Why I will be ignoring all "atheists" on this forum.

I find the claim that atheists are anything other than propagandistic trolls that attack people and then scream like victims when called on their poor behavior quite amusing actually.

The OP is about the atrocious personal attacks levelled by atheists against a Christian by sole dint of his faith. THere are now dozens of atheists that this Christian has placed on ignore as a result, each one having a piece of personal drivel and insult laid out as the basis of his ignore.

Yet, despite all these insults and the wide spread behavior issues, the real issue is that atheists are victims? The real issue is that Christians do not understand evolution (again) and all the atheists can safely ignore the fact that far too many modern atheists are nothing more than angry ********s.

After all, why else would such a tiny group be sliding down the trust scale?

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/edgell/home/Strib Atheist Faith and Values.html

I guess, when your faith is derived solely on finding fault in others, it must really suck when people begin to document the behavioral issues of you. Get used to it. Keep screaming victim rather than acknowledging the behavior issues in your ranks.

 

What insults???

Those should be reported and deleted.

Hey, let's look at the facts for a change:
Who started this thread? - an atheist, attacking and insulting believers? lol

Your last comment is little more than slamming and making accusations against atheists, btw.

Up your game, Christian.

 

Now you are a mod are you?

The person who started this thread did so after SEVERAL atheists attacked him viciously, a fact that MANY Christians can attest to. It is not an insult, unless you are so thin skinned that you simply do not even have skin, to state a obvious fact about this behavior.

But, like obtuse, hypocritical, super victim atheists every where, out going shots are simply ignored - or indeed earned because all Christians are guilty and deserve it.

Which is exactly what this OP documents.

The angry trolls of atheism are legion, and their games are well known - hence they slide down the respectability scale. And, like abusers everywhere, its never their fault.

You dropped both your super victim cape and your chip brother. We have ALL seen this antic before.

Far too often actually ...

 

Its clear that you dont understand alot of what darwin meant by intermediate fossils. The fossils record doesnt show it.

lets break this down for you in a simple way. I have seen all of these weak arguments as I used to be a theistic evolutionist myself. For evolution to be true you must extrapolate all the way back to all life coming from a simple one celled creature. This was debunked a few years back by the cambrain explosion in which all of the major phyla suddenly popping almost instantly (historically speaking ) showing no transitional descendents at all.



Evolutionists assume that the small, horizontal microevolutionary changes (which are observed) lead to large, vertical macroevolutionary changes (which are never observed). This philosophical leap of faith lies at the eve of evolution thinking.
In 1980 about 150 of the world's leading evolutionary theorists gathered at the University of Chicago for a conference entitled "Macroevolution." Their task: "to consider the mechanisms that underlie the origin of species" (Lewin, Science vol. 210, pp. 883-887). "The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution . . . the answer can be given as a clear, No."

These are evolutionary biologists saying this. these are their opinions and not mine, and if you cant extrapolate macroevolution from microevolution darwinian evolution is debunked.


Now lets get back to your fairy tale whale macroevolutionary chart (I believed in all of these charts when I was a theistic evolutionist myself )


http://www.macroevolution.net/evolution-of-whales.html#figs-4-5




Figure 9.4: The two skeletons (from Kellogg 1936, not shown to
scale) above the line are those of two animals generally
recognized as early whales. A: Basilosaurus cetoides (~18m/60ft),
also known as Zeuglodon, and B: Zygorhiza kochii (~6m/20ft).
Both are from late Eocene strata. The three skeletons
below the line (figures from Williston 1898, Plate LXXII), all of
late Cretaceous age (~30 million years older than Basilosaurus
and Zygorhiza), belong to animals normally classified as
marine reptiles of the family Mosasauridae (mosasaurs). The
evolution of whales from organisms such as these is far more
plausible than the evolution of whales from terrestrial tetrapods.
C: Clidastes propython, D: Platecarpus tympaniticus,
E: Tylosaurus proriger. Although these three animals
are shown about the same size in the drawing, in life, Clidastes
was the smallest (~4 m/13 ft), Platecarpus, the next largest
(~7 m/24 ft), and Tylosaurus, the largest of all (~9m/30 ft).
Note that while the hind limbs are more developed in the older forms
(C, D, E), they are also present, in a reduced state, in the younger
ones (A and B). Thus, forms A and B are intermediate between the
Cretaceous forms and modern whales. The evolution of whales
from such precursors is far more reasonable than their
derivation from a "generalized shrewlike insectivore."

You see I can bring up animals that have similar body designs than whales that are from completely different phyla even. The reason why you believe in your fairy tale evolution picture is the same reason I used to believe it, thats because its been drilled into my head in my high school and college biology courses, but you have an additional reason also. Your worldview depends on evolution being true. You wont even approach any other evidences because your whole atheistic worldview crumbles. A worldview that is so dogmatic is more religious than me or any christians that I know.

Similarity of Body design doesnt mean that they evolved from each other.
If you take what our biology books say without question how can you call yourself anything other than a feidist. Feidism is pure blind faith. Christians arent feidists.

If the top 150 evolutionary biologists got together and couldnt extrapolate macroevolution from micro why do you believe you have discovered the holy grain of darwinian evolution? If you have then please present it to the world and receive your noble prize.

If your truely interested in what the intelligent design community really thinks, why not visit their forum and interact with them here http://www.uncommondescent.com/ Even I being a Christian used to laugh at anyone that opposed neo darwinian evolution till I actually researched intelligent design.

I see so many atheists call themselves free thinkers but it seems to me that they repeat it so much that they are truely trying to convince themselves and us of it. If your a true free thinker join that forum and see how easily you can debunk the leaders of the intelligent design community. My guess is most of you will be revealed for being not being free thinkers and tuck your proverbial tale between your legs and hightale it out of that forum, but even if there is one truely free thinker out of you something noble will be accomplished by my post.

 

Typical of the creationist. You do understand the Evolution that Darwin thought and the understanding of Evolution today is different right?

Keep attacking ideas from 130 years ago. No wounder why you dont understand Evolution.

 

Just a few comments.

Ignoring that you certainly meant transitional ancestors, this is actually little more than disingenuous equivocation.

For starters. this "explosion" lasted for some 15 million years. To call 15 million years "almost instantly" is like calling an alligator a lizard.

Secondly, to limit the discussion to "major phyla" is to stack the deck. Of the 36 or so phyla, the "major" ones are a mere 9. You are ignoring 75% of the phyla with that little act of rhetorical legerdemain.

Here is a chart that demonstrates the first uncontested appearances in the fossil record of the ones that are represented at all.




You will notice that even during the "explosion" they are spread across multiple millions of years. At least one phyla (not even including the extinct Phyla of the Ediacaran) preceded the Cambrian. And new phyla have been added to the record periodically ever since. It is not actually possible to reconcile that record with a single creative event.

Further... to claim that the paucity of ancestral fossils to the Cambrian phyla means that there were no ancestors is the equivalent of claiming that the 15 or so other phyla for which there is no fossil record at all did not exist until just the last few years. An idiotic position, I'm sure you would agree.

 

Yes it does. the human lineage, for instance, is remarkably well-preserved. It might not contain all intermediates, but there's more than enough evidence to support human descent from earlier great apes. The clade clearly shows the enlargement of the cranium, the reduction of tooth size, increases in height, the alignment of the great toe with the other toes, widening of the pelvis, and other assorted and sundry adaptations relating to bipedal walking and giving birth to large-brained offspring. There are also ancillary discoveries of tools, butchering, fire, and art, all showing increases in intelligence.

And that's just the human lineage.

Falsehood. We've found evidence of cyanobacteria in the form of stromatolites from 2.7 BILLION years ago, well before the Cambrian.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n2/full/ngeo107.html

No one alive's observed the Hundred Year's War, either, ergo, it never occurred.

Firstly, you're plagiarizing: http://www.icr.org/article/what-difference-between-macroevolution-microevolut/

Secondly, I've read that article: it supports punctuated equilibrium, an EVOLUTIONARY theory.

Punctuated equilibrium.

You're own counterargument references different ideas on how cetaceans evolved, so, it's not really debunking evolution.

Good thing we have a ton of molecular data now too. In most cases, they support each other.

Punctuated equilibrium.

 

Additionally: that cladogram up there doesn't even have most of the species that your "rebuttal" even mentions. Further, molecular evidence firmly puts the cetaceans as sister to artiodactyls (such as hippos and cows).

 

Buh-bye!

Poof!

 

Amazing how to them truth is relative unless you're talking about the absolute truth that God doesn't exist. You have more patience than I, my friend to be fielding their incoherent rants.

 

Amazing, do you actually believe any of this hyperbole? lol

Playing victim seems to be a Christian speciality, perfected over the last 2000 years. They are still claiming to be persecuted while they are the ruling majority in a nation, feel threatened because others don't want their children indoctrinated in school with bible lessons and forced prayers, or don't want to fund Christian rituals and displays with their income taxes!

This hypocritical victim attitude can be observed every day on this forum: cries of persecution and being insulted, in the breath as they attack, denigrate and hurl insults which won't even pass the swearfilter.

Yeah, poor innocent victims of those evil, pesky atheists who are a danger to their children...
lol

 

Definition of ignoramus? See above.

Why does this look familiar? Because it is famailar.

Christians says .... and atheists says exactly the opposite in a faustian whine fest.

A Christian begins collecting the mean spirited and insulting attacks of atheists.

Atheist says: You are attacking us you stupid people. (We are the victims!).

A Christian points out that it is actually atheists behaving quite poorly.

Atheist says: Oh, so you guys are now victims! Our righteous trolling is all about finding truth dolt! (You are the victims!) (Paying no attention to the complete 180 done in less than three posts).

A Christian will again point out that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the prevalence of rude, pointedly flame baiting comments that lead to the creation of this thread.

Atheist will no doubt say:




Atheism = Its all about crapping on other people.

Nice to see you will hold an interenet grudge for six months. Sounds like an anger management issue to me?

 

I'm going to be ignoring all idiots. Christians please sign up. Thanks.

 

If an atheist ignores himself? Does he cease to exist?

That my freinds is the real question this evening

However, its nice to see that a person faith is teh SOLE qualifier of a persons value and intelligence in atheism. But atheists are not bigots ... no sir, and that little comment was clearly a level headed criticism of our faith ....

 

The fact that this thread is still open and has over 400 replies shows that it is not Christians on this board who are persecuted but us atheists.

 

So, another 180 - now the atheists are the victims again?

Still a lot of nasty ass quotes from atheists out there. But they'll rationalize it some how - they always do.

Perhaps, if atheism wasn;t so self centered, they could coordinate an ACTUAL cogent response to the subject. Instead, its all about their hurt feelings. Do we see why most theologians define atheism as self worship?

 

Shall I start quoting Hitler? He was a Christian afterall.

 

No, of course the bashing, denigrating, insult hurling Christain majority are the victims here...

lol, the Christian persecution complex is too funny...

 

I thought I was on your ignore list?

GUess that did not last.

Shall I quote Stalin? Or any of the atheists frothing at the mouth who have been quoted in this thread?

Will that make it acceptable to be a dick based solely on someone's faith choice?

Rationalize away atheist.

 

Umm hmmm ... and another 180.

Panzer? Waa ... We are victims.

Stroll? Waa ... You are not victims when we behave poorly.

Teh poor behavior remains.

Rationalize away atheist. Patheist/Deist, or whatever you are this week.

 

Atheism isn't faith.

Quote Stalin all you want. It's your side that seems to think that quoting one of us somehow proves the entire lot but throws a hissy fit the instant it's done back to you.

 

What does any of that have to do with any of the quotes that resulted in atheists being ingored en-mass by a Christian for their poor behavior?

As long as you can crap on a Christian though? We gotcha. Are you aware of why Saint ignors you now?

Chronic pointlessness might be one reason.

 

from the OP:
"What we have on this and many other religious forums are not atheists, they are haters of God. They come with a malicious intent to destroy the faiths of others. It must be noted carefully that true atheists do not pester Christians and have no intent to destroy their faith. This crop of hateful, spiteful and miserable people do indeed believe in God, evidenced inversely by their queer bent to oppose the belief in God in every venue possible. God to them is a black hole exerting gravity upon them which causes their entire being to orient themselves toward Him, even if in an adversarial manner. When dealing with them, it must be understood from the beginning that they aren't true atheists, just rotten and cruel people seeking to spread their own inner misery."

 

And are you denying that this fits to the T?

That the dozens of flameing comments that resulted in the inclusion are off base?

Nope, its cirtical of atheism, and anything critical of atheism makes you a victim, even as you lambast others for being unable to objectively look at criticism.

Not there there is much to take from the criticism that we are murdering rapists based solely on our faith mind you, bt at some point, the sane and rational would take a look at the collection of such statements and offer a bit of their enshrined skepticism.

Or, they can cry like babies.

Anyone care to think that the later is about anything but an emotional state? Exactly like the OP charges?

 

It's generalising and disparaging of atheists posting on this forum.

Read it again, here some bits for your attention:
...are not atheists, they are haters of God...
...they aren't true atheists, just rotten and cruel people...

Open your eyes and see it for the inciteful diatribe it is.
At least the OP has taken the step to cease communicating (he says) instead of diverting every thread with their misgivings, unlike some others who aseem to be on a never ending trolling spree.