Hateful Atheist Richard Dawkins' Antiscientific Rubbish

[Dragonlady]

Atheists always fall back on magic at some point. There's a reason so many lefties love Harry Potter.

Marvin, you Da Man. They pretend that nothing made everything. Lefty Magic.

They do not. Not one atheist I know has ever thought that nothing made everything.

Please tell your unwilling but captive audience what atheists think made everything. Don't weasel out with some non-answer. Be specific and scientific, IF you can.

Natural forces. There are many elements and forces on the earth. Winds, tides, chemical reactions ect ect. (sic) These are not "nothing.

Gravity pulled the materials together for the planet. Gravity is not nothing. Nor is it magic.

ZERO specifics. ZERO as usual from you.

1. Where did these "materials" come from, Mister Nihilist Atheist?
2. Where did gravity come from, Mister Anti-Science?
3. How did gravity just "happen" to have a critical value precise to within one part in trillions of trillions to form the universe? You don't have a clue nor do any of your atheist pals. You simple dribble out some nonsense and trot away, satisfied with your inane bullshit. Which brings me to Brandolini's Law: It requires an order of magnitude more energy to refute bullshit than it did to produce it.
4. You don't even know the proper abbreviation for et cetera. Look it up. Try to learn something today. [It is NOT "ect ect." (sic)]
5. You overlooked a comma between your two ignorant, incorrect abbreviations.

Lord but you are abnoxious, condescending and be ignorant excuse for a Christian.

The story of Creation as told in the Bible is a myth told by primitive men to explain the origins of the world. It claims the earth is 6,000 years old.

The geological record and paleontological record of the planet completely shatters that myth. Closed ecosystems with no migration, develop their own unique species, not seen anywhere else in the world, based on the ease of life in their locations. Islands systems with no land bridges for animal migration, like Australia or the Galápagos Islands.

But the great continental land masses of Europe, Africa and Asia, North and South America are or were all connected by land bridges, enabling both animal migration and animal cultivation to spread related species throughout much of the world. So while life on the planet likely originated in the cauldrons of the equatorial rainforests where life is still densest today, and spread outward from there, evolving and adapting to changing climates and food sources along the way.

My faith is based on Jesus words teachings, not on magical thinking or miracles performed. The ideas that Conservatives reject - the separation of Church and State. I am my brother’s keeper. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

 

[Ringtone]

Atheists always fall back on magic at some point. There's a reason so many lefties love Harry Potter.

Marvin, you Da Man. They pretend that nothing made everything. Lefty Magic.

They do not. Not one atheist I know has ever thought that nothing made everything.

Please tell your unwilling but captive audience what atheists think made everything. Don't weasel out with some non-answer. Be specific and scientific, IF you can.

Natural forces. There are many elements and forces on the earth. Winds, tides, chemical reactions ect ect. (sic) These are not "nothing.

Gravity pulled the materials together for the planet. Gravity is not nothing. Nor is it magic.

ZERO specifics. ZERO as usual from you.

1. Where did these "materials" come from, Mister Nihilist Atheist?
2. Where did gravity come from, Mister Anti-Science?
3. How did gravity just "happen" to have a critical value precise to within one part in trillions of trillions to form the universe? You don't have a clue nor do any of your atheist pals. You simple dribble out some nonsense and trot away, satisfied with your inane bullshit. Which brings me to Brandolini's Law: It requires an order of magnitude more energy to refute bullshit than it did to produce it.
4. You don't even know the proper abbreviation for et cetera. Look it up. Try to learn something today. [It is NOT "ect ect." (sic)]
5. You overlooked a comma between your two ignorant, incorrect abbreviations.

Lord but you are abnoxious, condescending and be ignorant excuse for a Christian.

The story of Creation as told in the Bible is a myth told by primitive men to explain the origins of the world. It claims the earth is 6,000 years old.

The geological record and paleontological record of the planet completely shatters that myth. Closed ecosystems with no migration, develop their own unique species, not seen anywhere else in the world, based on the ease of life in their locations. Islands systems with no land bridges for animal migration, like Australia or the Galápagos Islands.

But the great continental land masses of Europe, Africa and Asia, North and South America are or were all connected by land bridges, enabling both animal migration and animal cultivation to spread related species throughout much of the world. So while life on the planet likely originated in the cauldrons of the equatorial rainforests where life is still densest today, and spread outward from there, evolving and adapting to changing climates and food sources along the way.

My faith is based on Jesus words teachings, not on magical thinking or miracles performed. The ideas that Conservatives reject - the separation of Church and State. I am my brother’s keeper. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

The Bible does not make any claim whatsoever regarding the age of the Earth.

 

[Hollie]

Atheists always fall back on magic at some point. There's a reason so many lefties love Harry Potter.

Marvin, you Da Man. They pretend that nothing made everything. Lefty Magic.

They do not. Not one atheist I know has ever thought that nothing made everything.

Please tell your unwilling but captive audience what atheists think made everything. Don't weasel out with some non-answer. Be specific and scientific, IF you can.

Natural forces. There are many elements and forces on the earth. Winds, tides, chemical reactions ect ect. (sic) These are not "nothing.

Gravity pulled the materials together for the planet. Gravity is not nothing. Nor is it magic.

ZERO specifics. ZERO as usual from you.

1. Where did these "materials" come from, Mister Nihilist Atheist?
2. Where did gravity come from, Mister Anti-Science?
3. How did gravity just "happen" to have a critical value precise to within one part in trillions of trillions to form the universe? You don't have a clue nor do any of your atheist pals. You simple dribble out some nonsense and trot away, satisfied with your inane bullshit. Which brings me to Brandolini's Law: It requires an order of magnitude more energy to refute bullshit than it did to produce it.
4. You don't even know the proper abbreviation for et cetera. Look it up. Try to learn something today. [It is NOT "ect ect." (sic)]
5. You overlooked a comma between your two ignorant, incorrect abbreviations.

Lord but you are abnoxious, condescending and be ignorant excuse for a Christian.

The story of Creation as told in the Bible is a myth told by primitive men to explain the origins of the world. It claims the earth is 6,000 years old.

The geological record and paleontological record of the planet completely shatters that myth. Closed ecosystems with no migration, develop their own unique species, not seen anywhere else in the world, based on the ease of life in their locations. Islands systems with no land bridges for animal migration, like Australia or the Galápagos Islands.

But the great continental land masses of Europe, Africa and Asia, North and South America are or were all connected by land bridges, enabling both animal migration and animal cultivation to spread related species throughout much of the world. So while life on the planet likely originated in the cauldrons of the equatorial rainforests where life is still densest today, and spread outward from there, evolving and adapting to changing climates and food sources along the way.

My faith is based on Jesus words teachings, not on magical thinking or miracles performed. The ideas that Conservatives reject - the separation of Church and State. I am my brother’s keeper. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

The Bible does not make any claim whatsoever regarding the age of the Earth.

No timeframe for the age of the planet is just one of many, rather glaring omissions on the part of the writers of the Bible. What the writers did leave are the major events in the history of the earth which are Creation, Fall, Flood and re-population of the planet.

Using the simple timeline of the YEC geological column we can trace back:

Using the present day as “x”, we can proceed back:

Post-Flood period. ~ 4,300 x

Flood period ~4,301 x

Post-Fall period. ~ 5,900 x

Pre-Fall period 6,000 x

Creation Week 6,000 x = 6,000 years ago.

James Ussher calculated the date of creation, using the Biblical and historical chronologies. Ussher's date of 4004 BC matches with biblical timeframes.

 

[Ringtone]

Atheists always fall back on magic at some point. There's a reason so many lefties love Harry Potter.

Marvin, you Da Man. They pretend that nothing made everything. Lefty Magic.

They do not. Not one atheist I know has ever thought that nothing made everything.

Please tell your unwilling but captive audience what atheists think made everything. Don't weasel out with some non-answer. Be specific and scientific, IF you can.

Natural forces. There are many elements and forces on the earth. Winds, tides, chemical reactions ect ect. (sic) These are not "nothing.

Gravity pulled the materials together for the planet. Gravity is not nothing. Nor is it magic.

ZERO specifics. ZERO as usual from you.

1. Where did these "materials" come from, Mister Nihilist Atheist?
2. Where did gravity come from, Mister Anti-Science?
3. How did gravity just "happen" to have a critical value precise to within one part in trillions of trillions to form the universe? You don't have a clue nor do any of your atheist pals. You simple dribble out some nonsense and trot away, satisfied with your inane bullshit. Which brings me to Brandolini's Law: It requires an order of magnitude more energy to refute bullshit than it did to produce it.
4. You don't even know the proper abbreviation for et cetera. Look it up. Try to learn something today. [It is NOT "ect ect." (sic)]
5. You overlooked a comma between your two ignorant, incorrect abbreviations.

Lord but you are abnoxious, condescending and be ignorant excuse for a Christian.

The story of Creation as told in the Bible is a myth told by primitive men to explain the origins of the world. It claims the earth is 6,000 years old.

The geological record and paleontological record of the planet completely shatters that myth. Closed ecosystems with no migration, develop their own unique species, not seen anywhere else in the world, based on the ease of life in their locations. Islands systems with no land bridges for animal migration, like Australia or the Galápagos Islands.

But the great continental land masses of Europe, Africa and Asia, North and South America are or were all connected by land bridges, enabling both animal migration and animal cultivation to spread related species throughout much of the world. So while life on the planet likely originated in the cauldrons of the equatorial rainforests where life is still densest today, and spread outward from there, evolving and adapting to changing climates and food sources along the way.

My faith is based on Jesus words teachings, not on magical thinking or miracles performed. The ideas that Conservatives reject - the separation of Church and State. I am my brother’s keeper. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

You are a liar. It is the political left that eschews the actual constitutional principle of the separation of church and state. Your claim is nothing more than the mindless slogan speak of statist bootlicks who, typically, are wont to suppress ideological liberty and free expression in the state schools as you simultaneously impose your naturalistic rot on the same.

 

[ChemEngineer]

NOWHERE in the Constitution is there any reference to separation of church and state.
In point of fact, every session of the Continental Congress was started with a prayer to Nature's God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Every bill of currency states "In God We Trust." Where's the separation? It is in the minds and lies of Democrats and atheists.

"Our Constitution was made for a good and religious people. It is unfit for any other." - Some Founding Father
Look it up. Don't be so lazy and ignorant.

Let's Examine Claims of Atheists

AreAtheistsRight.blogspot.com

 

[Ringtone]

Atheists always fall back on magic at some point. There's a reason so many lefties love Harry Potter.

Marvin, you Da Man. They pretend that nothing made everything. Lefty Magic.

They do not. Not one atheist I know has ever thought that nothing made everything.

Please tell your unwilling but captive audience what atheists think made everything. Don't weasel out with some non-answer. Be specific and scientific, IF you can.

Natural forces. There are many elements and forces on the earth. Winds, tides, chemical reactions ect ect. (sic) These are not "nothing.

Gravity pulled the materials together for the planet. Gravity is not nothing. Nor is it magic.

ZERO specifics. ZERO as usual from you.

1. Where did these "materials" come from, Mister Nihilist Atheist?
2. Where did gravity come from, Mister Anti-Science?
3. How did gravity just "happen" to have a critical value precise to within one part in trillions of trillions to form the universe? You don't have a clue nor do any of your atheist pals. You simple dribble out some nonsense and trot away, satisfied with your inane bullshit. Which brings me to Brandolini's Law: It requires an order of magnitude more energy to refute bullshit than it did to produce it.
4. You don't even know the proper abbreviation for et cetera. Look it up. Try to learn something today. [It is NOT "ect ect." (sic)]
5. You overlooked a comma between your two ignorant, incorrect abbreviations.

Grammar and spelling is (sic) your argument? lol Ok then.

The materials have always existed.

Gravity is a natural force. It is based on mass and energy. It has always existed as well. Gravity did not just "happen" to have any precise value. It has always been the same.

1. "LOL". Grammar and spelling ARE....
Pretty funny Mister Atheist "Intellectual."

IF you were as smart as you pretend to be, you would know how to construct sentences in good grammar. But you are not so you cannot. Q.E.D. "LOL".

2. NO the "materials have (NOT) always existed."
3. Neither has gravity. That is anti-science and completely without foundation or logic.
But giggle away.
4. HOW gravity happened to have that value is beyond your comprehension even to discuss.
You're talking in circles like Darwin did but you can't even see. I'm presenting counters to your nonsense not for you, but for others who might tend to believe your nonsense. You do.
Refer to the Anthropic Principle. Scientists of great training understand that these values are not a matter of "luck" or were "always there." That's atheist magic talk.

Readers, you may as well talk to a pigeon as this "moderator." He's a complete waste of time.

You continually post that everything was created. And you believe, I assume, that God has always existed.

So what scientific evidence do you have that the matter and energy in our universe has not always existed? And, by the same token, what evidence do you have that God has always existed?

The classical theist does not claim that everything was created, dummy.

 

[Hollie]

NOWHERE in the Constitution is there any reference to separation of church and state.
In point of fact, every session of the Continental Congress was started with a prayer to Nature's God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Every bill of currency states "In God We Trust." Where's the separation? It is in the minds and lies of Democrats and atheists.

"Our Constitution was made for a good and religious people. It is unfit for any other." - Some Founding Father
Look it up. Don't be so lazy and ignorant.

Let's Examine Claims of Atheists

AreAtheistsRight.blogspot.com

As is typical for for the hyper-religious, you can’t think beyond your extremist beliefs.

Separation of Church and State is a long held principle derived from the intent and context of the time in which the Founders were setting for the framework of this nation. The absence of specific statements does not mean that the Constitution abandons certain ideals.

In point of fact, nowhere in the body of the Constitution is there any mention of your particular gods: Yahweh, God Jr. (Jesus), Holy spirits, whatever.

It is Thomas Jefferson who is credited with the “wall of separation” between religion and the State. Thomas Jefferson's Bible ends with Jesus crucified and nothing more. He does not return from the dead, which is quite essential from a Christian perspective. Jefferson "believed in Jesus Christ" as a philosopher, but not as a god incarnate. Thomas Paine, of whom it was said, "Without Paine's pen, Washington's sword would never have been wielded", was a thorough-going Deist who's "Age of Reason" deconstructed the bible completely.

Both the motto "In God We Trust" and the words "one nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance were 20th century additions. While "In God We Trust" was commissioned by Lincoln to be placed on our coins as a way to unite the nation during a bloody and vicious Civil War, it was never intended to replace our national motto. Our original (correct) motto was, "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many Comes One), but the Eisenhower administration in the 1950's, trying to make greater the gulf between the Americans and the Communists, enacted a law to change the motto and add the clause regarding God into the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

[Libby von H]

After reading nonsense published as "non-fiction" by Isaac Asimov, cited on this very thread, I proceeded to check out books by Carl Sagan and critique those, which critiques I mailed to his publisher. Then it was malicious atheist Richard Dawkins' turn. So much nonsense that I won't burden readers with more than a small fraction of it.

Cover: Subtitle: “Why the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design”

(Never before in all my book reviews have I had to begin my critique at the COVER! A title and a subtitle - both misleading - both wrong. Professor Dawkins contradicts his own subtitle on Page 21:

‘We may say that a living body or organ is well designed if it has attributes that an intelligent and knowledgeable engineer might have built into it in order to achieve some sensible purpose, such as flying, swimming, seeing, eating, reproducing, or more generally promoting the survival and replication of the organism’s genes.’ Every living plant and animal you see shows these “attributes” cited by the author.)

P 37: “Our modern hypothesis (evolution) . . .”

(Ah yes, that ‘modern’ hypothesis - evolution. 1859.)

Ibid: “Whenever I read such a remark (as the impossibility of believing in evolution), I always feel like writing ‘Speak for yourself’ in the margin.”

(Let me return the favor. On P 160, Dawkins writes, ‘Our minds can’t cope with the large distances that astronomy deals in, or the small distances of atomic physics...” SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. Dawkins: “Our minds can’t imagine a time span as short as a picosecond.’ SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.

Dawkins: ’Our minds can’t imagine a timespan as long as a million years...’ SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.


P. 163: “Our own subjective judgment about the plausibility of a theory of the origin of life is likely to be wrong by a factor of a hundred million.”

(SPEAKING FOR HIMSELF.)

Dawkins: “When we read in a newspaper about an amazing coincidence . . . we are more impressed by it than we should be.” (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.)


P. 105: “There is a considerable surplus of humans.” (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!! Interestingly, Carl Sagan said the same thing. Sagan hypocritically had five children, an "excess" by his own statements.)

P. 41: “Measuring the statistical improbability of a suggestion is the right way to go about assessing its believability. Indeed it is a method that we shall use in this book several times. BUT YOU HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT.”

(Emphasis added, again. If there is ONE thing Professor Dawkins does NOT do right, it is measuring the statistical improbability. He defines one chance in 10exp40 as “impossible”, and then says one chance in a universe full of numbers is “possible”. But a critic’s idea is impossible at one chance in 10exp301. Science turned on its head for evolution.)

P. 129: “Modern DNA replication is a high-technology affair, with elaborate proofreading techniques that have been perfected . . .”

(Subtitle: "... a universe without design...." but it's "high-technology, with elaborate techniques that have been perfected....")

P 160: “ . . .it is possible for a marble statue to wave at us. It could happen....It is theoretically possible for a cow to jump over the moon with something like the same improbability.”
(Atheists will make every effort to defend Dawkins' ridiculous attempts because they never admit that they were wrong. The arrogant, condescending Left is like that. And this is just ONE of his many books fraught with anti-science. Like Asimov, like Sagan, like all their excuse-makers, none of them could bring himself to say, "You make some good points. I overlooked that." No, Asimov and Dawkins simply engaged in attacking ME, failing to address the points I made. Sagan, on the other hand, greedily asked me to buy his newest book, overlooking the fact that I checked them all out at the public library, which by the way, invariably purchases Leftist books, but almost none on apologetics or by Christian authors. Librarians too have been brainwashed at Leftist socialist colleges. I had to borrow the book, The Irrational Atheist, by Vox Day, from the Library of Congress, since not one library outside of it had a copy to loan.

Q.E.D.

SAGAN WAS A SAD MIXTURE OF LAZINESS AND THICK-HEADEDNESS.

HE says in this book that he is absolutely not an atheist

Conversations with Carl Sagan By Carl Sagan with Tom HEad​

THen he says you have to depend on reason but gives up searching for an answer about God. A lazy man, that is how I saw him

​