The Athiest thread

[guitarmy]

All religions are cults. Some have just become a tradition.

Not true either. A cult is basically a spin-off of a religion. A cult is like a religion in it's infancy.

My Anthropology Professor explained it like this:

There's basically a this line called the "Pale of Orthodoxy". He always drew it on the board as a circle. Everyting that amounts to the major beliefs of the practicing majority of a religion is within that circle. The people, groups, and beleifs that are outside that circle are considered to be in a cult. They draw several traditions from within the pale, but have other traditions and facets which those within the pale of orthodoxy do not consider to be a part of their religion.

Cults can become religions, if they gain the majority, however.

For example, Christianity started out as a separate cult of Judaism. They drew from Jewish tradition, scripture, and law ---and then added to it. That's why all Christian bibles have a New Testament to go with the "Old" one. I never liked the new/old phrase but it makes it clear which ones people talk about.

Well, my paternal grandfather was the Jewish one. So, I guess I wouldn't be. I don't know how important the traditional sects are (and by that, I guess I mean, are they seen as a bit old and archaic or is their word law?) Though it is strange that I would even be considered Jewish at all...

I hate these genetic definitions of things like race and religion.

If you have descended from any Jewish ancestors then yes, you're part Jewish.

That doesn't mean you have to be Jewish. You can be whatever you want.

This is comparable to being Black or Native American in the United States. If you have any such ancestry from these groups, then you or your children will never be considered white.

Not that being white is the hip thing or that anyone should want to be black or white. My point is that these religious and racial things are silly. 7/8 White and 1/8 Native American classifies you as Native American---puh lease.

This is why I don't believe in race. Too much nonsense that only divides us as human beings. I'd love to talk about that elsewhere.

My point is that when you assume the favor of an almighty all powerful being, you can do whatever the hell you want to people. Or when you assume the power of an allmighty being.

Yeah that's a good point. I think the one rule every religion should have is "no violence". Kind of like the nuclear proliferation treaty but on regarding all violence.

If your religion gives you a reason to kill, or harm others, get out and find one that doesn't rule with fear on this life.

Find one that rules you with fear of your afterlife! That's at least a lot better and more humane.

For me, I think it's ok if one person or group hates a certain other group of people. It's when that hatred becomes an act of violence that pisses me off. How dare they!

I just dont see how anyone can think religion has done more harm than good. You dont believe, that is fine. I do believe that God exists. I also believe that Jesus was the son of God and I feel I owe it to him to respond to this. Not everyone in this world fears death or is unable to accept its inevitable arrival. People are quick to try and blame God for the problems in the world. You refer to Gods as "them" and we as a species have no need for "them". Speak for yourself but don't include all of us believers in your analysis.

Don't drop the J-word if you're addressing an atheist. It's hypocritical of your point about not wanting to be included as a human being.

We don't need to know what you owe to anyone, and by you telling us, it includes everyone reading it.

Take out everything from "I do believe God...respond to this" and I would agree with most of the points you made. One thing I've learned, is that referencing your beliefs to an atheist just doesn't help whatever case you're trying to make.

It just sets you up as a loony.

Many religions try to convert people (atheists or not) by referencing their religious texts (I'm not saying you were trying to). That doesn't work because those texts don't mean shit to atheists. It just drives them away even more!

'The god delusion' is more controversial, but again is a very well argued book on why atheism is the correct option to choose.

That doesn't sound right at all. I'm guessing you're not his PR person.

Atheism is no more correct than any religion is.

There really has never been accountability. In fact, I'd venture to say that accountability is a fairly recent ideal, and one still widely rejected.

There's definitely no accountability on the internet. It's waaaay too anonymous for anyone to be responsible for what they say.

I like to say "Nobody's Fault But Mine"----Unless it's something that you REALLY aren't responsible for, then it helps make you a better person.

It's also the reason I rejected the idea of Jesus being crucified. Supposedly, he died for our sins. There are sects of Christianity that truly believe that because of this, it doesn't matter how big, how evil, of a sin you committed... if you just accept Jesus into your heart, you'll be forgiven and you'll get into Heaven.

My faith meter is coming up "bullshit" (not you--THEM).

Any particular Christian religions you're talking about (not lumping Christian faiths together)?

I once told an Evangelist that I'd rather go to their Hell then their Heaven for one simple reason: Their Heaven is full of Christian criminals, whereas their Hell is full of non-Christian doctors, humanitarians, musicians, and all-around good people. So I say if I'm gonna get burned by fire, at least I'll have doctors to patch me up, humanitarians to help me heal, musicians to soothe my soul, and friends to stay by my side.

You don't like Billy Joel do you?

Extra brownie points if anyone gets the reference.

[guitarmy]

this came to me the other day, I wrote it down,

ya can't see the wind except what is evidenced by its moving. thats how I feel bout GOD. A power greater than myself moving.

I need one fo sure!!

but I respect all of u who do not.

peace and love

I think one thing that atheists lack is the understanding that understanding isn't humanly possible.

That doesn't mean you take everything religious you hear as "gospel truth", but it does mean that you have to come to terms with the fact that you don't always get to understand and there are many times in life where understanding is way above us.

I don't ever expect to understand whys and whatnots, and I think that's my point about proof. I don't think humans will ever be able to prove existence of God. That's just not how it works.

The "Why not just pick one?" Question:

If you don't believe in God or an afterlife, or if you can't say that there is or isn't a God, then why not pick one and play the odds?

My point is this...If you are an atheist, then you believe nothing will happen when you die. If you happen to be right, then that is that. There are no consequences.

But if you happen to be wrong, then you missed your chance and there are consequences.

If you pick a religion, then you are investing in your future, if such a future exists.

But if you don't, and such a religion is real, then you come up short.

I've always wondered this. The best response I can think of is "Well it would really suck if I believe in religion and it turned out not to exist.--what a waste of time!"

To this I say:

Not necessarily a waste of time. There is a good chance that there's a religion out there that is similar to your moral beliefs (besides religion), so why not become a card carrying member?

I think u may enjoy this bit!!

We're all god.

I'm not A god or THE god, but we're all god and we're all potentially divine and potentially evil.

We all have everything within us.

There is a power we can all tap.

God is a power and we're all light bulbs that can tap the electricity.

You can use electricity to kill people or to light the room.

God is that.

I don't need to go to church.

I think people who need a church should go.

The others who know the church is in your own head should visit that temple 'cus that's where the source is.

John Lennon, 1969

Thank you, John Lennon

That actually sounds like Catholicism, and other Christian religions, from my interpretation of it. Except the "I don't need to go to church" part

I'm a very faithful Protestant and for every awesome atheist I know there are 40 who are F'd in the head or have daddy issues.

Yeah good job alienating atheists there. I know it was a reaction to what Suz said, but Suz isn't the one who prescribes to a faith that preaches against revenge, YOU ARE!

...

How did I know "In My Time of Dying" was gonna come up here? I'd say it doesn't matter if the song wasn't Led Zeppelin's, because they still made the choice to cover it. Did they cover it because at least on of them had religious reasons? Who knows. I think that John Bonham was active in his church. Don't quote me on that though!

...

In England and indeed across most of Europe you will find a far greater number of athiests and England as a whole is a very secular country. If you asked most people about religion they would claim to be RC or C of E, but in reality have no practical faith whatsoever and, if pressed, would admit to a vague belief in some higher power but only because that is how they were brought up - not due to any commited belief of their own.

I would agree that theist are probably an overall majority, but not as big a majority as you make out, certainly not outside the USA.

Some actual numbers would strengthen your argument. Your argument is not a religion, and so I need proof!

F'd in the head eh, ... What about all those altar/choir boys that get F'd in the ass by their priest/minister etc.

That's not fair because it's not an officially sanctioned activity.

It was in the ancient Greco-Roman religion though.

And just because a priest is fucked up in the head, doesn't mean the religion he belongs to is. Individuals often make stupid decisions that do not reflect their organization. The organization wrongly becomes the scapegoat when that person is best known for belonging to such an organization. OH IT MUST BE BECAUSE HE IS _____(fill in your own biased blank)______ .

Any cover up on the part of the Catholic church was wrong though. That doesn't mean the whole church is wrong. It just means the individuals who took part in it were.

It's kind of like just because someone's mother was crazy in the head for religion doesn't mean the religion itself is.

[guitarmy]

I don't put much trust into anyone who believes in fictional beings such as gods, tooth faeries and the like. To me this is a very good meter in determining how intelligent they are.

Religion has been used over the centuries to control. That is it's main function........control.........how others feel, eat, sleep, or screw for that matter.

It's more practical to take things as they are, appreciate love, beauty and life EMPIRICALLY. We must also accept our immortality thusly.

Codex Argenteus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Argenteus (added at edit)

Oh, intelligence is just a word created by atheists to tell non-atheists how non-intelligent they are!

Being an atheist doesn't make you any more intelligent than a non-atheist. That's like if I said, "how dare you be an atheist and believe the atheists that came before you!" It's not like you were the first. Just as there is religious propaganda, there is also atheist propaganda. And neither of us is to blame for believing either of it.

Atheist or not, we're all factors of our environment, which is what really tells us what to think.

By that definition, none of us are intelligent. Some of us have just had the right experiences to lead us down certain paths.

What about the fact that a lot of things are as they are, due to religion. That our world society has been shaped by it, and to deny it is to deny our heritage and turn our back on history?

Most of the morality we know today is from religion. Laws, which are supposed to be secular, can't help but borrow from such religious teachings either.

If they are truly secular, then they wouldn't need religious basis for laws.

You seem to have confused Theism with organized religions like Christianity and Islam. How hypocritical that you claim all Theists are stupid and then go on to misconstrue Theism and membership in a specific church/sect. If you're going to do this right, say all members of massive churches have been brainwashed, are stupid, etc...

Not that I believe that.

FYI, I am agnostic. I don't consider this to be between Theism and Atheism, I consider it un-belief in God. So, I would not outright deny the existence of a supreme being, but I would not acknowledge that one exists or has ever existed.

You too should answer my question about "Why not just pick one?", found above.

There is much evidence to support that there is a God and a Devil.

Oh really? Let's hear it then?

My point is that if there was actual evidence, actual scientific proof, then it'd either be the end of the world, or God wouldn't exist altogether.

In fact, the closest thing to the existence of God that I can think of is existence itself. You, me, this forum, your country, our world, our solar system, our universe.

Even if you believe the "Big Bang" theory, it still doesn't account for who/what made all the noise.

>

The best measure of intelligence is the right to choose as far as I'm concerned. I will choose to point out 'God' is a 'concept,' not an empirical fact.

The world runs on facts, at least mine does.

Are you a Vulcan? Your world runs on facts, eh? What about emotion? I've never met a human not at least a little controlled by indescribable emotion.

Free will is key though, and many religions support that, so I'd think they'd fall under intelligence.

Do you mean the big daddy in the sky you pray to? Cause you can't have issues with that if it doesn't exist for you. Ya know?

BOOYAH!

Although I believe in God, I'm intelligent enough to know that the person you quoted was contradicting themselves.

...

Nathan,

I really liked your #144 post (page 8) because it connects with a lot of the things I'm saying here.

...

Like I said 'God' is not a fact. It's a concept. At least you can see that, showing there's hope for you yet. I would suggest your first statement 'Your Rabbi,' makes you believe what he wishes you to believe. Sort of like herding cattle now isn't it? I refuse to be herded like cattle.

So you don't believe in a concept now? Concepts don't need to be proven

And, you've been "herded like cattle" just as much as he has, for reasons of both theist and atheist propaganda that I've already mentioned.

Athiests and Agnostics outnumber any ONE organized religion in America.

...

Theres nearly 7 Billion persons on this Earth between 2-3 Billion believe in some sort of god.

...

I find your lack of reasoning is tainted by things which cannot be proven

Spoken like a true THEIST!

You have just thrown out numbers and haven't provided sources.

You may as well be citing scripture.

Very hypocritical of you. It gives you no credibility.

As far as Theism being here first, that is highly unlikely.

....

How many centuries has your religion been here now? How many centuries has the world been here? And your stating that Theism was here first?

Bring me your evidence on that.

What was first doesn't matter.

Bring me your evidence on your numbers, for they are not God, and I can't take them on "blind faith".

47.2% indeed.

[guitarmy]

I don't get why people think that someone who doesn't believe in god (s) doesn't see the beauty in the world. Why is that? We experience love, joy,beauty, wonder like anyone else. I personally don't associate those things with a diety. Why is that so hard to grasp?

It's hard for them because they see beauty as only coming from God/the gods.

While I believe God is the source of beauty, that's only because I believe God is the source of everything.

But in practical terms, human aesthetics and culture decides what is beautiful.

I believe in a purely material universe that conforms to naturalistic laws and principles.

Such a universe came from where, who, and how?

I believe that the life we have is the only one we will have, that the mind and consciousness are inseparable from the brain, that we cease to exist in any conscious form when we die, and that it is therefore incumbent on us to enable each person to live their one life to the fullest.

Interesting that you believe this without proof. Not even the religious have proof of this of an afterlife. If you think that you have proof of a non-afterlife, then that makes you some sort of paradox.

I believe in the power of science and reason and rationality to further deepen our understanding of everything around us and to eventually overcome superstition and erase the petty divisions sown by religion, race, ethnicity, and nationality.

Science will never be able to explain everything. There will always be an element of all that is human that we won't be able to grasp. The human race will always be humbled.

I am in awe of the beauty, vastness, and complexity of nature and the universe, and the fact that all arose purely by the working of natural laws.

Again, and how did these laws begin. Magic?

I believe in the power of ideals such as peace and justice and shared humanity to inspire us to create a free and just world.

Even if the ideals we hold today originated from religion?

I believe in kindness, love, and the human spirit and their ability to overcome challenges and adversity and to create a better world.

Even if the concept of love we know today originates from religion?

I believe in the necessity for credible and objective evidence to sustain any belief and thus deny, because of the absence of such evidence, the existence of each and every aspect of the supernatural.

Yeah but you'll never get any evidence, whether it's true or not, so you've wasted your breath.

I refuse to bow, prostrate myself, or otherwise cower before the deities of any religion.

You have that right.

I am neither tempted by the fiction of heaven or any other form of eternal life nor fearful of the fiction of hell.

You got me there.

[guitarmy]

I choose to live the dignified and exhilarating life of a free-thinker, able to go wherever knowledge and curiosity takes me, without fear of contradicting any dogma.

True freedom is a prison, because without constraints, you'd be the only human in existence. Why? because it's not possible for a human to survive without the teachings and beliefs of another human. You'd never come to know language or culture other than yourself. Not to mention, you'd die slightly after being born because there would be no one to care for you. Therefor, to be free is to be dead.

To be totally free is to be totally unconscious of anything that might potentially influence you. Trust me, you don't want freedom.

I find the whole "I do not believe in God" thing to be a little mystifying personally.

What is "God"? The Christian God? Are you Atheistic towards the Greek, Egyptian, and Norse deities as well? What about the general idea of some kind of "higher being" with no characteristics other than that they created everything ever?

There are so many different ideas of what "God" is.

There's no evidence for any kind of creationism, so why would I give it credence by saying that I avidly disbelieve in it? There's nothing to refute! Because there's no evidence in the first place!

If someone were to give me some hard evidence, like "Because of X, the Christian God exists". Then maybe I could refute it in some way.

Atheists are giving religion more credence by calling themselves Atheists! Say you're non-religious and don't believe in creationism! Or that you're a humanist or something! This whole debate between Theism and Atheism is ridiculous!

Atheists say God doesn't exist because there is no evidence, Theists say God exists because there is no evidence against it. But there can't be any evidence against it because there is absolutely nothing to disprove! And vice-versa, how is someone supposed to prove that an omniscient overlord of the universe exists or doesn't exist?

I agree!

If you come up with proof of your "God" get back to me ASAP.

Umm, are you even listening?

He and others have said a couple times that it's about faith, and that believing in God draws it's strength from the fact that it can't be proven.

There is no proof of God and there never will be, short of some apocalyptic revelation, which by definition would be too late for you and others.

Even if God exists, then science would never be able to prove it. Why can't you understand that?

>In other words man created god?

And who created man to create such a thing?

And where's your proof that man created god?

Surely, since you subscribe to the atheist tradition of scientific proof, you must be able to tell me.

I'd agree entirely with that bit - I don't however think that religious belief, or lack thereof, has any impact on whether someone is a good person or not. I know plenty of good people who are religious and plenty who are not. Equally, there are plenty of bad religious people. Anyone can quote relgion to justify almost any atrocity, or can blame atrocities on godless people.

I agree.

I currently choose not to believe in God, because there is no evidence to support it. If someone can provide convincing evidence I will gladly believe.

You obviously haven't heard a word that has been said.

No one can prove God, so don't pretend you're waiting around for some proof.

HELLO?

IS ANYONE THERE?

I sure hope so.

Like I said before, I think the closest thing to proof of God's existence is the Universe's existence.

What more proof do you need?

I think what all you atheists are really struggling with is "which God is it?", and you want proof that it's one and not the other, or that it's something else altogether.

I think you're lying to yourself if you don't find the correlation between origin of the universe and some sort of higher power.

God exists because the universe exists. While I can't prove that the one(s) we know as God created it, I think it's safe to assume that something greater than the universe created the universe. Humans refer to that as God.

Also keep in mind that it's possible to believe in both creationism and evolutionism. You're not always one or the other.

For example: I personally believe that God created the universe via Big Bang theory, but was so masterful in his plan that was able to map out all of existence in that explosion of life. This includes the earth, as well as the rest of the universe, and our ape ancestors.

It's that simple.

Shit, even Genesis has two creation stories. How's that for a contradiction? I just take that as God's message to me to not take the bible so literally. I mean, if the first chapters contradict themselves, it should tell you something.

[guitarmy]

Well put. I can't understand why some people believe that having faith is somehow preferable to having proof.

Because proof is unattainable and faith is.

Proof is impossible and faith is not.

...

Nathan's post #187 on page 10

I don't think they read your posts and I don't think they'll read mine. I do think you will. I'm guessing they're afraid that they might learn something that contradicts their beliefs and can't see past your words.

You think it's possible that atheists are lazy? Even if they had the proof, they don't care enough to see it.

If I do manage to prove that God exists I won't be able to get back to you because I'll be dead.

Exactly my point as well.

1. When was the first religion established? No body knows. Homo Sap goes back over 100,000 years and there were early varieties before that. As a practical matter early hominids probably tried to explain the unexplainable by imagining invisible oogly booglies (or ascribing special powers to visible objects) and attempted to placate them with rituals and sacrifices. Archaeological digs indicate rituals (like burials) by Neanderthals that may have had a religious component. Evidence of ritual behavior in Africa has been found as far back as 70,000 years. Cave paintings that go back 20 to 50 thousand years look very much like some sort of attempt to manipulate supernatural forces.

2. When was the first religion recorded? That's somewhat easier as recorded history only goes back 6,000 years or so. The earliest civilizations in Mesopotamia, and the Indus and Nile valleys all had formal worship of some sort of supernatural critters as integral parts of their cultures. These, no doubt, had much earlier roots in pre-historical cultures. I would imagine that religion and culture probably grew up together, one reinforcing the other: religion getting financial and political support from the organized society and the society using religion to control and motivate the population. In Colonial America towns grew up around churches. Something very like that probably happened by in pre-historical times as groups with common beliefs banded together for mutual support and created the first communities and cities.

Source:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=offeri...to-a-stone-snak

Offerings to a Stone Snake Provide the Earliest Evidence of Religion

70,000-year-old African ritual practices linked to mythology of modern Botswanans

By JR Minkel

PBS: Evolution http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/

Please notice tools.

I fail to see why it matters that which came first when talking to someone who believes in God.

Such people tend to believe in something called divine intervention, which is something like "the hand of God".

And while you don't think God exists, you have to admit that if he did exist, he would be able to influence human culture and traditions, eh?

Do you know what I'm talking about? I'm talking about something called logic.

I'm talking about a conditional world.

Conditional worlds have if-then clauses.

IF God exists

THEN he would be all powerful.

This doesn't prove that God exists, but it shows that if he did, he would be all powerful.

Now, you don't have any proof that he doesn't exist, so by scientific logic, you can't prove that he's not all powerful if he did exist.

Was that too much for the intelligent atheists out there? It basically means that you don't have any more proof in your beliefs than we do.

Just one question that befuddles me though, if this is so why are there still apes?

Oh that's easy.

There are still different apes because not all apes evolved together.

Some were separated by continents or other natural borders and so their gene pools mixed separately after having a common ancestor.

Over hundreds of thousands of years, mutations occur and since evolution is based on environment and the separate apes were living in different environments, they evolved differently.

Some species of apes are still around today because nature has not selected them into extinction yet, or changed them yet again into a different species.

I didn't know this was a political thread? I did read it all at once. The idea I was on about was the mutually exclusive one.

There's several species of apes, even though they look similar,,,,,,,,they are not the same.

Look at how diverse birds are, how diverse fish are. Only us smart ass godlike humans figure hey we are so big and bad and above all the other animals. Who knows, a plague could wipe humans out entirely. Then what would happen. Planet Of The Apes maybe?

I have a feeling you're kidding, but in case you're not, NO.

Plant of the Apes would not happen because it's impossible for such mutations to ever occur again. Why? Because the conditions for such mutations don't exist anymore. The nature that selected particular traits no longer exists as the nature we know it.

This is why I have a hard time believing in aliens (at least ones developing separate from us), because there's no way they would be anything like us, unless there is some proxy-earth out there. Even then, it'd be such a long shot, ESPECIALLY if God doesn't exist.

A good athiest cannot be swayed. I puppet on a string however is another subject all together.

So you mean you just ignore what he has to say then?

So much for actually searching for any proof or truth.

...

I made it to page 11 and I now see that you guys have seen a little bit more eye to eye through PMs.

I still have to post this though, as it took me a while to get through and I don't want to scrap it all!

[~tangerine~]

The "Why not just pick one?" Question:

If you don't believe in God or an afterlife, or if you can't say that there is or isn't a God, then why not pick one and play the odds?

My point is this...If you are an atheist, then you believe nothing will happen when you die. If you happen to be right, then that is that. There are no consequences.

But if you happen to be wrong, then you missed your chance and there are consequences.

If you pick a religion, then you are investing in your future, if such a future exists.

But if you don't, and such a religion is real, then you come up short.

EDIT...messed up the quote ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

How do you pick one, flip a coin? Pick out of a hat? Play the odds? How many different religions are there? I think your odds of winning a jackpot of a lottery are just as good as picking the "right" religion, lol.

I believe that EVERYONE faces the same fate, whatever that may be, when they die. I personally don't believe in life after death, but if i'm wrong and there is something, it's the same for all of us, religion will not make a difference.

Many people do not "feel" a "need" to belong to an organized group of people who are being told what to think. Many people have other interests that take up their time and make up their life, without the need for "religion".

How's this for a question. What if there is something after you die, and there are consequences, but you picked the wrong religious beliefs to practice? Do you only get a pass for having religious beliefs, despite the fact that many religions believe in much different ideals?

I'm not buying this argument...

and as far as the Atheism is a religion theory set forth by some here, well for me it's not. I simply do not believe in "god" and i don't practice religion (not to say that i don't have family members who do, including my young child).

[~tangerine~]

^ I think that's got to be a record of quotes and responses gathered together in consecutive posts I've ever seen.

Great tenacity guitarmy. Hats off to you.

He's really pissed at his girlfriend, and kept it bottled up inside too long, lol.

[Mary Hartman]

[horrible British accent]

Guess it's time for me to step in and clear the air, right?

[/horrible British accent]

Mary and I have spoken over PMs and are now friends.

We have spoken and are both open to what the other believes and, honestly, I don't blame her for preferring facts to faith. Believe me when I say that I understand that completely.

And Dzldoc, you want to know why there are still apes? This is just a theory, mind you, but maybe it's because the apes we descended from are no more. The apes I'm talking about are not the apes that exist today. Today's apes are, like us, descended form the same ancestor.

Even if you don't believe it, how can you deny the fact that our DNA is almost disturbingly similar to ape DNA? That has to be more then just a coincidence.

First I'd like to say thanks for peeking in. Probably very busy too. As far as argueing with everyone that I didn't read your posts. That's old news.

The way I see it if we believe anything anyone tells us as a precept that there is a god, just to pacify our fear of the unknown, well then we really aren't doing anyone any justice. Now a bit more for what you are saying....

"HUMAN ABO BLOOD GROUPS - ROOTS OF MANKIND

Human Blood Groups: Origins of the ABO System

Human Blood Types and Human Evolution

THE FACTS

CHIMPANZEES are blood group A, minimal O, never B.

GORILLAS are blood group B, minimal O, but never A.

The AB blood group is entirely missing - only HUMANS have it.

THE ABO STUDIES of the MAN-APES

Chimpanzees

28 separate studies showed that Chimpanzees

have the blood types A and minimal O, but never B.

Gorillas

8 separate studies showed that Gorillas

have the blood types B and minimal O, but never A.

There is NO blood type AB in either of the man-apes.

(See Jakob Schmitt, Immunbiologische Untersuchungen bei Primaten,

S. Karger, New York and Basel, 1968).

But man has both A and B AND blood type AB as well as very much O.

THE MN STUDIES of the MAN-APES

MN is a different blood antigen system than ABO. But the same analysis holds true for the MN blood type in man-apes and humans as for ABO. Man is both M and N or the combined MN blood type, whereas the Chimpanzees and Gorillas react exclusively to these types. (According to Schmitt, the reactions of Chimpanzees are 00.16 to Anti-M human mucous and 10.00 to Anti-N, whereas the figures for Gorillas are exactly the reverse, with 10.00 to Anti-M and 00.64 to Anti-N).

THE MN STUDIES of the MAN-APES

Since man - but not the man-apes - can also be the combination MN , M and N must have combined at some time in the past. So, is A + B = You and Me? Can we venture a genetic guess as to who Adam and Eve were?

Perhaps man developed on two separate lines from the man-apes or evolved from a combination of two primate lines [this idea was first presented on LexiLine]. The evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin may be disputed, but his basic conclusions are strongly supported by modern scientific studies. It is well known, for example, that the chromosomes of the man-apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, etc.) are very similar to those of man himself, differing in fact only very slightly, thus suggesting a genetic relationship. See Dorothy A. Miller, Science magazine, Vol. 198, p. 1116.

The study of (human) blood is called hematology. Equally as interesting as chromosomes are blood types, the so-called ABO alleles and the MN alleles. Most of us, for example, know our blood type in the ABO system as A-positive, A-negative, B-positive, B-negative, O-positive, O-negative, AB-positive, AB-negative. The positive or negative refer to the so-called Rhesus factor. Persons with blood type O are so-called universal donors, since they can give blood to anyone having any of the blood types A, B, O or AB. Persons with blood type AB on the other hand, can give blood only to persons with AB blood type. A person with blood type A can not give blood to a person with blood type B and vice versa. This means that an African with blood type A can give blood to a Scandinavian with blood type A, but a Scandinavian close relative with blood type B can not.

ABO BLOOD TYPE ORIGINS: AFRICA

Given the above facts, blood types AB and O seem to be a combination of A+A, A+B or B+B (AB as exclusive and O as inclusive) - whereas A and B themselves appear to be separate original groups. Only if the father and mother are "A AND B" or "B AND A" blood type can the child then be born with any of the human blood groups A, B, AB or O. This negates current theory that O is the original blood type, especially since the man-apes have little or no O blood type and no AB blood type at all.

A and B are very likely the originals. Chimp + Gorilla? The spot at which the territories of the chimps and gorillas meet is also the region of the oldest human skulls in Africa."

Anyone with a one scintilla of a brain would have known this already. Not saying Nathan.

However.

Convincing some people there's scientific proof of evolution is like nailing jello to a tree. It's a waste of time

[Mary Hartman]

True freedom is a prison, because without constraints, you'd be the only human in existence. Why? because it's not possible for a human to survive without the teachings and beliefs of another human. You'd never come to know language or culture other than yourself. Not to mention, you'd die slightly after being born because there would be no one to care for you. Therefor, to be free is to be dead.

To be totally free is to be totally unconscious of anything that might potentially influence you. Trust me, you don't want freedom.

I agree!

Umm, are you even listening?

He and others have said a couple times that it's about faith, and that believing in God draws it's strength from the fact that it can't be proven.

There is no proof of God and there never will be, short of some apocalyptic revelation, which by definition would be too late for you and others.

Even if God exists, then science would never be able to prove it. Why can't you understand that?

And who created man to create such a thing?

And where's your proof that man created god?

Surely, since you subscribe to the atheist tradition of scientific proof, you must be able to tell me.

I agree.

You obviously haven't heard a word that has been said.

No one can prove God, so don't pretend you're waiting around for some proof.

HELLO?

IS ANYONE THERE?

I sure hope so.

Like I said before, I think the closest thing to proof of God's existence is the Universe's existence.

What more proof do you need?

I think what all you atheists are really struggling with is "which God is it?", and you want proof that it's one and not the other, or that it's something else altogether.

I think you're lying to yourself if you don't find the correlation between origin of the universe and some sort of higher power.

God exists because the universe exists. While I can't prove that the one(s) we know as God created it, I think it's safe to assume that something greater than the universe created the universe. Humans refer to that as God.

Also keep in mind that it's possible to believe in both creationism and evolutionism. You're not always one or the other.

For example: I personally believe that God created the universe via Big Bang theory, but was so masterful in his plan that was able to map out all of existence in that explosion of life. This includes the earth, as well as the rest of the universe, and our ape ancestors.

It's that simple.

Shit, even Genesis has two creation stories. How's that for a contradiction? I just take that as God's message to me to not take the bible so literally. I mean, if the first chapters contradict themselves, it should tell you something.

Having faith on something created to pacify mans fright of death is not an option for me. All gods have been proven to not exist. Sure, you can elaborate, threaten, scare your children into believing they will burn in hell because they do not believe in your supernatural misfit desire as much as you wish. The bible was not written by a 'God.' It was written by close to 100 men/women.

HERE THAT?

Men and or women...NOT a 'God,' of your delusions.

[Dzldoc]

First I'd like to say thanks for peeking in. Probably very busy too. As far as argueing with everyone that I didn't read your posts. That's old news.

The way I see it if we believe anything anyone tells us as a precept that there is a god, just to pacify our fear of the unknown, well then we really aren't doing anyone any justice. Now a bit more for what you are saying....

Convincing some people there's scientific proof of evolution is like nailing jello to a tree. It's a waste of time

[Mary Hartman]

Way to dodge what I said.

Looks like it was another fact now doesn't it? Not a dodge, I spoke with him and I said I would study his beliefs more with a dialogue and I meant it. I do make mistakes though plenty of them.....why? maybe I'm not 'Godlike?'

[Mary Hartman]

[Patrycja]

Having faith on something created to pacify mans fright of death is not an option for me. All gods have been proven to not exist. Sure, you can elaborate, threaten, scare your children into believing they will burn in hell because they do not believe in your supernatural misfit desire as much as you wish. The bible was not written by a 'God.' It was written by close to 100 men/women.

HERE THAT?

Men and or women...NOT a 'God,' of your delusions.

Sorry, MH, but that is simply not factual. Not proving that something IS beyond a shadow of a doubt does not mean that it ISN'T beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Guitarmy brought up some very valid points - and kudos to you for a stellar contribution, thanks - and it is a disservice to his efforts, and to the pursuit of truth (as it is professed to be here) not to read it.

I came on here originally to see what arguments were being made for atheism, because the subject of belief is interesting. I have yet to find a sound proposition supporting that God does not exist, based on sound principles of argumentation, ones that would, say, hold up in court.

If anything, the supporters of atheism have displayed the attitudes of circular or faulty reasoning and rationalization that they are trying to get away from, or accuse theists of. They do their position a disservice by putting down an opposing view, making fun of those who believe it, or accuse them of being brainwashed/having a limited capacity for comprehension, all without soundly defending said position of atheism from some very sound thoughts presented.

I met some nice people here, though, that's been the best part

[wanna be drummer]

Looks like it was another fact now doesn't it? Not a dodge, I spoke with him and I said I would study his beliefs more with a dialogue and I meant it. I do make mistakes though plenty of them.....why? maybe I'm not 'Godlike?'

Your posts here are public. I didn't know you and Nathan talked things out. My bad there.

But that doesn't mean your statements are now off-the-table.

[Reggie29]

Religions are doctrines of faith - FACT

ALL Religions are a belief in the one true God - FACT

Creationism is a belief that all if not most religions embrace - FACT

Big Bang is a theory - FACT

Evolution is a theory - FACT

Religion gives a lot of people comfort and is purely spiritual.

Religion has a lot to answer for in that there are people who have done evil things in Gods name.

All modern "western" laws were derived from the Bible, specifically the Old Testament, The Ten Commandments and that's a good thing, no?

The Biblle and Koran etcetera are always open to some, often illogical interpretation.

They are in there simplest form "life guide books".

Nevertheless there are many beautiful things within as well as the fire and brimstone that people mosly talk about.

Scientists, if as some have intimated are atheists have a lot to answer for as well.

There have been many, many great things that science has provided some good and some evil.

Medicine and biological research, space exlporation and so on, too many in fact to list, have benefitted us all.

However, science like religion in the wrong hands and minds have "created" terrible things that are not good for mankind.

Nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

If find it it amazing that the "guys in the lab" can develop these things that can wipe out millions of people yet can't find a cure for the common cold.

"The greatest trick satan played on the world was convincing them that he doesn't exist", Kaiser Sose.

You either believe or you don't.

[Jarlaxle 56]

ALL Religions are a belief in the one true God - FACT

Creationism is a belief that all if not most religions embrace - FACT

Uh....what about Buddhism? Taoism? Hinduism?

Hinduism is polytheistic, so they believe in quite the opposite of "ONE 'true' God"

Actually, from wikipedia "Many religions, both historical and contemporary, have a belief in polytheism, such as Hinduism, Shinto, Chinese folk religion, Neopagan faiths, Anglo-Saxon paganism and Greek paganism."

And, Buddhists and Taoists don't necessarily hold beliefs about a deity.

So, uh, you're wrong there.

Just had to correct you on that point. Get your 'facts' straight.

[Reggie29]

Uh....what about Buddhism? Taoism? Hinduism?

Hinduism is polytheistic, so they believe in quite the opposite of "ONE 'true' God"

Actually, from wikipedia "Many religions, both historical and contemporary, have a belief in polytheism, such as Hinduism, Shinto, Chinese folk religion, Neopagan faiths, Anglo-Saxon paganism and Greek paganism."

And, Buddhists and Taoists don't necessarily hold beliefs about a deity.

So, uh, you're wrong there.

Just had to correct you on that point. Get your 'facts' straight.

Read the what I said "all if not most", meaning there are exceptions.

Wikipedia now there's a reliable source of information, not.

BTW you forgot Druidism and Sikhs.

If you want to get pedantic you could add; Norse, Greek, Roman, Phoenecian, Egyptian,

Aztec, Incan, Mayan, North American Indian, Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime, Maori, Polynesian and so on.

Get your facts right, mate.

Edited to say: On another board some fool started a religion on Led Zeppelin!

[wanna be drummer]

Read the what I said "all if not most", meaning there are exceptions.

Why add "all" then?

Wikipedia now there's a reliable source of information, not.

99% of the time, it is.

[Reggie29]

Why add "all" then?

99% of the time, it is.

Perhaps it should have read "most (or some), if not all", semantics.

If that's the only thing people find wrong with my opinion then I can live with the notion that for the most part they agree with me.

Like they say, never argue about politics or religion, nodody really wins because we all think we are right and that will never change.

If it's only 99% then it's not entirely accurate is it?

My point is, because anyone can edit the information it is open to corruption.

[Mary Hartman]

Sorry, MH, but that is simply not factual. Not proving that something IS beyond a shadow of a doubt does not mean that it ISN'T beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Guitarmy brought up some very valid points - and kudos to you for a stellar contribution, thanks - and it is a disservice to his efforts, and to the pursuit of truth (as it is professed to be here) not to read it.

I came on here originally to see what arguments were being made for atheism, because the subject of belief is interesting. I have yet to find a sound proposition supporting that God does not exist, based on sound principles of argumentation, ones that would, say, hold up in court.

If anything, the supporters of atheism have displayed the attitudes of circular or faulty reasoning and rationalization that they are trying to get away from, or accuse theists of. They do their position a disservice by putting down an opposing view, making fun of those who believe it, or accuse them of being brainwashed/having a limited capacity for comprehension, all without soundly defending said position of atheism from some very sound thoughts presented.

I met some nice people here, though, that's been the best part

Well first off how am I being in the wrong for being someone who doesn't believe in the supernatural which is trying to prove by faith and writings of humans? Show me one religious text that was written by a god? Faulty reasoning IS NOT refuting something that does not exist. Faulty reasoning is believing this tripe to start with..

You do have one point though, I cannot prove they don't exist, however this means they are merely hypothetical. I mean hypothetically according to you here is a goddess from across town who comes complete with CD, I will be sure to be at her altar for my holy water sprinklings. Come one come all for our snake oils.

Hail Yarn Goddess.

Your posts here are public. I didn't know you and Nathan talked things out. My bad there.

But that doesn't mean your statements are now off-the-table.

This much is true. I wont budge much, I will agree with the yarn god hypothesis for now though, OK

Religions are doctrines of faith - FACT

ALL Religions are a belief in the one true God - FACT

Creationism is a belief that all if not most religions embrace - FACT

Big Bang is a theory - FACT

Evolution is a theory - FACT

Religion gives a lot of people comfort and is purely spiritual.

Religion has a lot to answer for in that there are people who have done evil things in Gods name.

All modern "western" laws were derived from the Bible, specifically the Old Testament, The Ten Commandments and that's a good thing, no?

The Biblle and Koran etcetera are always open to some, often illogical interpretation.

They are in there simplest form "life guide books".

Nevertheless there are many beautiful things within as well as the fire and brimstone that people mosly talk about.

Scientists, if as some have intimated are atheists have a lot to answer for as well.

There have been many, many great things that science has provided some good and some evil.

Medicine and biological research, space exlporation and so on, too many in fact to list, have benefitted us all.

However, science like religion in the wrong hands and minds have "created" terrible things that are not good for mankind.

Nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

If find it it amazing that the "guys in the lab" can develop these things that can wipe out millions of people yet can't find a cure for the common cold.

"The greatest trick satan played on the world was convincing them that he doesn't exist", Kaiser Sose.

You either believe or you don't.

I will agree with you on one thing. In the wrong hands neither is good. Plus too, I will say that those who use it as a form of social gatherings for people to behave decently is a good thing Coherent behavior amongst groups is used in many ways. Unfortunately America has it so interwoven into everything from money to politics,,,,,,,,,well they make people believe as if we have to agree with it. Just because it is constitutional does not make it so. So I am submitting my religion so we Will be able to worship the new yarn goddess, we will party, eat great foods, laugh, listen to the terrific Led Zeppelin and dance like spirits in the night with dolls in our hands. Who can bring the cannabis and peyote

[Ned_Devine]

I don't know about other religions, but you can be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. I grew up a very devout Catholic, just like my sister and my parents. However as I grew older and was exposed to different ideologies and ways of thinking, I realized that what I felt was common sense was not in line with what the Church thought and I grew separate. I go with my family to Midnight Mass on Christmas, and Easter Mass, but other than that.....unless someone is marrying or being buried in the Church, I don't attend. I feel I'm more spiritual than religious now. I think most organized religions are useless. I think you can have faith and believe in a higher power without conforming to any one faith's tenets and canons.

The worst kind of Catholic - the "Chreaster." Twice a year showing at mass taking up space from the one who want to be there.

[greenman]

Personally I find that most people who identify themselves as athiests have little of use to contribute. Any sensible agnostic is going to apose things like creationism being taught in schools or support the seperation of church and state and its those areas that are ultimately going to reduce dangerous religious extremism not shouting "you made up god because your afraid to die!" every 30 secs.

[JTM]

The worst kind of Catholic - the "Chreaster." Twice a year showing at mass taking up space from the one who want to be there.

What ? ... Takin' up already empty space, what a nerve ... You should be grateful that there was a couple more coins in the collection dish.... You religious freaks never cease to amaze me.

[Mary Hartman]

Personally I find that most people who identify themselves as athiests have little of use to contribute. Any sensible agnostic is going to apose things like creationism being taught in schools or support the seperation of church and state and its those areas that are ultimately going to reduce dangerous religious extremism not shouting "you made up god because your afraid to die!" every 30 secs.

Your kinda catching on a bit there frodo. There's really nothing to contribute as far as proving a god doesn't exist because it's VERY obvious to us. I am happy the agnostics do that much too love. I am fairly sure I don't oppose teaching creationism in private schools. I will also say I've never had an agnostic shove anything down my throat until now.

They are usually very adaptive.