Um, yeah, if you have a high school grasp of history.
If you knew anything about Galileo, you’d know that he believed the earth goes around the sun because it has to for the sun to cause the tides. Truth. Everyone else believed that the moon causes the tides–and had for centuries. One of the greatest discoveries occurred because he was trying to find proof for one of the most lame-assed ideas ever to come out of a great scientist.
Worse, there were great mathematical predictive models for the solar system based around the idea that the sun and planets go around the earth. What did Galileo come up with? Well, eventually, he saw some moons around another planet…or he saw some blurry globs the *might be* moons around a planet. Turned out he was right–they were moons–but at that point, the good money was on the theory that actually had, you know, some math backing it up. His improvement of the telescope and his real and impressive contributions to the study of mechanics were his real contributions. The whole sun-earth thing was a kind of embarrassment in context. And he got in trouble for writing a really horrible hit piece making fun of his friend, who happened to be the pope and had just given him special permission to continue his publications after he’d already be told to cut it out by the previous pope for being an ass. Remember that the universities were a part of the church. (“I don’t care who’s right. You idiots need to stop name calling and go do something else,” was pretty much the content of the papal bull.) He got in trouble not for scientific debate but for being a complete and utter, unbearable ass.
For those of you who don’t really “get” history: Imagine someone who makes House look like a warm, fussy teddy bear who is happy to live and let live.
Want to give some credit? Give it to Kepler. He’s the one who put some math into the wild speculations and curious but overall unconvincing observations.
Finally somebody shows the world how ignorant we are. I mean think about it… Crusaders who used to kill in the name of Christ or whatever. Oh and that Hitler gay..I.. I mean guy who slaughtered Jews and Blacks etc, he was Christian too. Oh..and don’t forget Popes that molest Children.
Nah, Trolls are attracted to any chance to show their ignorance over the difference between what Christianity actually says to do and what stupid humans actually do in the name of their religion.
In the end, it’s about the human element, not the religion itself.
Religion (or god itself) doesn’t exist without the human element.
Religion was created by humans, the bible was written by humans, so religion and human element can’t be separated because the former doesn’t exist without the latter.
The bible was written by men who were inspired by God. Just because a man says he does something in the name of God, now, it doesn’t mean God agrees with him. God only inspires people through his word now, not through miracles. The bible says ‘where there were miracles, they have ceased. I am a Christian and I think this post is hillarious. I believe science is one of the beautiful creations of God. He set the plan in motion and we evolved, change, bettered, sometimes worsened ourselves to become who we are now. I agree this is a great argument. It is nice to finally hear intelligent debate instead of namecalling.
If we, people, created clones, we would be tangible, living things. We wouldn’t necessarily be “Gods” because we don’t choose the fate of them, but much rather just gave them life. If they were clones they would be able to conjure more clones like we have; we’re doing nothing more special than what they are, thus not godly.
You’re comparing two complete opposite things: tangible versus an idea. I believe something could have stirred us into the process of which we are now, but only to the equivalent of me putting seamonkey eggs into water.
dumbyodaddy: “You’re comparing two complete opposite things: tangible versus an idea. I believe something could have stirred us into the process of which we are now, but only to the equivalent of me putting seamonkey eggs into water.”
Not really. The analogy was intended to show that the existence of a god is not dependent on the beliefs of human beings.
If humans were to create “clones” (or any intelligent life, for that matter) and those clones called us “gods” — their belief that “gods” exist has no bearing on whether or not those gods actually exist.
Playing a pitiful linguistic game with the definition of the word “god” does nothing to help your point.
“Religion (or god itself) doesn’t exist without the human element.
Religion was created by humans, the bible was written by humans, so religion and human element can’t be separated because the former doesn’t exist without the latter.”
And again the issue went over your head.
What Christianity as a doctrine and a religion teaches is a separate thing from what any “Christian” purports to do with those teachings, or actually does “in the name of” those teachings.
It’s akin to a libertarian calling himself a socialist. The title is meaningless when the actions and beliefs are incongruous.
I think the the base of the argument is that god does not exist as defined by the bible, so god does not exist as anything but a fictional character in a book, which is where some numskulls get “we created god” from. But just because we imagined it doesn’t mean we created it, because we certainly didn’t create the god portrayed in the bible.
Now as for whether or not a clone, or child, or any other creation would consider their parent a god, I agree it is just a word game. Though in the area of playing with the definition of god I think Einstein had an interesting idea…
According to some religions god does not care wether you belive in him or not as long as you are not evil he will let you live a go about your life and go to heaven your statement is invalid.
as children, our kids do see us as gods.. in their eyes, we CAN do anything. It’s only as they grow older, see us for our fallibility to we lose the god status. As they grow older, getting closer to their own godhood (if they choose to have a child) do they realize that parents do have a certain godlike quality after all. Based on a parents forgiving nature, ability to be a savior to a child in trouble, and depth and breadth of knowledge, does the child puts their parent back into a godhood status, and thus gain their own godhood status, thus keeping up the cycle.
Same with religion. When people get intelligent enough, they see the failibility of religious stories, and become atheist.
Though a lot of people never reach that point where they are honest and intelligent enough.
We don’t really “create” science, unless you’re talking medical science. A lot of science is just observations and discoveries (like say finding out the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around)
So yes, it would still be doing that even if we were not around.
And how did God create science JME? He created something that allowed us to find that the earth is over 65 million years old, rather than the 6000 like the Bible says? Yea, way to overlook blatant contradictions to your faith. Blindingly following, just like the Nazis did with Hitler.
The Bible does not say that miracles have ceased. Please give the verse you are attempting to reference. The only one that comes to mind is I Corinthians 13:8 regarding when the perfect comes (when Christ returns). God hasn’t changed – miracles still happen. If you find Christian friends who know this, you will see examples of it in their lives. Jesus said those who believe in him will do even greater miracles than he.
Science makes God obsolete. Even if there were a supreme being, who gave the universe and humanity its start, why would He create something that would make his power useless? There are no miracles to witness now, so clearly a hypothetically existent god is no longer physically active in our world, also witnessed by how every phenomenon has a logical explanation. So basically, christianity taken out of context states that a supreme being created a world and a superior species, then made himself obsolete, and then waited for this species to recognize and worship him, who now lacked any evidence for his existence, and whom logic would find faulty?
Oh, good. Since God knows all, his laws would be timeless. So, I have a question for you. I have a daughter. She’s 12 and does very good at school. How much do you think I can get for her? (Leviticus 25:44, Exodus 21:20, Titus 2:9). Also, I’ve got a little problem with my wife. She insists on working on Sunday. Can I kill her myself, or should I call the cops to do it for me? (Exodus 31:15). My 15 year old daughter has a habit of saying “oh my God!” And she doesn’t always respect us, her parents. Is there any particular way I should put her to death? (Leviticus 20:9, and 24:16, Deut 21). Just one more question. I’m told that God hates abortion, yet the Bible itself gives us explicit instructions on how to rip pregnant women open to make sure we kill the babies, too. Can you explain? (Isaiah 13, Numbers 31, Hosea 13)
Yes, but science expects this to happen.
Plus, the church isn’t as flexable about these things as most scientists are, especially back when Galileo was around.
Yes, of course science changes, but no real scientist has any problems with adapting their theories. The point is that there are some stupid people who still think that whatever is written in the Bible 2000 years ago is truth because it’s ‘Gods word’.
I don’t deny the fact that I know little. I believe you’re referring to an Agnostic, since Atheism is defined as…
Atheist:a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
it’s as easy as that. Yes of course we all have and support other theories of the mysteries of the universe, but when it comes down to it…Atheism is just denying any god or gods.
Atheism is not based on faith. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods due to insufficient evidence. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies? Is faith that you don’t believe in unicorns or goblins. No, you don’t believe in them because no one as ever proven their existence. Likewise I don’t believe in god because i see know evidence for one. The burden of proof is on the Theists. Until they can prove that any type of god exist, I will continue to not believe in them.
This argument isn’t worth it, as sheep will continue to be sheep. Believing in something that isn’t real, devoting their s**tty lives to a higher power only to be completely disappointed when there is no afterlife.
I agree that it can be disheartening at times when the other side seems to only to project their notion of what they think you believe instead of trying to understand (or even ask) what it is that you really believe. But I think it most certainly is worth it, as it was these very same arguments proposed to me that lead me to eventually breaking free from Christianity as well as Theism all together
we devot our lives to god happily. but if there is no go then there is no afterlife. then there is no regret for us. but there will be for you when you burn in the eternal hellfire
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA-wait, you are using sarcasm right? Even if you are not, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA….oh I love when the comments turn to this, although I prefer debating gay marriage.
If you devote your life to God (I assume you just don’t use punctuation, although it’s very odd that a Godly person would forget to do so. Troll?), you are missing out on MANY life options. You cannot experience guilt-free sex with more than one person, you can’t experiment with drugs every once in awhile, you can’t practice homosexuality (even if, deep down, you know that you are), you can experience the wonder of OTHER religions and OTHER beliefs, etc.
And see, if this is the only life you have, and there IS no afterlife, you’re screwed. You wasted your ONLY life missing out on all the good stuff just because you thought God existed. And see, to me, that’s really missing out.
Secondly, if the “ONE GOD” does exist, I would rather go to hell anyway. If God treats people as horribly as the religious believe, I want NOTHING to do with him! He is a selfish, jealous, childish God! I would rather spend eternity with the devil, in hell, where sin is a-okay, then spend eternity praising a God like that in a place where NO sin is allowed.
Besides, if you really want to get into the bibilical stories, I think you can quickly see that 1) the devil actually starts to seem like the ‘good guy’ and 2) in Job, god DIRECTLY WORKS with the devil to make humans miserable. It sounds like they are good DRINKING BUDDIES in this book, man.
I’m not religious, but there’s really no reason for experimenting with drugs. That was a pretty bad argument and I think you should have done better. There’s no point to that at all and it’s just plain dumb. And I don’t know what your views on sex are, but it seemed like you were saying that people are supposed to have sex with a lot of people or else they weren’t living life. That’s really shallow and I think you should have done better on that too. You made it seem like non-religious people LIKE to do bad things. If you want to defend us, try not to make us look bad.
Actually, simply put, you’re wrong. Christianity varies widely in beliefs, and what you are saying you /necessarily cannot do/ is not something that all of us believe in.
Lets see. Starting from the beginning
“You cannot experience guilt-free sex with more than one person” False. I am religious – I go to church weekly, I am sure about my beliefs and have strong beliefs. And I have in fact, been part of a threesome before. And it was not at all against my personal religion and not something I have any guilt about.
“you can’t experiment with drugs every once in awhile” – I have absolutely no interesting in experimenting with drugs, so while I have not, it is not because of my religion.
“you can’t practice homosexuality” – Again, simply False. There are openly gay bishops, openly gay priests, and so on. A friend of mine is openly gay, goes to the same church that I do and many of the other members of the church know that he is gay because he brought his boyfriend to church.
“you can experience the wonder of OTHER religions and OTHER beliefs, etc.” Yes. I in fact, do not know what it is like to believe something that is not what I believe. This is in fact, true whether you are religious or not. You actually are making a good point of that, what with the “all religion is evil.”
“And see, if this is the only life you have, and there IS no afterlife.” – There is no proof of that, just as there is no proof of an afterlife – either the existence or non-existence is entirely based on faith. The faith you so strongly proclaim is an absolutely terrible thing you are using here.
“You wasted your ONLY life missing out on all the good stuff just because you thought God existed.”
No there is nothing I feel like I am missing. It can’t be sex, because I am in a strongly sexual relationship. It can’t be alcohol seeing as my boyfriend and I have a shelf of alcohol in our apartment. It can’t be living and sleeping with the person that I love, because I am doing so despite the fact that we’re not married. It can’t be drugs, seeing as the slightest whiff of pot smoke makes me physically ill and have a migraine. And yet, despite having these “good stuff” I have a strong belief in God, and have a strengthened life when it is hard because of having faith.
“If God treats people as horribly as the religious believe, I want NOTHING to do with him!”
Unconditional love is horrible and you don’t want it?
” He is a selfish, jealous, childish God! ”
Even if you want to argue that about the Old Testament, I personally believe in the Bible not as rules to live by but stories to learn from – even though I believe that the stories are true, I do not believe we should blindly follow.
“then spend eternity praising a God like that in a place where NO sin is allowed.”
God does not expect us to be perfect, and he loves us despite our imperfections. We are expected to make mistakes, apologize for them, try to be better people, and make mistakes again.
I am perfectly happy here with my faith with full knowledge that others will believe otherwise. I am fully aware than my personal beliefs are only my own. However, despite having beliefs which include reincarnation, I believe in one God and that Jesus Christ died for our sins, so am simply put a Christian who has came up with a set of beliefs rather than blindly arguing that there cannot be a God, nor blindly following the teachings of a church made up of humans.
Jenna, life is about having lots of sex with different people. For guys anyway. One of the main functions of the male brain is that after a guys been having sex with one girl for too long to reduce the amount of pleasure and arousal he can have with that female, as well as increase attraction to others so as to increase the amount of women he impregnates. Why do you think most species are polygamous? Its the most effective way for one species to survive. And while this may not agree with modern social standards, its still a fact.
Ha! Do me a favor and google “Bad Faith”. When you believe in something because the consequences of not believing in it and it turning out to be true are negative, but the consequence of believing in it and it tunring out to not be true are null, then that, my dear, is worse then having no faith at all. Having faith is believing in something regardless of the consequences…
fool..
so you waste 2 hours a week for your *entire* life, so that if a cosmic jewish zombie that will save your soul etc. *does exist* you get to spend eternity with no meaning or goals? what makes life precious for those who live it is knowing there is an end. There is no end to heaven, I would rather enjoy my time on earth and go to hell with all my friends than waste my time, and go to heaven for eternity with righteous sheep.
There is no eternal hellfire. The bible does not ever say that anyone will ever burn in eternal hellfire…. so actually, no even if athiests are right they won’t burn in eternal hellfire, they’ll just die, exactly as they expect.
You do have a very literal point, they can’t be disappointed when there’s no afterlife because they can’t have a thought process. Sooo yep pretty much! So they may as well be disappointed now, and give all their time, money, sweat and blood to the church now. They will HAPPILY take massive amounts of donations to convince you there is an afterlife, and what your doing is worth a higher cause. Hahahahahahahahaha. I pity the fool
ben: “Atheism is not based on faith. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods due to insufficient evidence. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies?”
Stupidity is a disease on these boards, isn’t it?
Atheism is as much a “religious belief” as Christianity because it dogmatically asserts a “religious” proposition about the divine nature of the universe.
“insufficient evidence…i see know evidence for one”
Evidently you’re not well versed in the debates about theism.
Reach back into history and you’ll find proofs for the existence of a god based on pure reason, empirical data, and even on the simple force of logical necessity.
“burden of proof is on the Theists”
Not really.
The burden of proof is on whoever makes an assertion. If the atheist says “there is no god” his claim stands in as much need of proof as when the theist claims that there is a god.
Dumbyodaddy=retard: “Stupidity is a disease on these boards, isn’t it?”
Starting off right away with the petty insults huh? Pathetic and unnecessary. If you arguments were as good as you say they are, then you would have no need for such petty remarks. You aren’t off to a good start but lets continue anyway.
“Atheism is as much a “religious belief” as Christianity because it dogmatically asserts a “religious” proposition about the divine nature of the universe.”
No atheism is not a religious belief. Nor is a position and stance or a world view. It is simply a response to a claim. The claim being “There is a god”. Nothing dogmatic about it. If evidence is presented that leads me to believe otherwise then I will change my response. I accept the notion that i could be wrong. Can you say that about yourself?
“Evidently you’re not well versed in the debates about theism.”
Oh I am. This subject is nothing new to me and I am well versed with the arguments from both sides.
“Reach back into history and you’ll find proofs for the existence of a god based on pure reason, empirical data, and even on the simple force of logical necessity.”
I find it very telling that you don’t provide any such evidence, you merely just make the assertion that it exists. Please share with us this plethora of evidence if you have it. I would love see it. Really I would. Because in all my dealings with so called religious, it has either been circular logic or baseless assertions. If you have something more I would be glad to take a look at it.
“The burden of proof is on whoever makes an assertion.”
I agree.
“f the atheist says “there is no god” his claim stands in as much need of proof as when the theist claims that there is a god.”
Again i agree. However I have never made such claims nor has any atheist i have ever met. I don’t claim god absolutely does not exist. In fact I even accept that there is a possibility that he does exist. However I see evidence to support such notion and until I do then I have no justifiable reason to believe that he does.
Atheism denies any assertions that dogmatically gives any propositions about any divine nature of the universe. Atheism is per definition a person who doesn’t relate to ANY theism’s what so ever.
I can agree on your statement if you referred to Humanists.
An atheist does not disbelieve in God, because for a atheist “god” is nothing more than an idea, like Santa clause or any other fantastical figure. Religious people have a difficulty realising this because for them God is more than an idea, the believe in him, so they look at an atheists disbelief in God as a belief in it self.
And the burden of proof lies on the person that comes with a fantastical theory. It is impossible to disprove of something that’s not observable, the burden lies on those who says there is a fantastical Omnipotent being, to prove it. Not on those who says it cant possibly be true.
I would like to see any logical proof of the existance of god that hasnt yet been disproven.
Thank you. So much. I hate it when people say that atheism is based on faith when it’s not. It’s based on the LACK OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. Those who devote their lives to “God,” they seem to lose all rational thought. And what really gets me is that the theists can’t prove the existence of God without using God in their justification. It’s a pity how so many people lose sight of reality because “God” says it’s wrong…
No. Agnostism is based on lack of sufficient evidence. Atheism is based off of faith. It takes just as much faith to say that there is necessarily not a god as to say that there is one. It doesn’t take faith to only say that they don’t know if there is a god and don’t want to act as if there is one without there being evidence that there is one.
And truthfully, neither a theist or an atheist will be able to prove the existence or lack there of a god, this is why it is a matter of faith in either direction. So, yes, they won’t be able to prove the existence of God, it wouldn’t be based on faith if they could – but this doesn’t negate the theists faith or the atheists faith. Both sides can choose what they want to believe.
Atheist comes from the root word Atheos. A- meaning without and Theos- meaning god. Theism is defined as a belief in a god or gods. Atheism (remember that A means without) literally translates as “without a belief in a god or gods”. So an atheist is someone who LACKS a belief in a god, period. No faith required. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies.? Is it faith that you don’t believe in the boogeyman or the Tooth Fairy? No it isn’t. The reason no one believes in these things is because there is no evidence to support their existence. It is not my responsibility to prove that god DOESN’T exist. Its the theists responsibility to prove that he DOES. They make the claim, they have to provide the evidence to support it. Until they do I have no justifiable reason to believe that he does. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE FAITH!
What? It’s already been explained well previously that Atheism is not a lack of faith because it asserts a belief about the nature of the universe.
In being an Atheist, you are putting across the position that it is POSSIBLE TO KNOW that there is no God, which requires a level of belief and/or faith not dissimilar to the level required to feel that it is possible to know that there IS a God (I.E Theism).
“Lack of faith” is more accurately said about Agnostics because they feel it is impossible to truly know whether there is a God or not; if you doubt the viability of religion to the point where you’re almost sure there is no God, but still feel that you can’t prove it / know for certain, you are Agnostic.
Thats is arguing out of a religious point of view. But an Atheist is someone who lacks faith what so ever, he is not some one who dos’nt belive in god, he lacks any belife in a god. God is nothing more than a fantastical mythological tale.
Religous people have a hard time undrestanding this because they belive in a “god” so when an Atheist says he doesnt belive in god, offcourse a religous person wholud chalck that up to faith aswell. But one needs to look from the other point of view.
I my self as an Atheist rely on purely rational observable things, if you want to give me a belief it’s the belief in the rational and irrational human behaviour, and the randomness of our world. Now thats more like a philosophy than a religion.
I’m not religious, I’m agnostic, and it’s not that I don’t understand, it’s that you don’t understand the distinction between what defines an Atheist as opposed to an Agnostic.
Which I’ll repeat is, in Atheism’s case, an outwards belief that God is non-existent, whereas Agnosticism is the belief that it is impossible to know, which encompasses ‘lack of faith’.
Atheism is a set of beliefs, not a LACK OF a set of beliefs. Agnosticism fits under ‘lack of belief’, NOT ATHEISM.
No. Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism/Gnosticism deals with knowledge. Atheism is not a set of beliefs, a position, or a world view. It is a response to a claim. The claim being “there is a god.”I see no evidence for a god so i have no belief ( or I lack a belief) in a one. That makes me Atheist. I also don’t think that we will ever know whether or not god exists for sure. That makes me Agnostic. I am an Agnostic Atheist. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
I can agree that agnosticism is’nt about faith it’s about knowledge, he isn’t sure and leaves all options open.
An Atheist is an A theist, someone who disbelives the theos. To put it another way, mere disbelief in the truth of a proposition is not equivalent to the belief that the proposition is false and that the opposite is true. If you make a claim and I disbelieve it, I am not necessarily saying that your claim is false. I may not understand it well enough to say one way or the other. I may lack enough information to test your claim. I may simply not care enough to think about it. Thus Atheism is’nt build on faith but the lack off. Then again you have diffrent grades, All Christians are strongly atheistic towards the other religions f.eks. And you can be atheistic towards some gods and agnostic towards others etc.
Your both wrong! Hitler created his own religion based on old folklore, Norse mythology and a bit of Christianity. The Nazi sent Christians to their death camps as well, and Christmas was forbidden in Germany.
Wow, how can anyone who knows a little history or has ever seen a picture of Hitler believe he is Muslim??? Apart from that he is Austrian where most people are Christians.
Step one: type in http://www.facebook.com into your URL bar, up there ^. Step two: write in the name of some famous historic dude, and fill out random information. Step three: make more accounts of people from the same historic event. Step three: act it out.
actually, the sun and the earth revolve around each other’s mutual gravitational center, which is closer to the sun than to the earth, but not quite the center of the sun.
Umm what? The sun and the earth do NOT have a “mutual” gravitational center. I have no idea where you got that from. The earth revolves around the sun, the sun revolves around our galaxy.
umm duh! the sun’s gravity pulls on the earth, and the earth in turn pulls back on the sun. this causes the point of rotation to be pulled slightly toward the earth. it’s basic astrophysics. shut up, go home, look it up.
Wrong again. If you had study basic astrophysics you would undoubtedly come across Einstein’s general relativity. And in general relativity, gravity is not a force (which means it has no “pull”) but is instead a curved space/time geometry where the source of curvature is the stress-energy tensor (i.e. matter). So the path of a planet (in this case Earth) orbiting around a star (our sun) is the projection of a geodesic of the curved 4-D space/time geometry around the star onto 3-D space. In other words, the reason Earth revolves around the sun is because we are following the the curvature of space that has been warped by the sun
Well since the definition of “force” is mass X acceleration, and gravity is the quantifiable attraction (acceleration) and relationship between two masses, then ipso facto gravity is a force. And since Earth would warp spacetime in the same manner as the sun, you’d still get a slight curvature toward the earth at the sun. If you look at the way two stars in a binary system interact, you’ll notice one doesn’t rotate around the other, but in fact they rotate around a “point” between them. The distance to this point from one of the stars would be proportional to the distribution of mass between the two stars. In a closed system, if the 2 stars massed the same, the point would be in the middle. If one star was twice as massive, the distance from that star to the point would be half the distance of the point to the smaller star. Now replace the two stars with the earth and the sun. The relationship would still hold. This isn’t just happening with the earth and the sun, but with the entire solar system. The solar system is in a state of gravitational resonance. I can’t say you’re wrong, but I can say you are not completely correct. ^.^
I responded to this guy too, but it got lost in the cheezburger networkz. I think that it’s because you posted something near the same time. I hate you.
Ok, I understand that but remember that the mass of the earth and the sun are drastically different. In comparison the mass of the sun is 332,900 times that of the Earth. So the effect is dramatically different than seen in binary star systems. The sun and the earth’s common center of mass ( the gravitational point that binary stars rotate around) is still located at the sun. So the sun isn’t really rotating around that point. Its merely wobbling around which cause a change in its radial velocity. But now i understand where you were coming from
Because, you know, general relativity isn’t in conflict with any other physics fields or anything. Anyone can regurgitate the teachings of their college professor, but that doesn’t make you right. With a basic study of multivariable calculus (dem surfaces (cuz of space + a dimension of time) and s**tz), you would undoubtedly come across this. In the words of Weird Al + that Newton mofo:
“My pancreas attracts every other pancreas in the universe with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. Wooahooawooo.”
There actually is a point of gravitational equilibrium between Earth and the Sun – it’s just that it’s very near the Sun’s core, so we can ignore our effect on its orbit around the galactic center. However, this phenomenon is what makes it possible to detect planets orbiting other stars – watch for the wobble in their paths caused by the gravitational attraction of their own planets…
OTOH, that’s not what relativity means; in this particular case, the rotational frames of reference for Earth and Sun are close enough to identical, so Einsteinian relativity doesn’t enter into it. (The term has more to do with relative passage of time as one enters regions of greater space/time curvature, such as near a very large mass or approaching the speed of light.)
Leaving observation out of the picture, the most accurate, factual statement that can be made is that both the Sun and the Earth (and all the other planets in our solar system) are orbiting a common barycenter of gravity which happens to be approx 30,000 kilometers above the core of Sun (the location of the barycentre varies a bit depending on which planet you’re talking about. For Earth it’s 30,000 km).
In the same way, the Moon-Earth system is orbiting a common center of gravity which happens to be 1707 kilometers below the surface of the Earth (the core is 6,378 kilometers down, so the Moon does *not* precisely orbit the center of gravity of the Earth).
And the Sun-Galaxy also has a barycentre..which is very close to the galactic core.
if you’ve read it, and don’t believe it was well written, I respect that… if you decide it isn’t well written without reading it… well… maybe not so respectable
OMG ur such a f*cked up reader. it say’s Answers In Genesis, not Answerin Genesis… plz lern to read! (and dont evan think bout sayin that my spellling is sh*t)!!!
So you question my competency in reading because I simply forgot to type “s”? LOL. (Also, nice try at goading me with your obvious misspelling of “even”)
i hate atheists. u all r just a bunch of attention seekers. u say “omg look at me, i pity u, theres no god and no religion and stuffz.” atcually, i pity u. u have nothing to beleive. dont u have nothing better to do than trying to prove that theres no god or something liek that… well, i guesss i gave u enough attention for 2day. LOL…
People that hate atheists are, by necessity, non-atheists who are terribly afraid that atheists are right, but are not willing to admit it.
I’m a staunch monotheist. Follower of Christ (yeah, the 3-in-1 type of monotheist). I happen to love atheists, even the kind that make a habit if insulting people like me— the Richard Dawkins types. I love them because they are a fellow human. Whether or not they agree with me is a secondary issue altogether.
Those non-atheists around here that are haters need to mature and understand that, from YOUR OWN WORLDVIEW you should understand that every human is created in the image of the same God as you are.
You have no grounds for hating, nor for mutilating the English language on purpose.
We see the Troll in its natural habitat, intent on observing the reaction of others when it leaves its poop for the brains consumption, and carefully observe its futile attempts to attract a mate. We at killtehtrolls will work tirelessly to annihilate this shockingly quickly breeding species of rodent, for the benefit of humanity.
Actually, what Galileo taught that the Church found offensive was that Earth was not the still center of the universe, and the Heavens weren’t invariant – the same thing Bruno Giordano had been burned at the stake for a century earlier. Galileo was able to back up his statement with observation of the four largest satellites of Jupiter, which is why he was able to get away with merely being censured by the Pope, rather than being executed as a heretic.
The shape and size of the Earth was proved during the height of the Greek civilization. Columbus was in fact wrong – he did his math poorly, and thought the Earth was merely 5000 miles around, rather than the accepted (and more accurate) figure of 25,000. He thought he could sail to the Indies more quickly by going west than by going east around Africa. Had it not been for the fact that a great hurking unsuspected continent lay athwart his path, Columbus and his men might well have been lost at sea due to his foolishness…
Nicolaus Copernicus was actually the first astronomer to propose a heliocentric model of the universe, it’s called the Copernican Revolution hope you learned something today.
If you were taught that Columbus discovered that the Earth was round in your school, I pity you. No other school teaches that at all. If you were just making a random example, you’re a fool. Nobody thinks that Columbus discovered that the Earth was round.
Right. I think the first one to actually prove it and make an accurate aproximation of it’s size (circunference) was Eratosthenes of Cyrene about 200 years BC. And he only got that worng because he didn’t had the distance between the two cities he used quite right. But, consideringit was 200 BC i still think it’s pretty awsome.
Exactly, no educated individual believes Columbus discovered the earth was round, it’s posts like John M’s that make me hate religion/religious zealots, he should go be a martyr in another war started by religion.
He was referring to the commonly mistaught idea that columbus (and everyone else alive at his time) thought the world was flat, not that columbus himself discovered it was round. I know this is a common mistake because pretty much every history class I take the teacher tells us that it is wrong.
It really doesn’t matter if it is a “COMPLETE HISTORICAL INACCURACY” the thing is… the historical inaccuracy is part of what makes it humorous. So, if you would please get a sense of humor, that would be much appreciated. Anyone who took the post for face value really SHOULD brush up on their history books. And I did know all of this BEFORE you said it, and I didn’t comment about it.
Seriously…does anyone else see that he wrote this status 400 years ago?
All of the comments are of 30 or so minutes ago.
It must’ve taken forever for people to notice his status if they’re 400 years late to commenting.
I don’t “agree” with abortion (TRANSLATION: It’s not something I would want to undergo, nor is it something I would recommend to anybody), but I fully support any woman’s right to undergo it if she wants to. Remember, pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion or anti-life.
Same for gay marriage. I’m straight, but that doesn’t mean I’ll make everyone subscribe to “marriage = man + woman.” (I’ll highly recommend it, though.)
abortion can be solved by enforcing gay marriage and banning the traditional one. it also solves population growth.
in fact, all countries in excess of 200 million in population should exercise this idea of mine – in less than 100 years 90% of the world’s population will die without a new generation taking over, making it the right time to start over again.
Oh, and for those defending the Church saying he was tried for “violating papal decree” – the fact of the matter is that the Pope ordered him to write both the arguments for AND against heliocentrism in his book.. when Galileo clearly had a proof showing the Earth *does* revolve around the Sun.
It’s the same “teach the controversy” BS that persists to this day in Creationist/church dogma.
Try walking into the Creationist Museum and trying to “teach the controversy” there by introducing evidence that the Earth is clearly not 6,000 years old and that organisms did indeed evolve from one another. Make sure to bring a watch so you can entertain yourself counting the seconds before a security guard removes you.
As much as it pains me to say. Galileo did not have proof. He in fact ignoredcollected evidence (comet observations) which would have supported his theory.
He believed he was right, and didn’t have the patience to collect enough evidence to validate his theory (you can’t prove theories, oly disprove them).
He was right, but because he based his argument on faith he was guilty of heresy since his faith was at odds with the accepted Christian faith. If he had spent sufficient time gathering observations and accepted observations gathered by others (those damn comets again), then his argument would have been based on ‘natural philosophy’ (Physics) rather than faith.
Of course it didn’t help that he acted like a complete a$$hole and insulted everyone who didn’t accept his superior intelligence.
Which is quite a pity, since at the time the church was not tied down in dogma (as seems to be now), and would have probably changed its doctrine to agree with Galileo’s theories.
When he published his theory on Heliocentric Solar System, he was not met with censorship by the church. When He tried to delve into forming Theological arguments that contradicted the church, the church freaked. Here was a man who had power through words, and he was undermining church authority with Theological teachings. So as a punishment, they refused to support Galileo in his astronomical endeavors and worse excommunicated him from the church, ruining any credibility in the literate (educated) community at the time.
I read the first post without looking at the name and thought this was another “I just found out the world is round, how do planes fly upside down?” fail. I was very glad to see it wasn’t.
Anybody note how on any topic even remotely touching religion, you will find both atheists and Christians trolling? Atheists: atheism is a faith, and absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. Get over it. Christians: bible verses don’t work well as arguments when used on people who don’t believe it. Get over it.
Atheism is NOT based on faith. It is merely a lack of belief because of insufficient evidence for the claim that god exists. You’re right in that absence of evidence isn’t evidence absence. But absence of evidence is reason to not believe until evidence is presented. I see no evidence for any god or gods which is why i do not believe in them. And until evidence is present to me to prove that any kinda of god exists I will continue to not believe.
Actually atheism is by definition the absence of faith, hence it’s called a-theism or non-religion. Those that say “I don’t believe in god but I believe in something” are called theists and are probably what you’re referring too. Good point otherwise.
Also now that I’m busy being technical, the sun and earth are actually moving around eachother and there appears to be no set point in the universe. It’s all relative as Einstein would say.
Atheism is NOT based on faith. It is merely a lack of belief because of insufficient evidence for the claim that god exists. You’re right in that absence of evidence isn’t evidence absence. But absence of evidence is reason to not believe until evidence is presented. I see no evidence for any god or gods which is why i do not believe in them. And until evidence is present to me to prove that any kinda of god exists I will continue to not believe.
Sorry about the noob question, but is there actually a way to make facebook say a post is 400 years old? (Or 65 million years, as in a previous WIN) Or was this photoshopped later?
What gets me most about atheists is that they think they’re superior to people with different beliefs, and then try to ram their own beliefs down the throats of said people with pseudo-intellectual arguments they read somewhere else.
As a non-religious person, I find myself preferring Christians who tell me I’m going to hell, but at least they don’t do so in a “I’m-not-being-taken-as-a-fool” smug manner.
Um, I’ve seen that it’s the christians who believe that they are superior to everyone else, not the athiests. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen christians rant about how they’re going to heaven and everyone else is going to hell and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Please. What sort of human being says stuff like that? As an athiest, we just want to be left alone.
What gets me most about the religious is that they think they’re superior to people with different beliefs, and then try to ram their own beliefs down the throats of said people with invasions and violent purges of non-believers, all in the name of their own “kind and merciful” God.
What I find intresting, as an atheist, is when I discuss (argue) with religious people about the excistence of some supreme omnipotent being (God) they tend to infer their own world wiev upon mine. Saying that, for instance, atheism is a religion or that science is my god.
I find that some religious people are so bent on their ownworld view that they cant or wont see it from my view, that I dont belive, and i dont need to either. Atheism is just an absence of faith! Thusly you cant group atheist into one common group, it’s not an idiology and it’s not a religion! (Humanism is a form of atheism that could be labled a religion or an idiology)
Also being an athiest in itself is not an attack on those who are religious. Buddhists are maybe the only “religious” people I have discussed with, that are able to totaly accept my atheism and point of view. I guess its because biddhism originaly is more like a philosophy.
That being said, anny people who whants to cram their world view down the throat of an other person is just a prick! Atheist, christian, muslim, liberal or conservative. But those who cant accept an argument around diffrent ideas and idelogoies etc. is and idiot.
“There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”
Even though it’s faked, that still pretty damn good. XD
I also like that fact that people are getting mad over this. Seriously, guys. No one cares. If you want to go cry about the big mean people making slightly relevant jokes about your religion, then you can go complain about them on Facebook.
Stupid debates or complaints on Facebook would probably just end up on Failbook, eventually, as a post. There’s nothing one can do about it. This site is meant to be filled with bulls**t. But that’s why I like it.
Why is everybody arguing over religion on this post. All of the irony and humor in this post lies in the fact that the person who made it thought that Galileo discovered the heliocentric solar system but it was really Copernicus
The idea of a heliocentric solar system had been around for a while. Copernicus’ heliocentric model was put forth as an explanation to different planetary movements, such as planets in retrograde and influenced Galileo, who created a telescope powerful enough to prove it.
Also, why would Copernicus like this if Galileo was trying to take credit?
I’ve read a few comments on here and it seems many of you fall into the group of “ignorant atheists.” There are ignorant atheists just as there are ignorant Christians (and there are a lot of those). You believe that Christians are stupid, call them names, and say that there is no evidence for God or Christianity. However, there is ample evidence in support of Christianity. If you want to actually be educated on the issue please go to reasonablefaith.org, or are you afraid to be proven wrong?
Sorry but the rantings of Dr. Craig are not evidence. I am more than familiar with Craig and his arguments. I find them sorely lacking as being convincing of anything. He does nothing but lay out bold assertions and merely claims them to be true with giving one piece of evidence to support them. Each and every argument I have ever heard from him fails right at the starting gate. Sorry but if the only evidence you have God is Craig, then you have no evidence.
I consider Christianity to be an extremely large group of people (the church) that have taken the teachings of a pretty nice guy (Jesus) WAY out of hand.
You know the difference between a Religion and a Myth? It all comes down to whether anyone still believes or not. Greek “mythology” used to be a bonafied religion…
Why would Thor be coming? Thor is Norse mythology not Greek. Zeus would have been more appropriate or Hades, or many many others.
And the difference between a Religion and a Myth has nothing to do with belief. There are still followers of Mithra after all. Mythology is what religion is based upon. A myth is a traditional story which embodies a belief. A religion is a collection of myths used to define and codify a belief.
Oh, and as far as the “bible is the word of God” thing goes…
God created all of this stuff, but he could not just go “poof, here’s your user manual”? He instead entrusted his word to be written down by multiple different, hugely fallible, egocentric, self-serving human beings? And how come all of this stuff went down while nobody else was around? “While I was completely out of your sight and hearing, God told me all of these things he wants you to do…” How come nobody has called b/s on this? If I popped up and said that God came to me thru my truck radio and told me stuff, I would be locked up, but Moses is a prophet for doing essentially the same thing?
Hey just to let you ppl(trolls) know that we went from over 9000 to debates about if someone believing in god is dumb to drugs and back to religion. WoW.
lets just say that is debate that all of u ppl(trolls) had was not over 9000
Nowhere does the Bible claim the earth is flat, or that its the centre of the universe. Hitler was not a Christian. The ONLY reason I need to state that at all is the ignorance that pervades popular culture. Likewise with the Crusades. An examination of the Bible, compared with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church caused a little something called the Reformation. KINDA important since that’s the reason the Puritans and Reformers sought out North America.
Well, no reformation began because a guy named Henry didn’t like his wife . The puritans and reformers left England for North America because they weren’t allowed to persecute others for not believing in as strict a version of Protestantism as they did.
“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.”
“Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.”
“As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.”
“And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and misery.”
“When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and exploited.”
Each of these quotes are from Adolf Hitler himself from a speech he delivered in April 12, 1922. Published in “My New Order”. Quoted in “Freethought Today” April 1990
Win!
+2.
+4
+8
+16
+ 32
C-C-C-C-COMBOBREAKER!!!!
I love you people.
10000000
∞
IT’S OVER 90000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
win :’)
is there anyway to “like” this
+2^(n-1)
+128
Divided by zero
OH SHI–
I told you not to say Candlejack! OH SHI-
Must be a tan(x) function. Explain why it rose so fast and then divided by zero; should be cycling up through the many-digit negatives soon….
+32
+9000
>9000
good one ! xD
You win the internet!
OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!
1337
WHAT 9000 !!
BUT THAT CAN’T BE RIGHT!!!!!!
Do you have any idea how many people use that meme a day?
over 9000? (obvious reply i know)
not obvious. pure WIN, man. i ♥ u.
I imagine this reply being spoken in a “Don’t touch that! You don’t know where it’s been!” kind of voice.
your comment. I approve.
+8
+8
too late -.-
bad fate.
Have faith
The game.
it is lost
At what cost?
world war iii
lol….
tch. combo breakers not rhyming.
there was no combo… there was only two line.
Shall never be?
(Wish I could favourite these comments xD)
World War 9001.
Um, yeah, if you have a high school grasp of history.
If you knew anything about Galileo, you’d know that he believed the earth goes around the sun because it has to for the sun to cause the tides. Truth. Everyone else believed that the moon causes the tides–and had for centuries. One of the greatest discoveries occurred because he was trying to find proof for one of the most lame-assed ideas ever to come out of a great scientist.
Worse, there were great mathematical predictive models for the solar system based around the idea that the sun and planets go around the earth. What did Galileo come up with? Well, eventually, he saw some moons around another planet…or he saw some blurry globs the *might be* moons around a planet. Turned out he was right–they were moons–but at that point, the good money was on the theory that actually had, you know, some math backing it up. His improvement of the telescope and his real and impressive contributions to the study of mechanics were his real contributions. The whole sun-earth thing was a kind of embarrassment in context. And he got in trouble for writing a really horrible hit piece making fun of his friend, who happened to be the pope and had just given him special permission to continue his publications after he’d already be told to cut it out by the previous pope for being an ass. Remember that the universities were a part of the church. (“I don’t care who’s right. You idiots need to stop name calling and go do something else,” was pretty much the content of the papal bull.) He got in trouble not for scientific debate but for being a complete and utter, unbearable ass.
For those of you who don’t really “get” history: Imagine someone who makes House look like a warm, fussy teddy bear who is happy to live and let live.
Want to give some credit? Give it to Kepler. He’s the one who put some math into the wild speculations and curious but overall unconvincing observations.
certainly a WIN vs ROMAN CATHOLIC church
lol
Lol I love these history facebook fails. They make me chuckle.
Anyone else hate these?
Especially the part where Galileo posts that 400 years ago but it took the church until an hour ago to reply.
I think that’s actually part of the joke…
I didn’t know Galileo was 400+ years old.
Yeah, but still, they intentionally put the “25 minutes ago”. How can that be a mistake? They’re meticulous. I think it’s supposed to be like that.
Now now… I’m sure that a lot of people devoid of a sense of humour might hate these posts…
No, I think you’re the only person who’s anal retentive enough to let it bother them.
WIN!!!! LOL
I love that you hate the reply time, rather than the fact IT IS COMPLETELY FAKE! or do you genuinely believe Galileo posted this….400 years ago…..
Oh, I love history geeks! Very cute job!
silly astronomers.
F**king awesome!
Finally somebody shows the world how ignorant we are. I mean think about it… Crusaders who used to kill in the name of Christ or whatever. Oh and that Hitler gay..I.. I mean guy who slaughtered Jews and Blacks etc, he was Christian too. Oh..and don’t forget Popes that molest Children.
Ah, the trolls are out today…thought it was too sunny for them…
Nah, Trolls are attracted to any chance to show their ignorance over the difference between what Christianity actually says to do and what stupid humans actually do in the name of their religion.
In the end, it’s about the human element, not the religion itself.
Religion (or god itself) doesn’t exist without the human element.
Religion was created by humans, the bible was written by humans, so religion and human element can’t be separated because the former doesn’t exist without the latter.
The bible was written by men who were inspired by God. Just because a man says he does something in the name of God, now, it doesn’t mean God agrees with him. God only inspires people through his word now, not through miracles. The bible says ‘where there were miracles, they have ceased. I am a Christian and I think this post is hillarious. I believe science is one of the beautiful creations of God. He set the plan in motion and we evolved, change, bettered, sometimes worsened ourselves to become who we are now. I agree this is a great argument. It is nice to finally hear intelligent debate instead of namecalling.
you can’t create something (science) if you don’t exist…
Again, religion (or god) doesn’t exist without the human element.
So if we created clones and the clones called us God, are you saying that we would not exist without them?
You’re stupid, thus your argument is invalid.
If we, people, created clones, we would be tangible, living things. We wouldn’t necessarily be “Gods” because we don’t choose the fate of them, but much rather just gave them life. If they were clones they would be able to conjure more clones like we have; we’re doing nothing more special than what they are, thus not godly.
You’re comparing two complete opposite things: tangible versus an idea. I believe something could have stirred us into the process of which we are now, but only to the equivalent of me putting seamonkey eggs into water.
couldn’t have said it better myself…
Finally, someone I agree with completly. Thanks for being awsome *vow*
dumbyodaddy: “You’re comparing two complete opposite things: tangible versus an idea. I believe something could have stirred us into the process of which we are now, but only to the equivalent of me putting seamonkey eggs into water.”
Not really. The analogy was intended to show that the existence of a god is not dependent on the beliefs of human beings.
If humans were to create “clones” (or any intelligent life, for that matter) and those clones called us “gods” — their belief that “gods” exist has no bearing on whether or not those gods actually exist.
Playing a pitiful linguistic game with the definition of the word “god” does nothing to help your point.
“Religion (or god itself) doesn’t exist without the human element.
Religion was created by humans, the bible was written by humans, so religion and human element can’t be separated because the former doesn’t exist without the latter.”
And again the issue went over your head.
What Christianity as a doctrine and a religion teaches is a separate thing from what any “Christian” purports to do with those teachings, or actually does “in the name of” those teachings.
It’s akin to a libertarian calling himself a socialist. The title is meaningless when the actions and beliefs are incongruous.
Your point is moot.
I think the the base of the argument is that god does not exist as defined by the bible, so god does not exist as anything but a fictional character in a book, which is where some numskulls get “we created god” from. But just because we imagined it doesn’t mean we created it, because we certainly didn’t create the god portrayed in the bible.
Now as for whether or not a clone, or child, or any other creation would consider their parent a god, I agree it is just a word game. Though in the area of playing with the definition of god I think Einstein had an interesting idea…
Thank you for destroying yo daddy’s arguement.
So if you created a baby and that baby called you God, are you saying that that makes you a god?
You, sir, are stupid and thus renders your argument invalid.
lol…take the foot outta your mouth, you look like an idiot.
Lol. It would follow that kids should call their parents gods because the kids’ parents created them.
Your argument is invalid.
hey chrisf*g if god exists then why isnt he stopping atheists?
According to some religions god does not care wether you belive in him or not as long as you are not evil he will let you live a go about your life and go to heaven your statement is invalid.
hahaha thats awesome.
as children, our kids do see us as gods.. in their eyes, we CAN do anything. It’s only as they grow older, see us for our fallibility to we lose the god status. As they grow older, getting closer to their own godhood (if they choose to have a child) do they realize that parents do have a certain godlike quality after all. Based on a parents forgiving nature, ability to be a savior to a child in trouble, and depth and breadth of knowledge, does the child puts their parent back into a godhood status, and thus gain their own godhood status, thus keeping up the cycle.
Same with religion. When people get intelligent enough, they see the failibility of religious stories, and become atheist.
Though a lot of people never reach that point where they are honest and intelligent enough.
exactly. I’ll admit, I was born into a Roman Catholic home…
Ooh, did they slap your face often?
Mine did.
…Hmm, dunno why I just shared that. Hmpf.
maybe YOU thought your parents were gods as a kid but i good sir did not
We don’t really “create” science, unless you’re talking medical science. A lot of science is just observations and discoveries (like say finding out the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around)
So yes, it would still be doing that even if we were not around.
And how did God create science JME? He created something that allowed us to find that the earth is over 65 million years old, rather than the 6000 like the Bible says? Yea, way to overlook blatant contradictions to your faith. Blindingly following, just like the Nazis did with Hitler.
The Bible does not say that miracles have ceased. Please give the verse you are attempting to reference. The only one that comes to mind is I Corinthians 13:8 regarding when the perfect comes (when Christ returns). God hasn’t changed – miracles still happen. If you find Christian friends who know this, you will see examples of it in their lives. Jesus said those who believe in him will do even greater miracles than he.
my head just exploded, from ignorance.
Last time I checked none of my christian friends came back from the dead
Not yet. Givem’ some time.
What!? People who believe in miracles will attribute ordinary random occurrences and luck to miracles!? Preposterous!
Science makes God obsolete. Even if there were a supreme being, who gave the universe and humanity its start, why would He create something that would make his power useless? There are no miracles to witness now, so clearly a hypothetically existent god is no longer physically active in our world, also witnessed by how every phenomenon has a logical explanation. So basically, christianity taken out of context states that a supreme being created a world and a superior species, then made himself obsolete, and then waited for this species to recognize and worship him, who now lacked any evidence for his existence, and whom logic would find faulty?
Oh, good. Since God knows all, his laws would be timeless. So, I have a question for you. I have a daughter. She’s 12 and does very good at school. How much do you think I can get for her? (Leviticus 25:44, Exodus 21:20, Titus 2:9). Also, I’ve got a little problem with my wife. She insists on working on Sunday. Can I kill her myself, or should I call the cops to do it for me? (Exodus 31:15). My 15 year old daughter has a habit of saying “oh my God!” And she doesn’t always respect us, her parents. Is there any particular way I should put her to death? (Leviticus 20:9, and 24:16, Deut 21). Just one more question. I’m told that God hates abortion, yet the Bible itself gives us explicit instructions on how to rip pregnant women open to make sure we kill the babies, too. Can you explain? (Isaiah 13, Numbers 31, Hosea 13)
you’re amazing.
Fail. The laws of science aren’t timeless either. They have been changed as they have been proven wrong.
Yes, but science expects this to happen.
Plus, the church isn’t as flexable about these things as most scientists are, especially back when Galileo was around.
Yes, of course science changes, but no real scientist has any problems with adapting their theories. The point is that there are some stupid people who still think that whatever is written in the Bible 2000 years ago is truth because it’s ‘Gods word’.
you WIN friend
(and you beat me to it lol)
When it gets to logical debate, theistic religions don’t have a f**king leg to stand on, this pleases me greatly
…hilarious*
I love you
I love you too (:
Win. Best argument ever.
Be wise enough to believe in a god, but smart enough NOT to believe in religion.
Believing in God is the opposite of being wise.
I agree. Believing in God/a god/gods is not wise. So is atheism. Both are based on faith, and a denial that actually we know next to nothing.
I don’t deny the fact that I know little. I believe you’re referring to an Agnostic, since Atheism is defined as…
Atheist:a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
it’s as easy as that. Yes of course we all have and support other theories of the mysteries of the universe, but when it comes down to it…Atheism is just denying any god or gods.
Atheism is not based on faith. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods due to insufficient evidence. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies? Is faith that you don’t believe in unicorns or goblins. No, you don’t believe in them because no one as ever proven their existence. Likewise I don’t believe in god because i see know evidence for one. The burden of proof is on the Theists. Until they can prove that any type of god exist, I will continue to not believe in them.
these are by far my favorite strains to debate on
This argument isn’t worth it, as sheep will continue to be sheep. Believing in something that isn’t real, devoting their s**tty lives to a higher power only to be completely disappointed when there is no afterlife.
I agree that it can be disheartening at times when the other side seems to only to project their notion of what they think you believe instead of trying to understand (or even ask) what it is that you really believe. But I think it most certainly is worth it, as it was these very same arguments proposed to me that lead me to eventually breaking free from Christianity as well as Theism all together
we devot our lives to god happily. but if there is no go then there is no afterlife. then there is no regret for us. but there will be for you when you burn in the eternal hellfire
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA-wait, you are using sarcasm right? Even if you are not, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA….oh I love when the comments turn to this, although I prefer debating gay marriage.
See, you’re just wrong on this one.
If you devote your life to God (I assume you just don’t use punctuation, although it’s very odd that a Godly person would forget to do so. Troll?), you are missing out on MANY life options. You cannot experience guilt-free sex with more than one person, you can’t experiment with drugs every once in awhile, you can’t practice homosexuality (even if, deep down, you know that you are), you can experience the wonder of OTHER religions and OTHER beliefs, etc.
And see, if this is the only life you have, and there IS no afterlife, you’re screwed. You wasted your ONLY life missing out on all the good stuff just because you thought God existed. And see, to me, that’s really missing out.
Secondly, if the “ONE GOD” does exist, I would rather go to hell anyway. If God treats people as horribly as the religious believe, I want NOTHING to do with him! He is a selfish, jealous, childish God! I would rather spend eternity with the devil, in hell, where sin is a-okay, then spend eternity praising a God like that in a place where NO sin is allowed.
Besides, if you really want to get into the bibilical stories, I think you can quickly see that 1) the devil actually starts to seem like the ‘good guy’ and 2) in Job, god DIRECTLY WORKS with the devil to make humans miserable. It sounds like they are good DRINKING BUDDIES in this book, man.
So, no, you’re wrong.
…although as someone else said, you wouldn’t regret it after death, as you couldn’t think to regret it, hah.
I’m not religious, but there’s really no reason for experimenting with drugs. That was a pretty bad argument and I think you should have done better. There’s no point to that at all and it’s just plain dumb. And I don’t know what your views on sex are, but it seemed like you were saying that people are supposed to have sex with a lot of people or else they weren’t living life. That’s really shallow and I think you should have done better on that too. You made it seem like non-religious people LIKE to do bad things. If you want to defend us, try not to make us look bad.
Actually, simply put, you’re wrong. Christianity varies widely in beliefs, and what you are saying you /necessarily cannot do/ is not something that all of us believe in.
Lets see. Starting from the beginning
“You cannot experience guilt-free sex with more than one person” False. I am religious – I go to church weekly, I am sure about my beliefs and have strong beliefs. And I have in fact, been part of a threesome before. And it was not at all against my personal religion and not something I have any guilt about.
“you can’t experiment with drugs every once in awhile” – I have absolutely no interesting in experimenting with drugs, so while I have not, it is not because of my religion.
“you can’t practice homosexuality” – Again, simply False. There are openly gay bishops, openly gay priests, and so on. A friend of mine is openly gay, goes to the same church that I do and many of the other members of the church know that he is gay because he brought his boyfriend to church.
“you can experience the wonder of OTHER religions and OTHER beliefs, etc.” Yes. I in fact, do not know what it is like to believe something that is not what I believe. This is in fact, true whether you are religious or not. You actually are making a good point of that, what with the “all religion is evil.”
“And see, if this is the only life you have, and there IS no afterlife.” – There is no proof of that, just as there is no proof of an afterlife – either the existence or non-existence is entirely based on faith. The faith you so strongly proclaim is an absolutely terrible thing you are using here.
“You wasted your ONLY life missing out on all the good stuff just because you thought God existed.”
No there is nothing I feel like I am missing. It can’t be sex, because I am in a strongly sexual relationship. It can’t be alcohol seeing as my boyfriend and I have a shelf of alcohol in our apartment. It can’t be living and sleeping with the person that I love, because I am doing so despite the fact that we’re not married. It can’t be drugs, seeing as the slightest whiff of pot smoke makes me physically ill and have a migraine. And yet, despite having these “good stuff” I have a strong belief in God, and have a strengthened life when it is hard because of having faith.
“If God treats people as horribly as the religious believe, I want NOTHING to do with him!”
Unconditional love is horrible and you don’t want it?
” He is a selfish, jealous, childish God! ”
Even if you want to argue that about the Old Testament, I personally believe in the Bible not as rules to live by but stories to learn from – even though I believe that the stories are true, I do not believe we should blindly follow.
“then spend eternity praising a God like that in a place where NO sin is allowed.”
God does not expect us to be perfect, and he loves us despite our imperfections. We are expected to make mistakes, apologize for them, try to be better people, and make mistakes again.
I am perfectly happy here with my faith with full knowledge that others will believe otherwise. I am fully aware than my personal beliefs are only my own. However, despite having beliefs which include reincarnation, I believe in one God and that Jesus Christ died for our sins, so am simply put a Christian who has came up with a set of beliefs rather than blindly arguing that there cannot be a God, nor blindly following the teachings of a church made up of humans.
Jenna, life is about having lots of sex with different people. For guys anyway. One of the main functions of the male brain is that after a guys been having sex with one girl for too long to reduce the amount of pleasure and arousal he can have with that female, as well as increase attraction to others so as to increase the amount of women he impregnates. Why do you think most species are polygamous? Its the most effective way for one species to survive. And while this may not agree with modern social standards, its still a fact.
Ha! Do me a favor and google “Bad Faith”. When you believe in something because the consequences of not believing in it and it turning out to be true are negative, but the consequence of believing in it and it tunring out to not be true are null, then that, my dear, is worse then having no faith at all. Having faith is believing in something regardless of the consequences…
fool..
so you waste 2 hours a week for your *entire* life, so that if a cosmic jewish zombie that will save your soul etc. *does exist* you get to spend eternity with no meaning or goals? what makes life precious for those who live it is knowing there is an end. There is no end to heaven, I would rather enjoy my time on earth and go to hell with all my friends than waste my time, and go to heaven for eternity with righteous sheep.
I prefer eternal suffering than the eternally boring paradise your god provides us.
There is no eternal hellfire. The bible does not ever say that anyone will ever burn in eternal hellfire…. so actually, no even if athiests are right they won’t burn in eternal hellfire, they’ll just die, exactly as they expect.
Surely they won’t be disappointed if there’s no afterlife as there would be nothing there to actually be dissapointed?
You do have a very literal point, they can’t be disappointed when there’s no afterlife because they can’t have a thought process. Sooo yep pretty much! So they may as well be disappointed now, and give all their time, money, sweat and blood to the church now. They will HAPPILY take massive amounts of donations to convince you there is an afterlife, and what your doing is worth a higher cause. Hahahahahahahahaha. I pity the fool
ben: “Atheism is not based on faith. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods due to insufficient evidence. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies?”
Stupidity is a disease on these boards, isn’t it?
Atheism is as much a “religious belief” as Christianity because it dogmatically asserts a “religious” proposition about the divine nature of the universe.
“insufficient evidence…i see know evidence for one”
Evidently you’re not well versed in the debates about theism.
Reach back into history and you’ll find proofs for the existence of a god based on pure reason, empirical data, and even on the simple force of logical necessity.
“burden of proof is on the Theists”
Not really.
The burden of proof is on whoever makes an assertion. If the atheist says “there is no god” his claim stands in as much need of proof as when the theist claims that there is a god.
Good job?
Dumbyodaddy=retard: “Stupidity is a disease on these boards, isn’t it?”
Starting off right away with the petty insults huh? Pathetic and unnecessary. If you arguments were as good as you say they are, then you would have no need for such petty remarks. You aren’t off to a good start but lets continue anyway.
“Atheism is as much a “religious belief” as Christianity because it dogmatically asserts a “religious” proposition about the divine nature of the universe.”
No atheism is not a religious belief. Nor is a position and stance or a world view. It is simply a response to a claim. The claim being “There is a god”. Nothing dogmatic about it. If evidence is presented that leads me to believe otherwise then I will change my response. I accept the notion that i could be wrong. Can you say that about yourself?
“Evidently you’re not well versed in the debates about theism.”
Oh I am. This subject is nothing new to me and I am well versed with the arguments from both sides.
“Reach back into history and you’ll find proofs for the existence of a god based on pure reason, empirical data, and even on the simple force of logical necessity.”
I find it very telling that you don’t provide any such evidence, you merely just make the assertion that it exists. Please share with us this plethora of evidence if you have it. I would love see it. Really I would. Because in all my dealings with so called religious, it has either been circular logic or baseless assertions. If you have something more I would be glad to take a look at it.
“The burden of proof is on whoever makes an assertion.”
I agree.
“f the atheist says “there is no god” his claim stands in as much need of proof as when the theist claims that there is a god.”
Again i agree. However I have never made such claims nor has any atheist i have ever met. I don’t claim god absolutely does not exist. In fact I even accept that there is a possibility that he does exist. However I see evidence to support such notion and until I do then I have no justifiable reason to believe that he does.
“Good job?”
Not particularly..
Atheism denies any assertions that dogmatically gives any propositions about any divine nature of the universe. Atheism is per definition a person who doesn’t relate to ANY theism’s what so ever.
I can agree on your statement if you referred to Humanists.
An atheist does not disbelieve in God, because for a atheist “god” is nothing more than an idea, like Santa clause or any other fantastical figure. Religious people have a difficulty realising this because for them God is more than an idea, the believe in him, so they look at an atheists disbelief in God as a belief in it self.
And the burden of proof lies on the person that comes with a fantastical theory. It is impossible to disprove of something that’s not observable, the burden lies on those who says there is a fantastical Omnipotent being, to prove it. Not on those who says it cant possibly be true.
I would like to see any logical proof of the existance of god that hasnt yet been disproven.
Thank you. So much. I hate it when people say that atheism is based on faith when it’s not. It’s based on the LACK OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. Those who devote their lives to “God,” they seem to lose all rational thought. And what really gets me is that the theists can’t prove the existence of God without using God in their justification. It’s a pity how so many people lose sight of reality because “God” says it’s wrong…
No. Agnostism is based on lack of sufficient evidence. Atheism is based off of faith. It takes just as much faith to say that there is necessarily not a god as to say that there is one. It doesn’t take faith to only say that they don’t know if there is a god and don’t want to act as if there is one without there being evidence that there is one.
And truthfully, neither a theist or an atheist will be able to prove the existence or lack there of a god, this is why it is a matter of faith in either direction. So, yes, they won’t be able to prove the existence of God, it wouldn’t be based on faith if they could – but this doesn’t negate the theists faith or the atheists faith. Both sides can choose what they want to believe.
Atheist comes from the root word Atheos. A- meaning without and Theos- meaning god. Theism is defined as a belief in a god or gods. Atheism (remember that A means without) literally translates as “without a belief in a god or gods”. So an atheist is someone who LACKS a belief in a god, period. No faith required. Is it faith that you don’t believe in fairies.? Is it faith that you don’t believe in the boogeyman or the Tooth Fairy? No it isn’t. The reason no one believes in these things is because there is no evidence to support their existence. It is not my responsibility to prove that god DOESN’T exist. Its the theists responsibility to prove that he DOES. They make the claim, they have to provide the evidence to support it. Until they do I have no justifiable reason to believe that he does. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE FAITH!
Ben, you sir are awesome.
It’s very simple
Religion = Faith
Atheism = Lack of Faith
any questions?
What? It’s already been explained well previously that Atheism is not a lack of faith because it asserts a belief about the nature of the universe.
In being an Atheist, you are putting across the position that it is POSSIBLE TO KNOW that there is no God, which requires a level of belief and/or faith not dissimilar to the level required to feel that it is possible to know that there IS a God (I.E Theism).
“Lack of faith” is more accurately said about Agnostics because they feel it is impossible to truly know whether there is a God or not; if you doubt the viability of religion to the point where you’re almost sure there is no God, but still feel that you can’t prove it / know for certain, you are Agnostic.
Seriously. :\
Thats is arguing out of a religious point of view. But an Atheist is someone who lacks faith what so ever, he is not some one who dos’nt belive in god, he lacks any belife in a god. God is nothing more than a fantastical mythological tale.
Religous people have a hard time undrestanding this because they belive in a “god” so when an Atheist says he doesnt belive in god, offcourse a religous person wholud chalck that up to faith aswell. But one needs to look from the other point of view.
I my self as an Atheist rely on purely rational observable things, if you want to give me a belief it’s the belief in the rational and irrational human behaviour, and the randomness of our world. Now thats more like a philosophy than a religion.
I’m not religious, I’m agnostic, and it’s not that I don’t understand, it’s that you don’t understand the distinction between what defines an Atheist as opposed to an Agnostic.
Which I’ll repeat is, in Atheism’s case, an outwards belief that God is non-existent, whereas Agnosticism is the belief that it is impossible to know, which encompasses ‘lack of faith’.
Atheism is a set of beliefs, not a LACK OF a set of beliefs. Agnosticism fits under ‘lack of belief’, NOT ATHEISM.
Ok?
No. Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism/Gnosticism deals with knowledge. Atheism is not a set of beliefs, a position, or a world view. It is a response to a claim. The claim being “there is a god.”I see no evidence for a god so i have no belief ( or I lack a belief) in a one. That makes me Atheist. I also don’t think that we will ever know whether or not god exists for sure. That makes me Agnostic. I am an Agnostic Atheist. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
I can agree that agnosticism is’nt about faith it’s about knowledge, he isn’t sure and leaves all options open.
An Atheist is an A theist, someone who disbelives the theos. To put it another way, mere disbelief in the truth of a proposition is not equivalent to the belief that the proposition is false and that the opposite is true. If you make a claim and I disbelieve it, I am not necessarily saying that your claim is false. I may not understand it well enough to say one way or the other. I may lack enough information to test your claim. I may simply not care enough to think about it. Thus Atheism is’nt build on faith but the lack off. Then again you have diffrent grades, All Christians are strongly atheistic towards the other religions f.eks. And you can be atheistic towards some gods and agnostic towards others etc.
um.. ok?
They have internet under that bridge.
not to be too defensive but i thought Hitler was Muslim
He was catholic and does it really matter what religion he was.
I think it does.
Sound like typically American prejudice to me, to assume he was Muslim. Not all the bad guys are Muslim and not all Muslims are bad guys!
Your both wrong! Hitler created his own religion based on old folklore, Norse mythology and a bit of Christianity. The Nazi sent Christians to their death camps as well, and Christmas was forbidden in Germany.
Wow, how can anyone who knows a little history or has ever seen a picture of Hitler believe he is Muslim??? Apart from that he is Austrian where most people are Christians.
Wut
srsly wut. You actually thought Hitler was Muslim?
seriously? are you really that clueless?
Good job. You have single-handedly ruined the humor of the comments and post by starting a religion argument. Asshat.
I agree. I don’t like asshats. >:(
oh, rule 14
TL:DR
How do they make the historic facebook fails?
Is their a websitee for it?
*there
*website
The website is called facebook.
If you like historic fails, you should check out the HistoricLOL site here on Cheezburger.
Step one: type in http://www.facebook.com into your URL bar, up there ^. Step two: write in the name of some famous historic dude, and fill out random information. Step three: make more accounts of people from the same historic event. Step three: act it out.
Those replies seem very late compared to the original post…
Yeah, especially since the church has acknowledged Gallileo’s findings by now – it was about 10 years ago, but still…
I think that was the point of the times they chose, honestly. They were exaggerating to ‘up’ the humor.
Oh my goodness… Galileo appears to be older than 400 years…
That’s epic. Especially “Copernicus likes this” XD
I found the “like” the funniest aswell (:
I didn’t even notice it until you guys pointed it out! Sweet XD
I didn’t notice at first either. lmao…that is awesome.
I noticed it but did’nt bother saying so untill i saw others had done so as well
Hahaha, didn’t see it. Nice!
Copernicus liking this was The Best!! Thanks for the (mostly) intelligent comments.
Interesting how the first post is like…400 years ago, followed by responses in the last hour. >_>
Also interesting how this history fails at accuracy. <_<
Also interesting how you excel, exceedingly, at annoyance <_<
take the stick outta your ass.
It’s funny cuz it’s truuue
Needs a comment by Einstein saying motion is relative to the observer…
Because in reality, the sun is revolving around the Earth just as much as the Earth is revolving around the sun.
hmm.. i think you got that wrong <_<
No, its right
No , its not.
There are enough arguments to support and deny both views… it’s all relative
no its isnt
yes it is
Its in your mind
I see what you did there…
In your mind = perspective = relative
LOL
Fail comment is fail..
lulz comment is lulz!
I see what you were doing there…but no, you’re wrong.
omg, please take a basic astronomy course…
actually, the sun and the earth revolve around each other’s mutual gravitational center, which is closer to the sun than to the earth, but not quite the center of the sun.
Umm what? The sun and the earth do NOT have a “mutual” gravitational center. I have no idea where you got that from. The earth revolves around the sun, the sun revolves around our galaxy.
I love you
Well thank you
the feelings mutual
f**kyou
umm duh! the sun’s gravity pulls on the earth, and the earth in turn pulls back on the sun. this causes the point of rotation to be pulled slightly toward the earth. it’s basic astrophysics. shut up, go home, look it up.
Wrong again. If you had study basic astrophysics you would undoubtedly come across Einstein’s general relativity. And in general relativity, gravity is not a force (which means it has no “pull”) but is instead a curved space/time geometry where the source of curvature is the stress-energy tensor (i.e. matter). So the path of a planet (in this case Earth) orbiting around a star (our sun) is the projection of a geodesic of the curved 4-D space/time geometry around the star onto 3-D space. In other words, the reason Earth revolves around the sun is because we are following the the curvature of space that has been warped by the sun
Astrophysics ftw!
Precisely incorrect astrophysics ftl!
Hell yeah, this is way more interesting than the religious debate.
Well since the definition of “force” is mass X acceleration, and gravity is the quantifiable attraction (acceleration) and relationship between two masses, then ipso facto gravity is a force. And since Earth would warp spacetime in the same manner as the sun, you’d still get a slight curvature toward the earth at the sun. If you look at the way two stars in a binary system interact, you’ll notice one doesn’t rotate around the other, but in fact they rotate around a “point” between them. The distance to this point from one of the stars would be proportional to the distribution of mass between the two stars. In a closed system, if the 2 stars massed the same, the point would be in the middle. If one star was twice as massive, the distance from that star to the point would be half the distance of the point to the smaller star. Now replace the two stars with the earth and the sun. The relationship would still hold. This isn’t just happening with the earth and the sun, but with the entire solar system. The solar system is in a state of gravitational resonance. I can’t say you’re wrong, but I can say you are not completely correct. ^.^
I responded to this guy too, but it got lost in the cheezburger networkz. I think that it’s because you posted something near the same time. I hate you.
(lol jk. i dun really hate you.)
And I think that he meant “force” in the sense of a fundamental force, e.g. electromagnetic. Cause the jury’s not totally out on that either.
Yah, I know what he meant. I just didn’t want to concede so easily
Love the pancreas bit too. Haha it’s so truuuwoowoo!
Ok, I understand that but remember that the mass of the earth and the sun are drastically different. In comparison the mass of the sun is 332,900 times that of the Earth. So the effect is dramatically different than seen in binary star systems. The sun and the earth’s common center of mass ( the gravitational point that binary stars rotate around) is still located at the sun. So the sun isn’t really rotating around that point. Its merely wobbling around which cause a change in its radial velocity. But now i understand where you were coming from
Because, you know, general relativity isn’t in conflict with any other physics fields or anything. Anyone can regurgitate the teachings of their college professor, but that doesn’t make you right. With a basic study of multivariable calculus (dem surfaces (cuz of space + a dimension of time) and s**tz), you would undoubtedly come across this. In the words of Weird Al + that Newton mofo:
“My pancreas attracts every other pancreas in the universe with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. Wooahooawooo.”
(Which includes the sun.)
Oh, haha, here it is. I totally refreshed the page beforehand, though. Wtfz.
There actually is a point of gravitational equilibrium between Earth and the Sun – it’s just that it’s very near the Sun’s core, so we can ignore our effect on its orbit around the galactic center. However, this phenomenon is what makes it possible to detect planets orbiting other stars – watch for the wobble in their paths caused by the gravitational attraction of their own planets…
OTOH, that’s not what relativity means; in this particular case, the rotational frames of reference for Earth and Sun are close enough to identical, so Einsteinian relativity doesn’t enter into it. (The term has more to do with relative passage of time as one enters regions of greater space/time curvature, such as near a very large mass or approaching the speed of light.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_spectroscopy
Leaving observation out of the picture, the most accurate, factual statement that can be made is that both the Sun and the Earth (and all the other planets in our solar system) are orbiting a common barycenter of gravity which happens to be approx 30,000 kilometers above the core of Sun (the location of the barycentre varies a bit depending on which planet you’re talking about. For Earth it’s 30,000 km).
In the same way, the Moon-Earth system is orbiting a common center of gravity which happens to be 1707 kilometers below the surface of the Earth (the core is 6,378 kilometers down, so the Moon does *not* precisely orbit the center of gravity of the Earth).
And the Sun-Galaxy also has a barycentre..which is very close to the galactic core.
YEAH YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH GALILEO.
Way to censor my post Failbook. :/
How is this a fail?
dude what the f**k is this s**t i dont get it
hahahah, awww….that’s cute.
I’m pretty sure this was a deliberate attempt to insult the church.
actually…that is what happend…
Well not exactly cos the last sentence would then have been: “YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH. YOU SHUT IT RIGHT NOW. OR WE WILL TORTURE YOU AND KILL YOU!”
or even more accurate…
“SHUT IT RIGHT NOW OR WE WILL SENTENCE YOU TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT”
Or ” We WILL TAKE ALL YOUR S**T AND DESTROY YOUR LIFE”
too bad for him
The chruch started it.
i’ve seen ths somewhere else before,.. jus cant remember where,…
History book at school?
HAHAHAHAH, WIN
Indeed
+5
Ninjas like you.
wherez giordano bruni?
I tend to completly not read the names so first I was totally confused by everything that went on there ^^
but wow, that “Copernicus likes this” made my day…
E pur si muove!
if anyone is interested in learning about the situation, this is a well written article: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/galileo.asp
Sorry but nothing from AnswerinGenesis is “well written”…
if you’ve read it, and don’t believe it was well written, I respect that… if you decide it isn’t well written without reading it… well… maybe not so respectable
OMG ur such a f*cked up reader. it say’s Answers In Genesis, not Answerin Genesis… plz lern to read! (and dont evan think bout sayin that my spellling is sh*t)!!!
So you question my competency in reading because I simply forgot to type “s”? LOL. (Also, nice try at goading me with your obvious misspelling of “even”)
and btw… I did find it quite cute, in spite of historical inaccuracies
)
I’m Christian, and I lol’d. This made my day.
good for you!
i hate atheists. u all r just a bunch of attention seekers. u say “omg look at me, i pity u, theres no god and no religion and stuffz.” atcually, i pity u. u have nothing to beleive. dont u have nothing better to do than trying to prove that theres no god or something liek that… well, i guesss i gave u enough attention for 2day. LOL…
this post just created three other atheists, congratulation.
+1
+1
*facepalm @ “lolwut?”.
People that hate atheists are, by necessity, non-atheists who are terribly afraid that atheists are right, but are not willing to admit it.
I’m a staunch monotheist. Follower of Christ (yeah, the 3-in-1 type of monotheist). I happen to love atheists, even the kind that make a habit if insulting people like me— the Richard Dawkins types. I love them because they are a fellow human. Whether or not they agree with me is a secondary issue altogether.
Those non-atheists around here that are haters need to mature and understand that, from YOUR OWN WORLDVIEW you should understand that every human is created in the image of the same God as you are.
You have no grounds for hating, nor for mutilating the English language on purpose.
All Christians should be like you
All followers of ALL religions should be like you.
+1
We see the Troll in its natural habitat, intent on observing the reaction of others when it leaves its poop for the brains consumption, and carefully observe its futile attempts to attract a mate. We at killtehtrolls will work tirelessly to annihilate this shockingly quickly breeding species of rodent, for the benefit of humanity.
Atheists don’t spend their time trying to disprove God. They live their lives, and we even get to sleep in on Sundays!
haha, love.
really we’re attention seekeres not christians, i think your a messed up
and I pity you for your use of grammar spelling….see, you Christians really ARE stupid.
sorry.
Calling every single Christian in the known universe stupid because of one retards misuse of grammar and spelling.
nice…
(/sarcasm)
Has religion made mankind this ignorant for so long? No wonder philosophers are extinct today…
Thank you for the correction.
Ah, finally, some sense here.
Cheer, John
Everybody knows Archimedes was funded by religion,
LOL <3 this post. Just took an astronomy class Wednesday and we were talking about the Aristotelian -centric science up til 14th century
Completely historically inaccurate.
I love the fictional posts like these. Makes me wish there was a website just for them.
The church is actually on facebook.
Actually, what Galileo taught that the Church found offensive was that Earth was not the still center of the universe, and the Heavens weren’t invariant – the same thing Bruno Giordano had been burned at the stake for a century earlier. Galileo was able to back up his statement with observation of the four largest satellites of Jupiter, which is why he was able to get away with merely being censured by the Pope, rather than being executed as a heretic.
The shape and size of the Earth was proved during the height of the Greek civilization. Columbus was in fact wrong – he did his math poorly, and thought the Earth was merely 5000 miles around, rather than the accepted (and more accurate) figure of 25,000. He thought he could sail to the Indies more quickly by going west than by going east around Africa. Had it not been for the fact that a great hurking unsuspected continent lay athwart his path, Columbus and his men might well have been lost at sea due to his foolishness…
Nicolaus Copernicus was actually the first astronomer to propose a heliocentric model of the universe, it’s called the Copernican Revolution hope you learned something today.
If you were taught that Columbus discovered that the Earth was round in your school, I pity you. No other school teaches that at all. If you were just making a random example, you’re a fool. Nobody thinks that Columbus discovered that the Earth was round.
Right. I think the first one to actually prove it and make an accurate aproximation of it’s size (circunference) was Eratosthenes of Cyrene about 200 years BC. And he only got that worng because he didn’t had the distance between the two cities he used quite right. But, consideringit was 200 BC i still think it’s pretty awsome.
Exactly, no educated individual believes Columbus discovered the earth was round, it’s posts like John M’s that make me hate religion/religious zealots, he should go be a martyr in another war started by religion.
Also, if my ears are hemorrhaging AND bleeding, then you’re a silly redundant troll.
Umad?
Not all hemorrhages include ear bleeding.
He was referring to the commonly mistaught idea that columbus (and everyone else alive at his time) thought the world was flat, not that columbus himself discovered it was round. I know this is a common mistake because pretty much every history class I take the teacher tells us that it is wrong.
Copernicus found this out…
It really doesn’t matter if it is a “COMPLETE HISTORICAL INACCURACY” the thing is… the historical inaccuracy is part of what makes it humorous. So, if you would please get a sense of humor, that would be much appreciated. Anyone who took the post for face value really SHOULD brush up on their history books. And I did know all of this BEFORE you said it, and I didn’t comment about it.
its the Moon
I LOL’d for real
Seriously…does anyone else see that he wrote this status 400 years ago?
All of the comments are of 30 or so minutes ago.
It must’ve taken forever for people to notice his status if they’re 400 years late to commenting.
This debate about religion itself is boring, lets debate about gay marriage and abortion! I agree with both. WHO WILL BATTLE WITH ME?
Gay people can only get married after they get 10 punches on their abortion card. (And the 11th abortion is free).
There. Problem solved.
I don’t “agree” with abortion (TRANSLATION: It’s not something I would want to undergo, nor is it something I would recommend to anybody), but I fully support any woman’s right to undergo it if she wants to. Remember, pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion or anti-life.
Same for gay marriage. I’m straight, but that doesn’t mean I’ll make everyone subscribe to “marriage = man + woman.” (I’ll highly recommend it, though.)
im pro-choice and for gay marriage, its your choice not anyone else’s, fvck ignorant morons, like glenn beck
YOU WILL ALL BURN IN HELL
Thats the kind of talk that gives Religion a bad name
It is the wreckless f*cking of ignorant morons that has produced this whole pitiful gay marriage debate to begin with.
You mean the parents of all those opposed to gay marriage?
well, i can’t say anything about f*cking ignorant morons, except that i wouldn’t want to breed with ‘em, but i digress…
i agree that the G/L community should be allowed to marry. they deserve to have the chance to be just as miserable as the rest of us!
abortion can be solved by enforcing gay marriage and banning the traditional one. it also solves population growth.
in fact, all countries in excess of 200 million in population should exercise this idea of mine – in less than 100 years 90% of the world’s population will die without a new generation taking over, making it the right time to start over again.
Woulda been funnier if Galileo came back a week later and recanted.
i guess this proves that failbook is fake…
Oh, and for those defending the Church saying he was tried for “violating papal decree” – the fact of the matter is that the Pope ordered him to write both the arguments for AND against heliocentrism in his book.. when Galileo clearly had a proof showing the Earth *does* revolve around the Sun.
It’s the same “teach the controversy” BS that persists to this day in Creationist/church dogma.
Try walking into the Creationist Museum and trying to “teach the controversy” there by introducing evidence that the Earth is clearly not 6,000 years old and that organisms did indeed evolve from one another. Make sure to bring a watch so you can entertain yourself counting the seconds before a security guard removes you.
As much as it pains me to say. Galileo did not have proof. He in fact ignoredcollected evidence (comet observations) which would have supported his theory.
He believed he was right, and didn’t have the patience to collect enough evidence to validate his theory (you can’t prove theories, oly disprove them).
He was right, but because he based his argument on faith he was guilty of heresy since his faith was at odds with the accepted Christian faith. If he had spent sufficient time gathering observations and accepted observations gathered by others (those damn comets again), then his argument would have been based on ‘natural philosophy’ (Physics) rather than faith.
Of course it didn’t help that he acted like a complete a$$hole and insulted everyone who didn’t accept his superior intelligence.
Which is quite a pity, since at the time the church was not tied down in dogma (as seems to be now), and would have probably changed its doctrine to agree with Galileo’s theories.
When he published his theory on Heliocentric Solar System, he was not met with censorship by the church. When He tried to delve into forming Theological arguments that contradicted the church, the church freaked. Here was a man who had power through words, and he was undermining church authority with Theological teachings. So as a punishment, they refused to support Galileo in his astronomical endeavors and worse excommunicated him from the church, ruining any credibility in the literate (educated) community at the time.
BS. Your recounting of the incident is fraudulent, I infer from your tone that it is intentionally so.
Your ‘creationist museum’ red herring is just more garbage. Of course creationists are buffoons, that’s not the point of anything happening here.
This is what I don’t get. Why do you feel the urge to go to a Creationist Museum and ram your own beliefs down their throats?
It amazes me how Christians and Atheists don’t get along – they’re so alike.
I read the first post without looking at the name and thought this was another “I just found out the world is round, how do planes fly upside down?” fail. I was very glad to see it wasn’t.
Posted 400 years ago. EPIC WIN.
Yes. Just Yes.
HEY! I FOUND THIS HILARIOUS!! THAT MAKES ME REAL SMART, RIGHT??
HAHA Copernicus likes this.
BRILLIANT.
All I know.. I am here and god is not…. end of story…….
Anybody note how on any topic even remotely touching religion, you will find both atheists and Christians trolling? Atheists: atheism is a faith, and absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. Get over it. Christians: bible verses don’t work well as arguments when used on people who don’t believe it. Get over it.
Atheism is NOT based on faith. It is merely a lack of belief because of insufficient evidence for the claim that god exists. You’re right in that absence of evidence isn’t evidence absence. But absence of evidence is reason to not believe until evidence is presented. I see no evidence for any god or gods which is why i do not believe in them. And until evidence is present to me to prove that any kinda of god exists I will continue to not believe.
Actually atheism is by definition the absence of faith, hence it’s called a-theism or non-religion. Those that say “I don’t believe in god but I believe in something” are called theists and are probably what you’re referring too. Good point otherwise.
Also now that I’m busy being technical, the sun and earth are actually moving around eachother and there appears to be no set point in the universe. It’s all relative as Einstein would say.
Atheism is NOT based on faith. It is merely a lack of belief because of insufficient evidence for the claim that god exists. You’re right in that absence of evidence isn’t evidence absence. But absence of evidence is reason to not believe until evidence is presented. I see no evidence for any god or gods which is why i do not believe in them. And until evidence is present to me to prove that any kinda of god exists I will continue to not believe.
^^Agreed.
Sorry about the noob question, but is there actually a way to make facebook say a post is 400 years old? (Or 65 million years, as in a previous WIN) Or was this photoshopped later?
What gets me most about atheists is that they think they’re superior to people with different beliefs, and then try to ram their own beliefs down the throats of said people with pseudo-intellectual arguments they read somewhere else.
As a non-religious person, I find myself preferring Christians who tell me I’m going to hell, but at least they don’t do so in a “I’m-not-being-taken-as-a-fool” smug manner.
Um, I’ve seen that it’s the christians who believe that they are superior to everyone else, not the athiests. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen christians rant about how they’re going to heaven and everyone else is going to hell and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Please. What sort of human being says stuff like that? As an athiest, we just want to be left alone.
Most Atheists aren’t like that. You just look at the douchebag Atheists who are too open about their (non)beliefs.
What gets me most about the religious is that they think they’re superior to people with different beliefs, and then try to ram their own beliefs down the throats of said people with invasions and violent purges of non-believers, all in the name of their own “kind and merciful” God.
ur so lame
What I find intresting, as an atheist, is when I discuss (argue) with religious people about the excistence of some supreme omnipotent being (God) they tend to infer their own world wiev upon mine. Saying that, for instance, atheism is a religion or that science is my god.
I find that some religious people are so bent on their ownworld view that they cant or wont see it from my view, that I dont belive, and i dont need to either. Atheism is just an absence of faith! Thusly you cant group atheist into one common group, it’s not an idiology and it’s not a religion! (Humanism is a form of atheism that could be labled a religion or an idiology)
Also being an athiest in itself is not an attack on those who are religious. Buddhists are maybe the only “religious” people I have discussed with, that are able to totaly accept my atheism and point of view. I guess its because biddhism originaly is more like a philosophy.
That being said, anny people who whants to cram their world view down the throat of an other person is just a prick! Atheist, christian, muslim, liberal or conservative. But those who cant accept an argument around diffrent ideas and idelogoies etc. is and idiot.
Church=/= christians
I didn’t start the Flamewar
Peeps were hatin’ on in before I left my comment.
its says four hundred years ago then an hour ago then 57 minutes ago and so on. hmm….
“There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”
-Douglas Adams
this was posted 400 years ago.
1 hour ago the first reply was made
GOD IS IMAGINARY GOD IS FAKE GOD IS HERE TO BRAINWASH YOU GOD IS SLOWING DOWN SOCIETY
I’d ask you to prove any of that, but trolls aren’t usually one to prove anything.
Oh boy, religious debates! I love discussions that can change people’s minds in a harmonious way.
i love when the church is like YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH. YOU SHUT IT RIGHT NOW. rofl
Will you do the Fandango?
CONTROVERSY :U
Even though it’s faked, that still pretty damn good. XD
I also like that fact that people are getting mad over this. Seriously, guys. No one cares. If you want to go cry about the big mean people making slightly relevant jokes about your religion, then you can go complain about them on Facebook.
Stupid debates or complaints on Facebook would probably just end up on Failbook, eventually, as a post. There’s nothing one can do about it. This site is meant to be filled with bulls**t. But that’s why I like it.
Why is everybody arguing over religion on this post. All of the irony and humor in this post lies in the fact that the person who made it thought that Galileo discovered the heliocentric solar system but it was really Copernicus
The idea of a heliocentric solar system had been around for a while. Copernicus’ heliocentric model was put forth as an explanation to different planetary movements, such as planets in retrograde and influenced Galileo, who created a telescope powerful enough to prove it.
Also, why would Copernicus like this if Galileo was trying to take credit?
Did anyone else read The Churches last line in the voice of Billy Mays?
I like peanut butter.
the funny thing is he rediscover probably things the church banned.
I think im seeing a pattern here…
I love lamp!
I’ve read a few comments on here and it seems many of you fall into the group of “ignorant atheists.” There are ignorant atheists just as there are ignorant Christians (and there are a lot of those). You believe that Christians are stupid, call them names, and say that there is no evidence for God or Christianity. However, there is ample evidence in support of Christianity. If you want to actually be educated on the issue please go to reasonablefaith.org, or are you afraid to be proven wrong?
Sorry but the rantings of Dr. Craig are not evidence. I am more than familiar with Craig and his arguments. I find them sorely lacking as being convincing of anything. He does nothing but lay out bold assertions and merely claims them to be true with giving one piece of evidence to support them. Each and every argument I have ever heard from him fails right at the starting gate. Sorry but if the only evidence you have God is Craig, then you have no evidence.
I consider Christianity to be an extremely large group of people (the church) that have taken the teachings of a pretty nice guy (Jesus) WAY out of hand.
You know the difference between a Religion and a Myth? It all comes down to whether anyone still believes or not. Greek “mythology” used to be a bonafied religion…
Thor is coming for you!
Why would Thor be coming? Thor is Norse mythology not Greek. Zeus would have been more appropriate or Hades, or many many others.
And the difference between a Religion and a Myth has nothing to do with belief. There are still followers of Mithra after all. Mythology is what religion is based upon. A myth is a traditional story which embodies a belief. A religion is a collection of myths used to define and codify a belief.
Oh, and as far as the “bible is the word of God” thing goes…
God created all of this stuff, but he could not just go “poof, here’s your user manual”? He instead entrusted his word to be written down by multiple different, hugely fallible, egocentric, self-serving human beings? And how come all of this stuff went down while nobody else was around? “While I was completely out of your sight and hearing, God told me all of these things he wants you to do…” How come nobody has called b/s on this? If I popped up and said that God came to me thru my truck radio and told me stuff, I would be locked up, but Moses is a prophet for doing essentially the same thing?
My favorite is the prophet who is visited by the divine during a drug trip.
Hey just to let you ppl(trolls) know that we went from over 9000 to debates about if someone believing in god is dumb to drugs and back to religion. WoW.
lets just say that is debate that all of u ppl(trolls) had was not over 9000
Nowhere does the Bible claim the earth is flat, or that its the centre of the universe. Hitler was not a Christian. The ONLY reason I need to state that at all is the ignorance that pervades popular culture. Likewise with the Crusades. An examination of the Bible, compared with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church caused a little something called the Reformation. KINDA important since that’s the reason the Puritans and Reformers sought out North America.
Well, no reformation began because a guy named Henry didn’t like his wife
. The puritans and reformers left England for North America because they weren’t allowed to persecute others for not believing in as strict a version of Protestantism as they did.
“Hitler was not a Christian”
Really?
“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.”
“Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.”
“As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.”
“And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and misery.”
“When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and exploited.”
Each of these quotes are from Adolf Hitler himself from a speech he delivered in April 12, 1922. Published in “My New Order”. Quoted in “Freethought Today” April 1990