad... especially since in police work bald is considered a hair color.
    Thanks for taking the wind outta my sails, ya big jerk

  3. #48
    King of the jungle Lion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    541
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    ...I suppose someone has already had at the old, reliable standby,

    "IEEEEEOOOOYYAAAAA!" *crackle* "OOOOOEEEAAAAAAAAAA!"

    Nope. You're the first TH. Sweet!
    In service of the
    Lion and the Lamb

  4. #49
    Trainee
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion View Post
    Really? There are actually over 230 verses concerning intelligence (only it's called wisdom in the Bible).
    Granite's signature/Russell's quote seems to indicate the gospels specifically and while wisdom is mentioned a few times throughout the course of all four, it doesn't seem to ever be praised as a virtue.

  5. #50
    King of the jungle Lion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    541
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallout View Post
    Thanks for taking the wind outta my sails, ya big jerk
    Oooops. Sorry. But you know first cop to the doughnut wins!
    In service of the
    Lion and the Lamb

  6. #51
    Trainee
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion View Post
    Oooops. Sorry. But you know first cop to the doughnut wins!
    How charmingly stereotypical

  7. #52
    Over 3000 post club noguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Florida (a town that once catered to wealthy horse owners)
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17983
    Quote Originally Posted by CabinetMaker View Post
    Nuts!

    What every atheist says about 10 seconds after dying.
    Don't you think Ooooouuuuch!!!! is more accurate? Because if faith while one is alive is what saves us from the lake of fire, then there will be absolutely no judgement process when an atheist dies.

  8. #53
    Over 3000 post club noguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Florida (a town that once catered to wealthy horse owners)
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17983
    Quote Originally Posted by Southgarden View Post
    "If I were not an atheist, I think I would have to be a Catholic because if it wasn't the forces of natural selection that designed fish, It must have been an Italian."
    - Douglas Adams
    Did he like fish, or was this a cheap shot at nature, italians, and fish?

    Because if it is the later I am offended. I am Italian, I like fish and am fascinated by nature.

  9. #54
    Over 3000 post club noguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Florida (a town that once catered to wealthy horse owners)
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17983
    Quote Originally Posted by IoverE View Post
    "The way to see by faith, is to shut the eye of reason"
    Ben Franklin

    "Give a man a fish he eats for a day, give a man religion and he'll starve to death praying for a fish." Not sure who said it but thought it was funny
    That was me back when I was agnostic, I can't believe it has become a famous quote. I said it one night at a keg party in college. Have you ever been to Connecticut?

  10. #55
    Newbie Redstar91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion View Post
    Redstar quote

    Only when they ape Christian ideals and civility.
    Last I checked "skepticism" is not upheld in the Bible as anything more than heresy.

    I heard something on Comedy Central once...

    "Why is it that we hate Lucifer when he gave us the most valuable aspect of humanity: intelligence?" - Anonymous.
    If TOL is any indicator, heaven sucks.

  11. #56
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Scandinavia
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by noguru View Post
    Did he like fish, or was this a cheap shot at nature, italians, and fish?

    Because if it is the later I am offended. I am Italian, I like fish and am fascinated by nature.
    It's from his book "Last Chance to See", about animal species either endangered or threatened with extinction, after seeing all the different colourful fish in the Great Barrier Reef. So unless you really, really don't like the stereotype that Italians are quite ... flamboyant, it's not an insult, no.

  12. #57
    Over 3000 post club noguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Florida (a town that once catered to wealthy horse owners)
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17983
    Quote Originally Posted by Southgarden View Post
    It's from his book "Last Chance to See", about animal species either endangered or threatened with extinction, after seeing all the different colourful fish in the Great Barrier Reef. So unless you really, really don't like the stereotype that Italians are quite ... flamboyant, it's not an insult, no.
    I was joking, I am not easily offended. I just got back from the Meso-American reef, none of those fish reminded me of my relatives. My grandparents generation dressed in either black or grey. My parents generation was also very conservative in dress (except around the holidays where the women liked to wear a lot of reds and greens). And my generation has become very anglicized. Of course we do tend to get a little more passionate about things than your average northern European.

    My grandfather who was a bike messenger in the Italian army use to say things like "I use to rida my bika so fast, the bullets could nota catcha me." Perhaps he was referring to that kind of thing.

  13. #58
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,306
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 157 Times in 128 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    41237
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Enyart View Post
    Dawkins is engaged in the discussion with Stein; he admits that the complexity observed in microbiology could be evidence that life on earth originated from a higher intelligence, somewhere out there in the universe. Of course, he claims that such a higher lifeform must have evolved by some kind of Darwinian mechanism. But if genetic and cellular complexity provides evidence that life on earth is too complex to arise by chance, then evolutionists like Dawkins and Francis Crick are just punting to claim it must have originated somewhere else. Dawkins validates the Intelligent Design argument
    But genetic and cellular complexity do not provide evidence that life on earth is too complex to arise by chance (whatever you mean by chance) so your argument falls on an invalid assumption.

    For those who object that these brilliant men lived prior to the 1859 publication of Darwinís Origin of Species, consider the following scientific giants all of whom in a time of more open debate, publicly rejected natural origins and Darwinian evolution, and indicated that the evidence supports belief in a supernatural Creator:

    Michael Faraday, 1867, Electromagnetism
    Gregor Mendel, 1884, Genetics
    Louis Pasteur, 1885, Microbiology
    James Joule, 1889, Thermodynamics
    Lord Kelvin, 1907, Thermodynamics
    Joseph Lister, 1912, Modern Surgery
    G. W. Carver, 1943, Modern Agriculture
    ...and, despite the collective biological brilliance of Mendel, Pasteur and Lister, there is no predictive, falsifiable Theory of Divine Creation.

    Could it be they were deluded?

    Stuart

  14. #59
    Trainee
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
    But genetic and cellular complexity do not provide evidence that life on earth is too complex to arise by chance (whatever you mean by chance) so your argument falls on an invalid assumption.
    Darwinian natural selection has nothing to do with chance. It's a red herring to suggest that it does. From what I know about Dawkins, it's his contention that the complexity of nature excludes the possibility of a designer.

  15. #60
    Over 3000 post club noguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Florida (a town that once catered to wealthy horse owners)
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17983
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallout View Post
    Darwinian natural selection has nothing to do with chance. It's a red herring to suggest that it does. From what I know about Dawkins, it's his contention that the complexity of nature excludes the possibility of a designer.
    I agree. The concept of chance is simply how we classify what we see given a false dichotomy. The false dichotomy is between many various possiblilities that lead to an even greater plethora of possible outcomes as opposed to predestination or a program set into action by God for which no other outcome is possible. The fact is no one can run a control experiment to see whether things would have happened or will happen another way. What is clear is the chain of cause and effect relationships that can be traced back to some point in the past. Each thing that happened in the universe was the result or was affected by things that happened previously. And similarly what happens in the future is the result of the state of things as they are right now.

    Even a car accident is not pure chance. There is a chain of events that unfolded that lead to the cars colliding. It was not intentional in many cases, but that does not make it a matter of pure chance. This is a false dichotomy that is created by people who think that anything that was not intentional was due to pure chance.

    I do not know how Dawkins can make the claim that "the complexity of nature excludes the possibility of a designer". To me that is just as much a statement of faith as the IDer's statement that "The complexity of nature excludes the possiblity of natural causes."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us