We Are ‘Apes,‘

[Ariux]

The Bible was written by several different people (not God Himself) and like all stories the telling varies from person to person. These were primitive people whose only point of reference was fire and brimstone and horrible punishments for straying from the 'true' religion. The revelation was a MAN'S idea, and it's written the way HUMANS think, not the way an all seeing all loving God would think.

And if God is really like that I don't want to have anything to do with HIM because he's a psychopath.
MY God doesn't work like that.

CandySlice, you're a f-ing retard. Practically the only person in the entire Bible who talks about fire and brimstone and horrible punishments is Jesus himself... not all those authors you ignorantly think are ignorant.

And, the the f- does an ignorant piece of shit like yourself know about Love or the nature of God?

 

[CandySlice]

The Bible was written by several different people (not God Himself) and like all stories the telling varies from person to person. These were primitive people whose only point of reference was fire and brimstone and horrible punishments for straying from the 'true' religion. The revelation was a MAN'S idea, and it's written the way HUMANS think, not the way an all seeing all loving God would think.

And if God is really like that I don't want to have anything to do with HIM because he's a psychopath.
MY God doesn't work like that.

CandySlice, you're a f-ing retard. Practically the only person in the entire Bible who talks about fire and brimstone and horrible punishments is Jesus himself... not all those authors you ignorantly think are ignorant.

And, the the f- does an ignorant piece of shit like yourself know about Love or the nature of God?

Actually most of that stuff comes from the old testament. (that's before Jesus was born) and what makes you so angry that all you have to fight with are the weak and pathetic tools of name calling and making yourself look like one of the lower classes?

 

[ima]

We only use a small percentage of our brains. I think Jesus may have been a man who used his entire brain. In that case you could probably walk on water too. Whoever he was, he was a great man and Id sure like to meet him someday. I have no doubt he lived, his impact was too great to be all myth and made up stories.

Got any proof? Anything?

Of course even an idiot knows the answer to that one. Looks like a lotta people believe the same thing though, doesn't it? I like to hope for the best and that would be that such a man lived and walked amoung us and taught the simplest of lessons, that love really doesn't need any 'proof'.

So instead of "no doubt", now it's "I hope"?

 

[CandySlice]

Got any proof? Anything?

Of course even an idiot knows the answer to that one. Looks like a lotta people believe the same thing though, doesn't it? I like to hope for the best and that would be that such a man lived and walked amoung us and taught the simplest of lessons, that love really doesn't need any 'proof'.

So instead of "no doubt", now it's "I hope"?

Okay. If you want to pin me down on my religious beliefs I think it's only fair to tell you they are spotty at best. I do not believe alot of the things in the Bible, I believe they were perhaps interpretations of something a very primitive people saw or dreamed about. I believe in a Supreme Being but Im not at all sure of his true nature or if he was even 'supernatural', or if he was even a God. In Genesis it is written 'we will make man in OUR image' which indicates to me it was a joint venture at best. Jesus makes sense to me when I think of a man with an advanced intelligence. It would be a shame if such a man never existed but right now, my gut tells me he did exist and I ALWAYS listen to my gut.
What 'proof' do you think I can give you? No one can do that. I think your question is disingenious at best.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Of course even an idiot knows the answer to that one. Looks like a lotta people believe the same thing though, doesn't it? I like to hope for the best and that would be that such a man lived and walked amoung us and taught the simplest of lessons, that love really doesn't need any 'proof'.

So instead of "no doubt", now it's "I hope"?

Okay. If you want to pin me down on my religious beliefs I think it's only fair to tell you they are spotty at best. I do not believe alot of the things in the Bible, I believe they were perhaps interpretations of something a very primitive people saw or dreamed about. I believe in a Supreme Being but Im not at all sure of his true nature or if he was even 'supernatural', or if he was even a God. In Genesis it is written 'we will make man in OUR image' which indicates to me it was a joint venture at best. Jesus makes sense to me when I think of a man with an advanced intelligence. It would be a shame if such a man never existed but right now, my gut tells me he did exist and I ALWAYS listen to my gut.
What 'proof' do you think I can give you? No one can do that. I think your question is disingenious at best.

Candy, you may find this interesting.
Proving the historic Jesus

 

[CandySlice]

So instead of "no doubt", now it's "I hope"?

Okay. If you want to pin me down on my religious beliefs I think it's only fair to tell you they are spotty at best. I do not believe alot of the things in the Bible, I believe they were perhaps interpretations of something a very primitive people saw or dreamed about. I believe in a Supreme Being but Im not at all sure of his true nature or if he was even 'supernatural', or if he was even a God. In Genesis it is written 'we will make man in OUR image' which indicates to me it was a joint venture at best. Jesus makes sense to me when I think of a man with an advanced intelligence. It would be a shame if such a man never existed but right now, my gut tells me he did exist and I ALWAYS listen to my gut.
What 'proof' do you think I can give you? No one can do that. I think your question is disingenious at best.

Candy, you may find this interesting.
Proving the historic Jesus

Cool. All new info is appreciated. I look forward to discussing it with you.

 

[Old Rocks]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution. To argue about various facets of the modern theory, with knowledge, is a sign of intelligence. To reject it because of what some goat herders wrote 5000 years ago is a sign of willfull ignorance. Doesn't matter whose goat herders those were.

 

[Mad Scientist]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution. To argue about various facets of the modern theory, with knowledge, is a sign of intelligence. To reject it because of what some goat herders wrote 5000 years ago is a sign of willfull ignorance. Doesn't matter whose goat herders those were.

The Books of the Bible were written over a period of about 1500 years:

Genesis: 1450 B.C. to Revelation 95 A.D. 3500 years ago. Your numbers are way off. Just like most of the "guessing" in that Algore Globull Warming Scam.

Oh, are you offended that I insulted your "Religion"?

 

[Mad Scientist]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution.

No it doesn't. Please explain, in a separate thread, how the human cell evolved.

It's guaranteed I can trip your ass up on this one!

 

[whitehall]

Who do atheists pray to when they get in a life threatening jam? "No atheists in the foxholes"? Do they envision an afterlife? What a dismal existence if they don't.

 

[ima]

Who do atheists pray to when they get in a life threatening jam? "No atheists in the foxholes"? Do they envision an afterlife? What a dismal existence if they don't.

Nobody knows what happens to us when we die. It doesn't matter what you believe, because you don't know. And believing in a specific thing like an afterlife won't change what will actually happen to you when you die.
I think the mystery is fascinating.

 

[daveman]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution. To argue about various facets of the modern theory, with knowledge, is a sign of intelligence. To reject it because of what some goat herders wrote 5000 years ago is a sign of willfull ignorance. Doesn't matter whose goat herders those were.

How did life "evolve" from non-life?

 

[masquerade]

The idea that we are on par with Apes is truly a disgusting idea.

Name ONE animal that has it's own spoken and written language.

Humans.
Yes we are an animal.
We are not divine, we are just at the top of the chain.
You cannot accept that you are an animal?

Even if you believe in God we are as or less than a dog or cat to him.

Such sad beliefs.

 

[ima]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution. To argue about various facets of the modern theory, with knowledge, is a sign of intelligence. To reject it because of what some goat herders wrote 5000 years ago is a sign of willfull ignorance. Doesn't matter whose goat herders those were.

How did life "evolve" from non-life?

Read this:
Evolution 101: From Soup to Cells - the Origin of Life

 

[daveman]

The whole of the geologic record and genetics support evolution. To argue about various facets of the modern theory, with knowledge, is a sign of intelligence. To reject it because of what some goat herders wrote 5000 years ago is a sign of willfull ignorance. Doesn't matter whose goat herders those were.

How did life "evolve" from non-life?

Read this:
Evolution 101: From Soup to Cells - the Origin of Life

And that's somehow less unbelievable than the idea of a Creator?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Atheist Richard Dawkins Tells Playboy: We Are ‘Apes,‘ Evidence for Jesus’ Existence ‘Is Surprisingly Shaky’ & Christ Dying for Humanity‘s Sins Is a ’Truly Disgusting Idea’

August 26, 2012

Famed atheist Richard Dawkins sat down with Playboy Magazine to discuss “the simple beauty of evolution, the improbability of God and why the pope should be arrested,” among other subjects. As usual, Dawkins took a provocative approach in the interview — one that people of faith will surely find offensive. These contentious anti-religious views appear in the September issue of Playboy.

---

Richard Dawkins Tells Playboy About Jesus, Evolution & Atheism | TheBlaze.com

Scientist hate the fact that we are really really different than anything else, so they get retards like this to say we are the same.

Saying human are apes is like saying apples are oranges, basing your argument on the fact that both are fruit.

we have hair, not fur
we have opposable thumbs
we walk upright all the time, unless drunk
we have teeth, not fangs
we suck at climbing trees

and that's just some physical differences, never mind that vast mental range we have.



oh and, I didn't miss the irony of the religious finding this in Playboy.

no
I
did
not

 

[midcan5]

"Despite a religious temperament and natural respect for tradition, an unsettling, empirical bent forces me into agreement with Mooney and his fellow liberals on the issues of climate change and evolution. Darwin got it right. There is no scientifically credible challenge to the general theory of evolution. Likewise, the scientific consensus on climate change—that it’s real, anthropogenic, and poses a grave threat—is as solid as consensus on anything beyond first principles is likely to ever be." Henry Chappell Are Conservatives Irrational? | The American Conservative

 

[daveman]

Atheist Richard Dawkins Tells Playboy: We Are ‘Apes,‘ Evidence for Jesus’ Existence ‘Is Surprisingly Shaky’ & Christ Dying for Humanity‘s Sins Is a ’Truly Disgusting Idea’

August 26, 2012

Famed atheist Richard Dawkins sat down with Playboy Magazine to discuss “the simple beauty of evolution, the improbability of God and why the pope should be arrested,” among other subjects. As usual, Dawkins took a provocative approach in the interview — one that people of faith will surely find offensive. These contentious anti-religious views appear in the September issue of Playboy.

---

Richard Dawkins Tells Playboy About Jesus, Evolution & Atheism | TheBlaze.com

Scientist hate the fact that we are really really different than anything else, so they get retards like this to say we are the same.

Saying human are apes is like saying apples are oranges, basing your argument on the fact that both are fruit.

we have hair, not fur
we have opposable thumbs
we walk upright all the time, unless drunk
we have teeth, not fangs
we suck at climbing trees

and that's just some physical differences, never mind that vast mental range we have.



oh and, I didn't miss the irony of the religious finding this in Playboy.

no
I
did
not

But other than that, we're just alike! Don't you see?

 

[daveman]

"Despite a religious temperament and natural respect for tradition, an unsettling, empirical bent forces me into agreement with Mooney and his fellow liberals on the issues of climate change and evolution. Darwin got it right. There is no scientifically credible challenge to the general theory of evolution. Likewise, the scientific consensus on climate change—that it’s real, anthropogenic, and poses a grave threat—is as solid as consensus on anything beyond first principles is likely to ever be." Henry Chappell Are Conservatives Irrational? | The American Conservative

You didn't read the whole thing, did you?

Could it be that the reality of anthropogenic climate change and the culpability of corporate capitalism simply rests easier with liberals than with conservatives? Does Mooney believe the average liberal earnestly studies the latest climate data? What if the study questions addressed the responsibility of the poor for their own condition or evidence that scientific genius is more common among men? Might there be some liberal backfire effect?

Mooney quotes Kahan: in some conservative communities “people who say, ‘I think there’s something to climate change,’ that’s going to mark them out as a certain kind of person, and their life is going to go less well.” What would Daniel Patrick Moynihan say about the consequences of breaking with liberal orthodoxy? Lawrence Summers?

--

Another trait researchers found prevalent among conservatives and surprisingly common in the United States is “authoritarianism,” which has been intractably linked to fascism thanks to largely discredited work by Theodore Adorno. Mooney doesn’t mention Adorno’s F-scale, nor does he distance himself from it.

“Authoritarians are also increasingly strong in today’s Republican Party—and especially in its most extreme ideological arm. … Authoritarians are very intolerant of ambiguity, and are very inclined toward group-think and distrustful of outsiders (often including racial outsiders).”

Racial outsiders like Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Thomas Sowell, and Walter Williams, say?

--

The liberal mind, in all its purported subtlety, can be disastrously, murderously wrong. Long after evidence of unprecedented atrocity trickled out of the Soviet Union, the intellectual left in the United States continued its infatuation with totalitarian communism, seeing in Stalinism the realization of the aims of the French Revolution.

The eugenics movement of the early 20th century was a progressive project as grounded in racism and nasty paternalism as it was in good intentions. Today, the left’s doctrinaire support for programs that incentivize young women to have children out of wedlock virtually ensures increasing poverty, dependence, and resentment—problems that could prove as disastrous as climate change.

--

And this: “Conservatives—especially religious ones—are also in denial about the single most important thing that we human beings know about ourselves: Namely, that our species evolved by natural selection and therefore shares a common ancestor with every other living thing on earth.”

That we evolved by natural selection tells us more about ourselves than all of the recorded wisdom of the ancients? More than the works of Shakespeare and Dostoevsky? More than the Delta blues?

If this is where Enlightenment reason takes us, Chris Mooney can have it. Count me on the side of superstition.​

 

[Katzndogz]

And this: “Conservatives—especially religious ones—are also in denial about the single most important thing that we human beings know about ourselves: Namely, that our species evolved by natural selection and therefore shares a common ancestor with every other living thing on earth.”


We share a common chemical composition with everything on earth. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to eat so much as an asparagus. Unless we share a common ancestor with asaparagus as a living thing as well.