1

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed

« on: January 05, 2011, 01:22:52 PM »

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.

but everyone here was 14-18 year old kids? you are very confusing

Quotes from Beorn:

God evolved all kinds of different creatures after His creation of the earth. About 180 years ago He made human evolve

The earth is 212 years and 2 months old.

The earth is only 130 years old

Tell me how YOU observed that the earth wasn't created 200 years ago?

So according to Beorn:

1. The earth went from 212 years old, to 200, to 189, to 130.
2. The Bible was written two hundred years ago.
3. God started evolution (despite Beorn at the same time maintain no God exists).

But of course Beorn is dead serious, and no troll right?

2

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed

« on: January 05, 2011, 11:40:10 AM »

Trolls/Stalkers who followed me to this forum:

Beorn, Dave, Bulu Bulu Zimbulu, HR Puff N Stuff

All followed me from either democracyforums or evolutionfairytaleforum.

Dave came from evolutionfairytaleforum, he was banned there for trolling/insulting creationists. I believe he blamed me for his ban (despite the fact i was never a mod there and had nothing to do with his banning) and so seems to have stalked me here for revenge.

HR Puff N Stuff came from democracyforums, they are either someone there called 'Considerdudley' (a 50 year old unemployed women who stalked my Amazon account) or someone called ''Ron'' (another 50 year old, but a man, also unemployed but apparently is taking a foundation degree in something).

Bulu Bulu Zimbulu is a nutter (look at their name) who came from either democracyforums or evolutionfairytaleforum. They only made 10 posts here.

Beorn (you) either came from democracyforums or evolutionfairytaleforum. I guess the former, as there is a troll there who stalked me called Beoserker (note the similarity in name). Beoserker is another 50 or 60 year old man who admits on democracyforums he ''is an old fart''.

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.

One of you five stalked me on Amazon and negative rated all my reviews.

So as i said - get a life.

3

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed

« on: January 05, 2011, 10:45:11 AM »

1. I'm not mattiashues or the thread maker (though i agree with some of his points).

2. If you want a real troll it would be beorn.*

*Beorn stalks me across the net, joins every forum i join, and also stalks my Amazon account.

They have a very unhealthy attraction to me. Futhermore Beorn was also banned from evofairytale for trolling. All they do did there was stalk creationists or even agnostics who questioned evolution and abused them. Sad waste of existence...

1. you are

2. euh what?

* 

You are a stalker who followed me from the following forum:

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/

Another troll called 'Dave' followed me from:

http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/

There are others as well. Basically at those two forums i defeated the evolutionists, so in anger and frustration all they could do is stalk me across the net. So sad they even had to even get to my Amazon account and 1 star rate my reviews there.

So don't deny being a troll. You followed me here, and your only purpose here is to insult/stalk me.

You really need a life.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolutionists believe in things they can not see

« on: January 04, 2011, 09:28:46 PM »

^ they are still flies.

An example of macroevolution would be one animal form evolving into another i.e ape-like creature into man.

Never been observed though, so its not science.

5

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics

« on: January 04, 2011, 08:09:06 PM »

6 different types of evolution

Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the “big bang”
Chemical evolution: all elements “evolved” from hydrogen
Stellar evolution: stars and planets formed from gas clouds
Organic evolution: life begins from inanimate matter
Macro-evolution: animals and plants change from one type into another
Micro-evolution: minor variations/adapations

First 5 have never been observed, tested or repeated.

Only number 6 *microevolution is science.

You can still believe in the first 5 as your religion/faith though, but they are not science.

6

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed

« on: January 04, 2011, 07:31:38 PM »

1. I'm not mattiashues or the thread maker (though i agree with some of his points).

2. If you want a real troll it would be beorn.*

*Beorn stalks me across the net, joins every forum i join, and also stalks my Amazon account.

They have a very unhealthy attraction to me. Futhermore Beorn was also banned from evofairytale for trolling. All they do did there was stalk creationists or even agnostics who questioned evolution and abused them. Sad waste of existence...

7

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics

« on: January 04, 2011, 07:25:48 PM »

''Evolution only talks about the change in an organism.
Ambiogenesis is the creation of life from molecules''
====

Abiogenesis = the theory of organic evolution.

Like macroevolution this has never been observed though, so its not apart of science. Just another faith/speculation/assumption.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolutionists believe in things they can not see

« on: January 04, 2011, 07:14:40 PM »

hummmmmmmmm.....

so world renown evolutionists like Jerry Coyne have admitted evolution is not observable.

Yet beorn (an atheist troll who has no qualification in science) claims it is.

Who to believe?

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolutionists believe in things they can not see

« on: January 04, 2011, 07:10:10 PM »

''Nobody has ever observed macroevolution in the laboratory or in nature.

According to the fundamentalist evolutionist Jerry Coyne:''
=====

That's spot on.

Leading evolutionists themselves have admitted macroevolution has never been observed (therefore non-tested).

Btw, Beorn is a troll atheist who followed me from another forum. Even his hero Dawkins admits macroevolution is not observable, yet he still trolls the net claiming it is.

because we really have observed fish morph into land walking creatures and apes into men... Evolution as far as reality is concerned is a pure fairytale. Science is what we can observe & test, macroevolution has never been observed or tested so its not a science.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolutionists believe in things they can not see

« on: January 04, 2011, 05:33:56 PM »

Just to point out i'm not matthiashues. I agree with some of his arguments though.

Evolution has never been observed and believing in it is like believing in fairies or any other crackpottery.

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: PROOF Every Atheist on the Internet is a Fake/Troll

« on: January 03, 2011, 10:34:04 AM »

  Many experts believe he was involved in the occult, if he was then he definitely was not an atheist.

This is nonsense which started with a pseudo-historical book called ''Morning of the Magicians'' (1960). All post-war invention and fantasy about Nazis UFO's, secret nazi societies, Hitler and the spear of longinus etc. Hitler had no interest in the occult. In fact he mocked Himmler for believing in it. Himmler was the occultist.

The Hitler & occult thing was just a cash in, and was a post-war invention. Books like ''Morning of the Magicians'' and Trevor Ravenscroft’s ''The Spear of Destiny'' came out in the 60's and 70's, well after the war. Only mugs and neo-nazis got sucked into it.

Go to Stormfront today and you will see neo-nazis there still claiming all this occult nonsense or related conspiracy theories that the Nazis made it first to the moon, or nonsense about a secret nazi base in antarctica where hitler remains frozen until the 4th reich. Arguing these these cranks is like trying to debate the flat earthers. You don't know if they are just pretending to believe in that junk, or if they are really serious about it.

I never said I believed he was into the occult.  I said that's what many experts, as well as people on this site such as November17 and Babs.  I would say Hitler was a Christian, according to his speeches and his writings.  Though he was also a private critic of the church and thought of theocracy as one of the largest threats to his rule, that does not discount the fact he spoke of his belief in Christ both publicly and privately.

Obviously Hitler wasn't a Christian.

Thousands of Christians were exterminated in the camps. Adventists, Christadelphians and Jehovah Witness' were killed and they had to wear a purple star in the camps saying ''bible student''. Like disabled people though who were killed by the nazis in modern times they get no recognition, only Jews get remembered as the victims of the nazis. Of course the fact Hitler killed thousands of his own white Germanic kindred is not politically correct, and so all those people who were killed get virtually no recognition.

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: PROOF Every Atheist on the Internet is a Fake/Troll

« on: January 03, 2011, 06:04:50 AM »

  Many experts believe he was involved in the occult, if he was then he definitely was not an atheist.

This is nonsense which started with a pseudo-historical book called ''Morning of the Magicians'' (1960). All post-war invention and fantasy about Nazis UFO's, secret nazi societies, Hitler and the spear of longinus etc. Hitler had no interest in the occult. In fact he mocked Himmler for believing in it. Himmler was the occultist.

The Hitler & occult thing was just a cash in, and was a post-war invention. Books like ''Morning of the Magicians'' and Trevor Ravenscroft’s ''The Spear of Destiny'' came out in the 60's and 70's, well after the war. Only mugs and neo-nazis got sucked into it.

Go to Stormfront today and you will see neo-nazis there still claiming all this occult nonsense or related conspiracy theories that the Nazis made it first to the moon, or nonsense about a secret nazi base in antarctica where hitler remains frozen until the 4th reich. Arguing these these cranks is like trying to debate the flat earthers. You don't know if they are just pretending to believe in that junk, or if they are really serious about it.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: PROOF Every Atheist on the Internet is a Fake/Troll

« on: January 02, 2011, 06:54:54 PM »

 Hitler was not an atheist, in public he was most definitely a catholic, and publicly used religious justification for the purging of the Jews.

Hitler was a militant atheist and a social darwinist.

We have his conversations in private, where we know his real views. What he told and presented to the public was all lies and propaganda and not what he believed in person.

All the nazi officials and generals who he personally knew recorded how he was an Atheist  (i.e Rosenberg, Goebbels).

There really is no debate amongst historians that Hitler was an Atheist. The only people who refuse to accept this fact are modern atheists of course who run internet bedroom blogs and websites...

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / PROOF Every Atheist on the Internet is a Fake/Troll

« on: January 02, 2011, 01:59:54 PM »

PROOF Every Atheist on the Internet is a Fake/Troll



Suppose you REALLY BELIEVE that there is no God...
and you REALLY BELIEVE that there's no intelligent purpose or design to the universe...
So, therefore, you believe that nothing REALLY MATTERS. (belief, actions, etc...)
Then, why would you go through the trouble arguing about it?UNLESS...
you REALLY DON'T BELIEVE what you claim?

Every Atheist who argues therefore has to be a fake.

If you don't get the video, or what's written above then think a little bit more about it.

Atheists believe there is no meaning or purpose to anything.

Why then do they debate over the net? Why all the trouble? Why do they waste their lives on the net attacking the Bible or Christians?

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: England raising tuition fees to about $15000

« on: December 13, 2010, 02:40:42 PM »

The day those fascist bastards become a major party is the day I start a glorious revolution. Luckily, it will never happen so I won't have to.

The sheeple of Britain call people fascists who merely support ''british jobs for british workers''

Watch the following video:



They call him a ''nazi'' after he merely states '''british jobs for british workers''. LOL. That's how pathetic UK now is, can't even say you support jobs for your own people without being labeled a nazi.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: All Atheists Believe in God

« on: December 13, 2010, 01:11:15 PM »

Atheism has no set belief on the creation of life or the universe. Any beliefs on these subjects will vary from atheist to atheist, and are independent of their disbelief in any gods.

Thats not the point, the point is - all atheists since they didn't observe the creation of the universe (like everyone else) have nothing more than a faith/belief/religious view about how/why/when it was created.

Atheism is 100% faith based. If you disagree, then tell me how the universe was made and provide observational, testable, replicable evidence.

What part of "atheism makes no claims" don't you understand?

Atheism makes several non-scientific claims, firstly ''god doesn't exist''. Atheism is a religion and faith based.

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 01:07:53 PM »

0_o? wut...The cretan zeus is the feature of one particular zeus-cult, not all of ancient greek myth. I still don't know what you're talking about though. What do you mean by rational explanation. What is rationally explained? Have you even read the illiad or any of the other Greek myths?

Apotheosis explains polytheism. The multiple Gods of polytheistic religions are explained simply by those figures being mortals who were magnified to Gods after their death. Polytheism was manmade.

If you read the Iliad, Odyssey or Aeneid you will discover the Gods had mortal descendants. Julius Ceasar who we of course know existed, traced his linage to Aphrodite (Venus). Obviously Aphrodite was therefore a real mortal woman.

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: All Atheists Believe in God

« on: December 13, 2010, 12:12:52 PM »

Atheism has no set belief on the creation of life or the universe. Any beliefs on these subjects will vary from atheist to atheist, and are independent of their disbelief in any gods.

Thats not the point, the point is - all atheists since they didn't observe the creation of the universe (like everyone else) have nothing more than a faith/belief/religious view about how/why/when it was created.

Atheism is 100% faith based. If you disagree, then tell me how the universe was made and provide observational, testable, replicable evidence.

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 12:08:57 PM »

So either you're saying Zeus actually exists or....what?

He existed about 4,000 years back, and was a Cretan king. After his death he became venerated into a God; the Minoan civilization on Crete was where most ancient Greek religion originated.

Paganism can be rationally explained.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: England raising tuition fees to about $15000

« on: December 13, 2010, 10:51:36 AM »

OK, show me a constituency in the UK where the combined votes for the BNP and UKIP candidates outstripped the votes for the winning candidate.

That was only one factor which would have increased the BNP vote, not the sole factor. The fact is, BNP was the only party to make success out of the election in respect to votes and saving deposits.

- In 1987, the BNP fought 2 seats and polled 563 votes.

- In 1992, the BNP fought 13 seats and polled 7,000 votes.

- In 1997, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 35,000 votes.

- In 2001, the BNP fought 33 seats and polled 47,000 votes.

- In 2005, the BNP fought 117 seats and polled 192,746 votes.

- In 2010, the BNP fought 339 seats and polled 563,743 votes.

BNP saved a record of 73 deposits. Compare to all other parties, BNP did best in +% of vote. All others, except UKIP, went down.

So now you've got your website back and Mark Collett and Nick Griffin are bessie mates, I expect Nick will be sailing to parliament at the by-election at Oldham East, eh?

Just to point out you can bet on this byelection. BNP was 1/100, then after it was announced Nick was standing now 1/20.

21

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 10:31:06 AM »

hahaha, you are ridiculous. In Ancient Greek myth, Zeus and Poseidon and the other gods were not deified mortals. There were demigods, like Heracles, but surely not all of them. Apparently, you don't know shit son. I don't know anything about Icelandic myth, but I am educated on the Greeks.

You clearly don't have a grasp on the origin of mythology. Do you really think people one day just thought those Gods up, i.e as Zeus as a bearded man in the sky? If so, you are retarded.

22

Flat Earth General / Re: Real Zetetics have to reject electricity?

« on: December 13, 2010, 09:59:25 AM »

That wasn't my point. My point is that just because you believe in something another person believes, it doesn't mean you have to believe every single thing the person believes.

The basis of Zeteticism though is direct observation. Yet most flat earthers on this forum contradict themselves on this and believe in things we can't or haven't observed. This undermines the whole basis of Zeteticism.

23

Flat Earth General / Re: Real Zetetics have to reject electricity?

« on: December 13, 2010, 09:45:14 AM »

I'm pretty sure FES isn't a personality cult.

Using the same logic, true scientists have to believe in different human races, because the guy who created the modern classification system (Linnaeus) separated humans into different races.

Of course, believing that there aren't human races (regardless of whether there are or aren't, I'm not implying anything here) is fashionable nowadays, so folk who believe in science (and by believe I mean they blindly agree with anything the broader scientific community says) will ignore Linnaeus' findings.

Yes it's fashionable for liberals to deny races exist. But back to reality -

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/10/dnaprint?currentPage=all

- FBI and racial DNA profiling 

24

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 09:38:56 AM »

Okay, fine.  Forget about the Greek and Norse gods.  I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which is not a mortal, it is an immortal deity.  Prove me wrong.

That was a parody invented by atheists in frustration of the growth of the intelligent design movement. We will see more of these parody religions comming about as more and more everyday are leaving the theory of evolution for alternitives.

25

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 08:52:17 AM »

Name of the fallacy? Or you just use it because it sounds cool?

The one where you dishonestly equate something that it not actually is. False presentation. I'm sure it has a name.

Wrong.
Loki was a God, and a Jötunn (A nature spirit) at the same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki

Thor is a God too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor

No, they were mortal men - quite clearly as we are told in the 'Prose Edda'.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/pre/pre03.htm

These names also appear in human geneology and kings lists, which further proves these were nothing more than mortal men, as early progenitors. As the 'Prose Edda' explains though, they were deified or exalted to divine level.

Saxo Grammaticus also recorded in his Gesta Danorum, the following:

''There were of old certain men versed in sorcery, Thor, namely, and Odin, and many others, who were cunning in contriving marvellous sleights; and they, winning the minds of the simple, began to claim the rank of gods''

Odin & Thor were mortals. They were real men who once existed, but who were magnified to Gods or deities after their death or by as Saxo Grammaticus believed through conning & tricking people. This is the origin of paganism.

And Poseidon is the God of the seas for the greeks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon

And yet mortal kings and other humans claimed desecent from him. He was a mortal who was deified.

And according to what I know, Euhemerism is a rationalizing method of interpretation that treats mythological accounts as a reflection of actual historical events shaped by retelling and traditional mores. And the greatest example of this is the Bible, so either you do not believe in the Bible, or you have to admit that both are equally (in)valid.

The Bible is monotheistic, it can't be euhemerised. Euhemerism only works for paganism, which is why the early Church Fathers embraced it.

The fact your knowledge on this topic doesn't go beyond wikipedia, i think we should not continue.

26

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: England raising tuition fees to about $15000

« on: December 13, 2010, 08:14:58 AM »

Why didn't the BNP win a single seat anywhere at the last election?  You can't tell me it's because the Labour Party imported Africans to vote for them in every constituency!

Three main reasons:

1. Just before the election, UKIP released their ''anti-Islamic extremism'' campaign. Numerous possible BNP voters therefore voted for UKIP instead, especially since their image has not been smeared as much by the media.

2. Just before the election, the BNP website was shut down by an idiot. Therefore loads of people thought something had happened to the BNP, and didn't vote for them. According to BNP sources, this costed the BNP about 100,000 votes.

3. Just before the election, the media announced that Mark Collett (a BNP member) had attempted or planned to murder Nick Griffin. Of course, most of this was lies or blown out of proportion but the media fed that story and it cost the BNP loads more votes.

If UKIP hadn't done their anti-Islam extremism campaign, the BNP wesbite hadent been shut down and the media didn't report about the silly murder attempt story - BNP without doubt would be in Parliament right now.

27

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 08:03:59 AM »

Yes he did- now prove that he didn't.

No one has observed the creation of the universe, we need a time-machine for that.

Therefore, as usual - i am right. When it comes down to origins, every view is religious. That includes even any atheist theory or view on origins.

28

Flat Earth General / Re: Real Zetetics have to reject electricity?

« on: December 13, 2010, 07:58:15 AM »

I have seen lightning. Case closed!

This is not the same as electricity in your household.

Rowbotham & Johnson also rejected Darwin's theory of evolution (i have no problem with denying this one) the germ theory of disease, the existance of atoms etc because none of these can be observed.

However most FES flat earthers on this forum believed they evolved from apes, which has never been observed. All FES flat earther i have met on here have all claimed they believe in germ theory of disease & atoms (despite these things are non observable by the naked human eye).

So there appears to be inconsistanies between modern claimed flat earthers & the original Zetetics.

29

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism is a religion

« on: December 13, 2010, 07:48:48 AM »

Atheism can't be a religion, as it doesn't have any beliefs. Atheism is just a rejection of all claims of the existence of a deity or deities. There is no belief involved.

The problem is that most theists confuse atheism with certain beliefs/lifestyles/worldviews that are common among atheists, even though they are completely independent of atheism.

Atheism is 100% belief.

Can you prove God doesn't exist? Obviously not, so therefore atheism is nothing more than a faith stance/religion/belief.

But theists introduced this concept of 'god' without them, there simply wouldn't be anything to disbelieve so how can it be a faith system?

Because every stance or theory on the origin of the universe is religious - since we can't observe, test etc it being created.

An Atheist is as religious as a Young Earth Creationist on origins.

lol no

Ok then, how do we observe, test or repeat the creation of the universe?

Are you saying you observed the universe being created?

30

Flat Earth General / Real Zetetics have to reject electricity?

« on: December 13, 2010, 07:46:55 AM »

Real zetetics or flat earthers have to reject electricity.

Charles. K. Johnson the earlier president of the FES, opposed using electricity on the grounds it can't be directly observed. His home (which he lived in up to 2001) had no electricity on running water. He rejected the electricity on the basis, since it can't be observed by the naked eye - it can't be trusted.

Of course the basis of flat earthism is the same - we observe the earth to be flat on the earth. Modern technology is rejected though which has proven it is round.

Since zetetics base their science on direct observation only, then genuine Zetetics like Johson should refuse to use electricity.

Johnson, Rowbotham etc rejected everything that could not be directly observed.