You would also need to do quite a bit of 'ethnic paper cleansing', expel all Ukrainians with ties to Russia.
That would mean expelling close to 90% of the total population. Perhaps it is easier to expel the remaining 10%? Most of the ethnic minorities in Ukraine (Ruthenians, Moldovans, Hungarians, Roma, Gagauz.etc) also have strong ties to Russia. If they go to war with Russia, ethnic Russians will be the enemy. So I would expel Russians before going to war with Russia. You don't want enemy sympathizers on your territory during the war. Anyway, this will never happen. Russia will never allow for this. So sleep tight. The situation in Ukraine is very complicated. Most of the rebels are ethnic Ukrainians, who speak Russian. There are also other rebels, from the ethnic Russian and Greek communities, but they are a minority. The conflict in Ukraine is essentially between the Russian-speaking Eastern Ukrainians and the Galician-speaking Western Ukrainians. I agree it is complicated. The two nations have a long history of living together. Some people are born to 'Ukrainian' parents, but later in life speak Russian only. Some other people are born to 'Russian' parents, but later in life speak Ukrainian only. There also others who speak 'surjik', a mixture of both. This went on for generations. How can you identify who is Russian and who is Ukrainian? On top of that you have the politics of the region... A complete disaster. |
|
|
|
Why do Atheists hate Religion ?
LOL. What kind of question is that? I am an atheist, but i don't hate religion. I don't hate any religion and I respect people who believe in god. Religion and faith is a part of this world. People should have the freedom of choice. Hatred will not lead you anywhere. I think you just should reconsider something.
Its simple that not all atheist are thesame there are people who don't care about what people religion is. People should have still faith not just because you believed or what so ever but if you don't have faith its like your selling your soul to satanas lmao. Im not hater of atheist i loved them because how they can take it. without god. Some people need imaginary friends, some don't. You don't believe 5000+ Gods of the past. You believe in one God. I don't believe in one more God than you. That is the only difference between us. |
|
|
|
Assalamualaikum everyone.. I am Muslim and i have been using bitcoin for several months. I just learn bitcoin and i saw many a lot of devious scheme to earn bitcoin. Just like HYIP, PONZI, Gambling, Bet etc.I am very afraid of RIBA. therefore, for guidance and assistance will be appretiated Thanks  Welcome. I am an Atheist, I like to look at butterflies and have been using bitcoin for several years. LOL. I would not worry about RIBA. Make your money any way you can. Allah does not know what bitcoin are, if he did, he would put few verses about bitcoins in the Quran. Good luck. congratulations you're an atheist do you a person be trusted? LOL obviously you're not worrying that what is good and evil something in mixed god bless you I'm the most honest, trustworthy person you'd ever meet. Unlike you, trigger happy, taqiyya spewing, a-holes. I believe your religion prevents you from being honest, even with yourself. Be happy. Take care. |
|
|
|
Nope. It doesn't. Its shows that God breaks Newtons 3rd law How does it do that? We don't know anything about "stuff" outside of the universe. So how would anyone know that God breaks Newton's 3rd Law?  He had to have a cause. newtons 3rd law doesn't say anything about "outside of the universe"
God is from outside the universe. Newton's 3rd doesn't apply to God. We have no clue from just thinking about God whether or not he had a cause.  You are right. He is imaginary. |
|
|
|
Assalamualaikum everyone.. I am Muslim and i have been using bitcoin for several months. I just learn bitcoin and i saw many a lot of devious scheme to earn bitcoin. Just like HYIP, PONZI, Gambling, Bet etc.I am very afraid of RIBA. therefore, for guidance and assistance will be appretiated Thanks Welcome. I am an Atheist, I like to look at butterflies and have been using bitcoin for several years. LOL. I would not worry about RIBA. Make your money any way you can. Allah does not know what bitcoin are, if he did, he would put few verses about bitcoins in the Quran. Good luck. |
|
|
|
Wow, I just read her bio. Fuck me, call me Tracy. This biatch is a hardcore Christian lunatic. I hope you guys survive the next 4 years... |
|
|
|
Hate is fear.
Atheists simply hate fear what they can't comprehend.
Not really. I don't fear your imaginary friend. I don't give a flying puck about your nonsense and your God. I definitely do not fear any 'God'. Nothing to fear, he/she/it does not exist. Move on. If I were to meet him, I would punch the lights out of this motherfucker who caused so much misery in this world. You on the other hand have plenty to fear. You believe in this shit. Religious dogma is based on fear. Atheism is the opposite. |
|
|
|
The pollution is a real problem. You should not shit where you eat. Less intelligent animals understand this. But somehow humans don't.
Another problem is that our population growth is not restrained. Nothing on this planet can stop us from reproducing and exploiting the planet.
Even natural disasters do not stop us. We rebuild and reproduce. We are like a plague that cannot be eradicated.
We need a new planet or things will snowball for us.
I agree. We the humans are most responsible on what is happening on our planet. Uncontrollable population, abused of resources and environment etc. Earth without humans can thrive very well. Put man on the equation and he will manipulate all things LOL Its not too late, we should have to be discipline and should take care our environment. Plant trees,used and harness renewable energy,educate our fellowmen to take care of mother nature etc. I agree with you that it should be the ideal. But in fact each state has its own lobby that earns a lot of money on energy. They are not interested in the environment. Therefore, they do not want to introduce an alternative technology. You cannot easily change the human nature. We are hardwired to reproduce. Even if you reduce the demand, by changing the human behavior, you'll still be faced with an exponential population growth. That is the root of the problem. More people equals less resources and more pollution. It is a matter of when not if. We need a new planet. The other day, I heard Lawrence Krauss talking about some 'not so secret' project he is involved in to design a ship that can travel at 20% of the speed of light. He was not joking. It seems to me that it's fiction. If such technologies are available they will immediately take the military and we hear about the existence of them on the basis of the latest weapons. While I have not heard. Top theoretical physicists are working on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRNtcj6YRuclisten what he says around 1:31:20 or there abouts... Here is the project description: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Initiatives#Breakthrough_Starshot |
|
|
|
The pollution is a real problem. You should not shit where you eat. Less intelligent animals understand this. But somehow humans don't.
Another problem is that our population growth is not restrained. Nothing on this planet can stop us from reproducing and exploiting the planet.
Even natural disasters do not stop us. We rebuild and reproduce. We are like a plague that cannot be eradicated.
We need a new planet or things will snowball for us.
I agree. We the humans are most responsible on what is happening on our planet. Uncontrollable population, abused of resources and environment etc. Earth without humans can thrive very well. Put man on the equation and he will manipulate all things LOL Its not too late, we should have to be discipline and should take care our environment. Plant trees,used and harness renewable energy,educate our fellowmen to take care of mother nature etc. I agree with you that it should be the ideal. But in fact each state has its own lobby that earns a lot of money on energy. They are not interested in the environment. Therefore, they do not want to introduce an alternative technology. You cannot easily change the human nature. We are hardwired to reproduce. Even if you reduce the demand, by changing the human behavior, you'll still be faced with an exponential population growth. That is the root of the problem. More people equals less resources and more pollution. It is a matter of when not if. We need a new planet. The other day, I heard Lawrence Krauss talking about some 'not so secret' project he is involved in to design a ship that can travel at 20% of the speed of light. He was not joking. |
|
|
|
|
The pollution is a real problem. You should not shit where you eat. Less intelligent animals understand this. But somehow humans don't.
Another problem is that our population growth is not restrained. Nothing on this planet can stop us from reproducing and exploiting the planet.
Even natural disasters do not stop us. We rebuild and reproduce. We are like a plague that cannot be eradicated.
We need a new planet or things will snowball for us.
|
|
|
|
Personally I don't see any problem in people who are atheists. We have a freedom to choose who we believe in, what we believe in or if we believe in anything at all. We have different philosophies in our life and different point of views our choice is our, we should not judge them let just mind our own business.
Atheists generally do not create problems. As far as I know atheists are not provoked any armed conflict. Religions are constantly at war for the minds of citizens with weapons in their hands and persecute dissidents. You are right. People are resources to religions. They need to be exploited and fought for. |
|
|
|
Health and religion are not compatible. Religion offers to pray to God which is not. Perhaps it will help recovery. I do suggest the believers to conduct an experiment. Do not go to the doctors and pray to God. Or scared?
Religious beliefs are a form of delusion. So yes, it is a health issue. |
|
|
|
One more time, if you believe, hear or see something that other people don't see or hear, you are losing your mind.
OK, maybe some people are losing their minds, but in EVP, the voices are coming from an electronic device. Would you claim that these devices are losing their minds? Obviously false? Really? Please enlighten me. Yes, humanism is obviously false! It does not take much searching to find the overwhelming evidence. So what kind of effort have you put forward? Would you claim that all of the AECES top 40 cases have simple and obvious explanations? http://www.aeces.info/Top40/top40-main.shtmlI have not examined the 40 cases you have listed. Have you examined millions of cases of people dying never to be heard from again? You used the wrong word to describe your position. It is not obvious that there is life after death. What is obvious that there is no life after death. Why? Because everyone lost a family member and they experienced the fact that loss is permanent. That fact is obvious, not some 40 cases in a pdf file on some website. No, not everyone experienced that loss as permanent. Some were able to connect again with the dead. Others were able to witness the prior personality in a new living body. Lots of related evidence; time for you to do some reading: http://www.near-death.com/paranormal/deathbed-visions.htmlDid anyone who died in YOUR family came back? If the answer is no, how can you say the answer is obvious? If the answer is yes, I think you are suffering from some sort of the post dramatic disorder. Your brain is playing tricks on you. The human brain is an extremely complicated organ. But it needs energy to stay alive, it cannot function without it. Dying is a process, it takes time. Once complete, the outcome is irreversible. You think that the brain is playing tricks upon those who scribe inspired writings, but I think the whole of these writings are more consistent with the existence of a discarnate personality communicating with the incarnated. I have pointed to the paper "The Problem of Seth's Origin" as an example of analyzing evidence of this nature. This is an important paper in parapsychology literature and I also recommend "A Field Guide to Critical Thinking" for an introduction. I can actually say that the answer is obvious because of the wealth of evidence that I have linked to over and over again, particularly in discussions with you. Taking the evidence as a whole is important because many different fields of study unite in supporting what is now called the "survival hypothesis"; you can start with understanding strong cases (AECES top 40) or understanding modern theoretical physics or biology; NDE is only the start but you have ignored all evidence presented so far. There are even some banned TED talks that relate to the true relationship between mind and brain; it is obvious that mainstream atheism does not want the cat out of the bag. Everything in the universe is cyclical, and everything depends on awareness to be observed, so from this I observe that awareness is cyclical. That is how obvious we are talking about. If you conduct an Internet search of Pseudoscience, you will find page after page of skeptical articles condemning paranormal subjects and those who study them. They have been effective because today, several countries, including the USA, considers pseudoscience a clear and present danger to scientific progress. The result has been virtually no funding for research and rapid condemnation of academics who are brave enough to study anything paranormal unless they are seeking to understand the nature of the “paranormalist mental illness.” This growing suppression can be countered by a well-organized and paranormalist community speaking well-considered arguments for why the skeptics are wrong and why knowing about things paranormal is important to society. In fact parapsychological researchers are always working to overcome Unthinking and/or Unfounded Criticism on the part of others; this is probably the main issue faced by the people who are interested in things paranormal and people who are actively involved in the study of parapsychology, psychical research, hauntings investigations, survival and transcommunication. http://ethericstudies.org/trojan-horse/http://ethericstudies.org/introduction-to-community/Again, the ghosts, spirits, afterlife is not observable. An average person does not experience any of the paranormal activities. That is why I say it is not obvious to me and most people. People who experience paranormal activity, people who talk to ghosts or spirits are not well. It is plain and simple. Ask yourself this question, do you personally experienced any of the paranormal activity? Do you personally know anyone who did? There are 1% of people worldwide suffering from schizophrenia. The percentage of people suffering only from the 'paranormal perception disorder' is probably much smaller. I suspect some schizophrenics can talk to ghosts and spirits. That is the nature of their illness. |
|
|
|
I think that you should first ask yourself following question:
- What is definition of true?
- Who can decide about it?
I think that we all agree that god is true.
Many people believe that Jesus is also true person, perfect man.
If so, I think that only God can answer such question for us (or Jesus).
We are not perfect and therefore can't create something what is perfect.
It's logical conclusion.
One example. Why gold is so precious and important?
Because it's unchanging and perfect, created by God itself.
Do you really think that fallen human beings can create something perfect, and unchanging for million of years.
I don't think so.
So, unless God or Messiah create religion, there is no such thing as truest religion.
I disagree. I think 'God' is a made up story, so is Jesus aka Osiris. There is no such thing as God (no matter what the story is: Allah, Jesus, Yahweh, Zeus, etc.). If you think God is real, ask him to post here. See what happens. |
|
|
|
Thermodynamics 2nd law applies to an isolated system. Earth is not an isolated system. Entropy is not the same as complexity. If you use cause and effect argument, you need to provide a cause for God. God needs a cause or your argument is invalidated. You got anything else? Your God is really the 'unknown'. It is definitely not a blond haired, blue eyed, English speaking Jew. You would not have to 'believe' in something if there was a proof. |
|
|
|
First, the only argument that I might have is that I don't have any arguments. Second, anyone who doesn't accept the reality of the universe and what he does, says, and thinks therein, might have a hard time understanding the proof of the real God. Anybody who accepts the reality of the universe and what he does, says, and thinks therein, knows about the real God in his heart, even though he might not acknowledge Him. Or basically mumbo jumbo mumbo jumbo mah god iz d rl god I was just doing a seminar on Sumerian deities, and went across Enki instructing Atrahasis to build an arc to save people from a terrible flood 1000 years before Moses Moses just didn't have Enlil making the flood because he couldn't bear peoples noise (it prevented him from sleeping) Rewriting old stories can be found throughout the bible Sumerian dating is off. The earth is only about 6,000 to 6,200 years old. http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htmWhy don't you tattoo "6000 years old Earth" to your forehead? Why are you keep saying it? To convince yourself perhaps. So if Earth is 6000 years old then the Stone Age did not happen, right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeolithicYou guys are worse than Neo-Nazis in re-writing human history. It would be way more appropriate if you tattooed "stone age" to your forehead, since you are unwilling to look at the fact that stone age is simply some made-up stuff by some scientists(?). You say it happened because you want it to have happened that way. That's all the truth and backing you have for it. Even your own people say this in their papers. But the Bible record, which is essentially a miracle in its existence, you want to ignore. You jokers are way out of touch with reality. EDIT: If you ever wanted to get serious, you would recognize that God exists. You haven't been able to rebut the laws that I show. Rather, you talk all around it. The laws of the universe show that Something as great as God is what made the universe. So you think scientists make things up? Why? Because they are evil and want to destroy your Osiris fairy tale? The physical artifacts of Stone Age cultures are all over the world. You are deluded. What?! You don't think that scientists make stuff up? Haven't you ever see science theories? They are all over the place. What do you think science theories are? Facts?? You seem to want to ignore the obvious that is right in front of you. The Stone Age people are all over the world here and there, still using stones. There never was a time when the Stone Age did not exist. The problem lies in the way that many scientists describe the Stone Age... a ficticious way. Why are you trying to ignore part of the facts, and trying to replace them with things that are not facts? Is it because that is what many scientists do... and the universities, and the media? I think you are right. You are an excellent example. |
|
|
|
Check the Bible for the description of O.T. King David. He was ruddy in appearance, probably a redhead or blonde. Jesus was a physical descendant of David's. We don't know that today's M.E. people are exemplary of people 2,000 years ago. A redhead or a blonde in Israel? What the fuck Are you serious?  I gave you the reasoning. Bible history shows that this may easily have been so. Bible history? Bible is a bunch of horseshit: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1367154.0You guys should take out the obvious BS. |
|
|
|
Science and religion are essentially one and the same thing and can be used interchangeably in any context.
Where do you people get such ideas? Science is about finding the truth via evidence & experimentation, and correctly predicting future results (like cosmic background radiation) Religion is about telling stories which are bullshit, have zero scientific merit, and are not capable of predicting anything You're not looking at it from a fundamental perspective. Both religion and science are systems of belief/faith. You believe in science, you believe in God. Getting on a plane and while not fully understanding how it all works, requires what would qualify as 'faith'. Taking a pill when ill, requires faith in science because you have no idea how the chemicals work. Both science and religion are systems of reason. Religion is not random, it follows a logic. Both science and religion rely on assumptions. No experiment/test in science can ever be truly conclusive. You can perform a test a million times and get the exact same result every time but there is absolutely no guarantee that on the million and one attempt, you'll get the expected result. Since there is no way to test something infinitely, science assumes a particular result to be true after a finite number of tests. That is why nothing in science is set in stone, theories that were once thought to be complete can still be improved upon as more tests are performed and new findings are uncovered. we first describe what is science and what is religion. Science is basing on the fact and has its own experiment to prove something. conducting a scientific experiment is a good thing to prove something that has to be proven. while religion, some are true and science also proved that some of the saids in the bible was true but some is just cant proved. they just believe it by faith. Same with science theory. Science theory is not known to be factual. If it were, it would be science law and not science theory. Anyone who believes that science theory is factual has a science religion in that belief. Science theories are validated by a direct observation. No belief is required. |
|
|
|
.....
Answer this:
Was the Earth created by God 6000-7000 years ago?
Was the universe created by God in 6 days?
Did God create man from dirt?
Did God create the first woman (Eve) from Adam's rib bone?
If the answer to any of the above is a resounding YES, then we have nothing to talk about. You just need to double your medication and stay away from guns or heavy machinery.
There are two more school of thoughts agnostic and gnostic. * Those who believe God require to "believe" in things/explanation mentioned religious book. To accept something without any proof without verification is to Believe. This causes problem for people who have habit of logical thinking and verification. All religions have different set of believe about God and relation of God with other. * Those who don't believe in God doesn't have explanation or answer for many phenomenon like How universe was created exactly. Interestingly those who accept this that they don't have definitive answer and are working on the same. Watching or reading George Carlin helps in solving majority Whether God exists or not. I like his comparison of God to Joe Pesi. |
|
|
|
Every time I comment on this thread the first person to respond to me thinks that I'm talking about Christianity and the god that they recognize, and it pisses me off. I'm not talking about Christianity, Islam, or fucking Hinduism. I'm talking about the idea of some sort of higher power/being or "god", and the absolute fact that you cannot say for certain as you proclaim there is a god or there is no god. Please, please, please read this. Stop right now and take away all of your preconceptions about me, religion and agnosticism. Please just read this devoid of emotion and tell me if it doesn't make sense. Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle. That principle is of great antiquity; it is as old as Socrates; as old as the writer who said, 'Try all things, hold fast by that which is good'; it is the foundation of the Reformation, which simply illustrated the axiom that every man should be able to give a reason for the faith that is in him, it is the great principle of Descartes; it is the fundamental axiom of modern science. Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic position, which if a man keep whole and undefiled, he shall not be ashamed to look the universe in the face, whatever the future may have in store for him.
The results of the working out of the agnostic principle will vary according to individual knowledge and capacity, and according to the general condition of science. That which is unproved today may be proved, by the help of new discoveries, tomorrow. The only negative fixed points will be those negations which flow from the demonstrable limitation of our faculties. And the only obligation accepted is to have the mind always open to conviction.
That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.”
― Thomas Henry Huxley
My beliefs are solely based off the logic that is explained in this quote. Please don't call yourself an atheist (as I'm assuming you do) and instead take to the agnostic position, as any logical person would have to do. It's a beautiful philosophy to live by: In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic position, which if a man keep whole and undefiled, he shall not be ashamed to look the universe in the face, whatever the future may have in store for him. Do not twist the issue. There is absolutely no evidence that any supernatural being exists or ever existed. All the religious dogmas are just pure, utter nonsense. If you want to have an honest, philosophical discussion about 'higher power/force', ok, fine here is one thing you have to remember: There is no time for 'God' to exist in before the Big Bang. So rest assured there is no God before the Big Bang. And nobody ever detected any 'God/higher power' in this reality, so whatever you are basing your 'agnostic' position on is based on your dreams and wishful thinking. You didn't acknowledge what I said. Please read again. In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. Just because it's never been detected doesn't mean no one ever will. That's just common sense, right? Nothing is ever discovered until it's... discovered, no? Also, your assumption about the big bang being the very beginning is only that... an assumption. Others have made assumptions too that go against that theory. http://discovermagazine.com/2013/september/13-starting-pointThe big Bang theory looks much more persuasive than a fairy tale called the Bible. It seems to me that this is similar to what you'd be offered a ride in the first Ford and don't drive new cars because they did not have before. I do not believe in big bang theory. Can you prove to me that it is true ? Are you there when it happened? There is more truth in the bible than your big bang theory. The reason why God cannot be proven by science is because we are not god. Only God can prove that he is God. Bible is not a book of reason and scientific discovery it is a book of faith. Answer this: Was the Earth created by God 6000-7000 years ago? Was the universe created by God in 6 days? Did God create man from dirt? Did God create the first woman (Eve) from Adam's rib bone? If the answer to any of the above is a resounding YES, then we have nothing to talk about. You just need to double your medication and stay away from guns or heavy machinery. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
