‘#24forOK’: Doc Thompson Begins 24 hour radio marathon to Benefit Oklahoma Tornado Victims!

Entertainment

Which Prominent Atheist Is Getting a Starring Role on ‘The Simpsons’?

Mar. 6, 2013 8:21am Billy Hallowell

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is known for his atheistic views, as he regularly speaks out against religious constructs and takes aim at the theological systems that billions of the world’s citizens embrace. While he’s known for his academic and sociopolitical activity, the outspoken activist is preparing to make a foray into entertainment.

On Sunday, March 10, the outspoken scientist will be given an even larger platform when he appears on “The Simpsons.” On the surface, this may appear to be a joke, but it’s not. In fact, Dawkins will be playing himself in the cartoon’s next episode.

Evolutionary Biologist Richard Dawkins Will Appear in the March 10 Episode of The Simpsons | Atheism

Richard Dawkins is slated to appear in “The Simpsons.” While he was spoofed in “South Park,” he didn’t lend his voice to the show’s creators. This image, though, shows how he was depicted in a past episode. No screen shots from his upcoming “Simpsons” episode have been released yet. (Photo Credit: South Park Studios)

While few details have been released about the plot and how he’ll be depicted, his inclusion is a welcome development for atheist activists who continue to seek cultural relevancy. The Futon Critic, a web site that provides television news and information, has a limited amount of information about the episode.

The synopsis claims that Lisa, a character on the show, is “harassed by a bullying new teacher.” The educator will be voiced by actress and comedian Tina Fey, however there’s no word surrounding what Dawkins’ role in the episode will be. A synopsis reads:

Flanders becomes jealous when his laid-back parents start to prefer Homer’s company over his and he faces unbearable guilt after punching Homer in the eye, as he desperately tries to reconcile with him. Meanwhile, Lisa is distressed by her new substitute teacher (guest voice Tina Fey), who bullies her for no apparent reason in the “Black-Eyed, Please” episode of THE SIMPSONS airing Sunday, March 10 (8:00-8:30 PM ET/PT) on FOX.

Based on the description, the role could be relatively small, with only a few seconds on-screen. Then again, there’s really no telling how many lines the animated Dawkins will deliver, as the show’s producers may be purposefully keeping the details under wraps.

Headliner Richard Dawkins, founder of The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, speaks during the National Atheist Organization’s ‘Reason Rally’ March 24, 2012 on the National Mall in Washington, DC. Credit: Getty Images North America

Text on the Futon Critic’s web site simply reads, “Tina Fey and Richard Dawkins Make Guest-Voice Appearance” and “Guest Voice Cast: Tina Fey as Ms. Cantwell and Richard Dawkins as himself.”

Dawkins confirmed his participation by tweeting a link to an announcement on his web site last night.

Richard Dawkins on The Simpsons - Sun Mar 10 http://t.co/kmFqAyEGnx

March 6, 2013 1:06am via bitly ReplyRetweetFavorite

@rdfrs

RDFRS(US)

As The Friendly Atheist blog notes, Dawkins has already been featured (although he didn’t offer his voice up) on “South Park,” another edgy and popular cartoon. While he was being teased on the episode, his inclusion is noteworthy.

The clip is too graphic to share on TheBlaze, but its existence shows that Dawkins’ influence apparently extends beyond the atheist activist community — a movement he helps lead.

–

Other Must-Reads:

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (126)

shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:58pm
HELLBOUNDANDDOWN
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:46pm
the attendants must’ve forgotten to fasten the sleeves on your lovely white jacket.

What’s the difference about what happens to me? YOU are already HELL BOUND and DOWN. YOU should worry about YOURSELF.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- libertarianodinist
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:22pm
  it must be so sad to be you,there must be a special hell just for you cause there’s no way you’re a christian
  
  Report this comment
- PATTY HENRY
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 5:39pm
  CHOICE in life is simple: GOD or hell. Any other “choice” is a lie from Satan. Atheists are GOD-BELIEVING angry people. Instead of talking to GOD, studying GOD’S word, they just want to stamp their feet and shake their fists at the Heavens. IF they truly didn’t think there was a GOD they wouldn’t even care if others DID believe… Silly little ‘pots’ thinking they can tell the ‘POTTER’ what to do, or think they (the silly little pots) could be the POTTER.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:29pm
  Patty Henry, have you even heard or seen the arguments against you?
  
  I’m not against your God, I don’t think it exists.
  
  I can be against the people who “believe” in God, and try to pass legislation and force others to live around your unholy book.
  
  Try using your brain for once please.
  
  Report this comment
- blinknight
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 12:46am
  @Patty
  
  You actually believe in Zeus, Athena, Thor, Odin, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, you just deny it and shake your angry fists at them all instead of accepting the truth.
  
  Do you see how silly what you just said is now? Trust me when I say we think god exists just about as much as you think Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy exist.
  
  Report this comment
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:54pm
Transitional Fossils Today?

The renowned evolutionist (and Marxist) Stephen Jay Gould wrote:

The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.3

And:

I regard the failure to find a clear ‘vector of progress’ in life’s history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record.

As Sunderland points out:

It of course would be no puzzle at all if he [Gould] had not decided before he examined the evidence that common-ancestry evolution was a fact, ‘like apples falling from a tree,’ and that we can only permit ourselves to discuss possible mechanisms to explain that assumed fact.

ASSUMED FACT? DAM RIGHT!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 2:29pm
  @Shorelinez
  
  I’m not sure whom you are arguing against, but a quick Google search about Gould’s quotes shows exactly how dishonestly you quote-mined them. The second one, for example, omits the very next line, which says: “But I also believe that we are now on the verge of a solution, thanks to a better understanding of evolution in both normal and catastrophic times.”
  
  If I had to take a guess, most of the quotes you’ve presented here from famous evolutionary scientists are taken terribly out of context and completely misrepresent their work. What do you think?
  
  Report this comment
- vashli19
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:11pm
  @ Locked. Spot on mate! I’m sure that SHORE just cut and pasted these quotes from some creationist website. There is a good list of mined quotes and why they are false here:
  
  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part1-1.html
  
  The Gould quote in question is number 50, I believe.
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:39pm
  @VASHIL
  
  So, let me get this straight. You try and trash the guy buy saying that he has not credibility because he “probably” (which you don’t know) got the quote for Creationists website and then you have the gall to source a website entirely devoted to trashing Creationists.
  
  While you’re Google searching, look up the word “hypocrite”.
  
  Evolutionists are the smartest people to ever live and don’t need facts, just ask them.
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:45pm
  @LOCKED
  
  “But I also believe that we are now on the verge of a solution, thanks to a better understanding of evolution in both normal and catastrophic times.”
  
  That’s the redeeming line that is supposed to discredit the original poster. Exactly how do the understand macro-evolution better during catastrophic times? Bottom line – no missing link found and there will never be a missing link found because macro-evolution is genetically impossible.
  
  He believes he’s on the “verge” of a solution ? Yea, I’m on the verge of curing the common cold too. If only I could cure that dang Rhino virus. But, once I overcome that…. UREKA!
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 6:12pm
  @Squid
  
  “That’s the redeeming line that is supposed to discredit the original poster. ”
  
  Yes? It proves that @Shorelineliz (got the name wrong before, my bad) is quote-mining to take things out of context. The equivalent that would upset you or I would be people quote-mining the Bible to take things out of context and try to pull the wool over the eyes of other Christians. Luckily, you and I know the Bible. It’s pretty obvious Liz doesn’t understand evolution. I’m thinking you may not either?
  
  “Exactly how do the understand macro-evolution better during catastrophic times?”
  
  You could try looking up the quote? :-) The link @Vashl119 provides actually gives all the context around it.
  
  “He believes he’s on the “verge” of a solution ?”
  
  Sure. You realize this quote is about 20 years old, right? Much like evolution, scientific advancement does not just suddenly stop.
  
  “Yea, I’m on the verge of curing the common cold too. If only I could cure that dang Rhino virus. But, once I overcome that…. UREKA!”
  
  I think you meant Eureka :-) I look forward to your success!
  
  Report this comment
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:53pm
The Gaps are Huge:

Teaching about Evolution avoids discussing the vast gulf between non-living matter and the first living cell, single-celled and multicelled creatures, and invertebrates and vertebrates. The gaps between these groups should be enough to show that molecules-to-man evolution is without foundation.

There are many other examples of different organisms appearing abruptly and fully formed in the fossil record. For example, the first bats, pterosaurs, and birds were fully fledged flyers.

Turtles are a well designed and specialized group of reptiles, with a distinctive shell protecting the body’s vital organs. However, evolutionists admit ‘Intermediates between turtles and cotylosaurs, the primitive reptiles from which [evolutionists believe] turtles probably sprang, are entirely lacking.’ They can’t plead an incomplete fossil record because ‘turtles leave more and better fossil remains than do other vertebrates.’6 The ‘oldest known sea turtle’ was a fully formed turtle, not at all transitional. It had a fully developed system for excreting salt, without which a marine reptile would quickly dehydrate. This is shown by skull cavities which would have held large salt-excreting glands around the eyes.

All 32 mammal orders appear abruptly and fully formed in the fossil record. The evolutionist paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson wrote in 1944: The earliest and most primitive members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:51pm
The Transitional Fossils Problem:

Charles Darwin was worried that the fossil record did not show what his theory predicted:

Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.

Is it any different today?

The late Dr Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History, wrote a book, Evolution. In reply to a questioner who asked why he had not included any pictures of transitional forms, he wrote:

I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them … . I will lay it on the line—there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.

The renowned evolutionist (and Marxist) Stephen Jay Gould wrote:

The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:49pm
No Transitional Fossils:
http://www.thematrix.co.uk

In his book, Origin of Species, Darwin himself admitted that at the time of writing, the fossils discovered made it look like a series of acts of creation between each main order of life. Although he urged people to look for links between them, he also admitted that if no such links were discovered, then his theory would be incorrect. It therefore makes no sense what-so-ever, that man should unearth thousands of fossils every year, representing highly ‘developed’ and sophisticated life forms, and yet mysteriously there are no intermediate, half-developed life forms discovered between layers. No matter how much digging around we do, there really is no back door away from this issue. In fact so much of evolution’s credibility depends on this starting issue, nothing in this belief system evens begins to carry any weight whilst this anomaly exists. A bit like needing to throw a six to start a game of ludo.

A recent article by Jonathan Sarfati Ph.D., F.M. explains;

Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science discusses the fossil record in several places. Creationists and evolutionists, with their different assumptions, predict different things about the fossil record. If living things had really evolved from other kinds of creatures, then there would have been many intermediate or transitional forms, with halfway structures.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:41pm
@Doors:

Please school us all on Transitional Fossils by the following evidence:

1. What is in between a woolly mammoth and an African elephant?
2. What is in between a saber tooth tiger and an Indian tiger?
3. What is in between a pterodactyl and a pelican or stork?

Give us some evidence. I bet you can’t. Liz+

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:35pm
THE_DOORS_OF_PERCEPTION
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:17pm
They have thousands of fossils now…

Still its fine…if Evolution is soooo improbably how improbably is a supernatural deity?

@Doors:
Liar. they don’t have even ONE transitional fossil and you know it. Where is the evidence for it? Nowhere. Ha! Ha! Whereas people who believe in a supernatural deity don’t require ANY physical evidence. SUPER NATURAL, get it? ABOVE THE NATURAL. OUTSIDE THE NATURAL. There is NO Physical or Natural Evidence for a Deity on the EArth. I never claimed to be able to find Natural Evidence for a Deity. Because there isn’t any. People have been “manufacturing” statues to their “deities” for centuries. It doesn’t prove anything. They are just statues. Figments of people’s imagination. AS IS EVOLUTION and ITS MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE. So, everything is a FAKE and FORGERY on this earth. There is NO evidence for God. There never was. There is NO evidence for Darwin. NEver was. IT”S all Manufactured Bull Sh%T. all of it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 3:51pm
  I suggest talkorigins.org. Spend days on it…
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:48pm
  @DOORS
  
  I suggest AnswersInGenesis.org. Spend days on it.
  
  See what I did there?
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 8:07am
  no because talkorgins.org has real science…it’s not even in the same ballpark. Like if i gave you a link to nasa.com or space.com…and you provide a link for astrology.com. Understand? Oh and they don’t bash religious people…creationism is not science.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 8:00pm
  And Devon, as further proof that you are simply being disingenious, I’ll point out that you have no clue as to my life science background. And as I said, it’s okay that you wish to set up all kinds of fraudulent barriers, but please stop pretending you aren’t. Tell people up front that no matter what they bring to your attention, you have no intent of even thinking about it. That would save some very honest people from wasting time under the false belief that you are open to discussion. You aren’t. I will remember.
  
  Report this comment
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:29pm
ThornyRose13 said:
demonstrations of ignorance on the topic of evolution, and many misunderstandings. All because a cartoon program is going to have the man on for a few minutes.”

@Thorny Rose 13:
Pray tell oh enlightened one? Where is MY ignorance on topic of evolution? do tell me? When all the Physical Evidence for the THEORY of Evolution is now deemed a HOAX? OH. Enlightened one! Do tell me? Do SCHOOL me and all others on the BLAZE, won’t you?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- HellboundandDown
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:46pm
  the attendants must’ve forgotten to fasten the sleeves on your lovely white jacket.
  
  Report this comment
Thornyrose13
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:26pm
Amazing. Just the mention of Dawkins’ name, and the ranting, raving, and reviling spews forth from the mouth of those who claim a higher moral standard than “evolutionists”. Not to mention numerous blatent lies, demonstrations of ignorance on the topic of evolution, and many misunderstandings. All because a cartoon program is going to have the man on for a few minutes.
Take a deep breath folks, look in the mirror, and think. Is THIS the issue you want to waste all your energy on today? You don’t like the man, change the channel or turn off the t.v. It’s not like his appearance is going to change the course of history. But things that are going to change history are going on, and you choose to focus on this. Shame on you.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:16pm
Darwinist Professor Debunks Transitional Fossils:

Asked “Are there any transitional fossils?” Celal Şengör gave the astonishing reply that there are “tons” of transitional fossils and that ALL dinosaurs represent transitional fossils. This unexpected reply IS A BLATANT DECEIT.

As we have explained and demonstrated many times before, fully 100 million fossils have been extracted from the layers of the earth, BUT NOT ONE IS A TRANSITIONAL FORM FOSSIL. All the 100 million fossils discovered have remained the same for millions of years and are IDENTICAL to living things today THAT HAVE NEVER CHANGED AT ALL. These 100 million fossils, hidden away for years by Darwinists because they proved this evident truth, have been revealed to the whole world and the whole world has been convinced by them. By means of Atlas of Creation, the whole world has now seen that NOT A SINGLE TRANSITIONAL FORM FOSSIL EXISTS AND THAT LIVING THINGS HAVE REMAINED UNCHANGED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS.

The Darwinist Professor Alan Feduccia, the most highly regarded ornithologist in the world, says this about the myth of dinosaurs evolving into birds:

” Well, I’ve studied bird skulls for 25 years and I don’t see any similarities whatsoever. I just don’t see it . . . . The [theory of] theropod origins of birds, in my opinion, will be THE GREATEST EMBARRASSMENT of paleontology of THE 20TH CENTURY.”

“There are insurmountable problems with that theory. . .

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:11pm
THE_DOORS_OF_PERCEPTION said:
What is the statistical probability of god existing?

@Doors:
What is the statistical probability of the EVIDENCE for Darwins’ Theory of Evolution being a HOAX? 100 percent. Read and weep:

Piltdown man: Found in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1912, this fossil was considered by some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the evolution of man—until it was found to be a complete forgery 41 years later. The skull was found to be of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the appearance of age, and the teeth had been filed down!

Nebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig.

Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his “missing link”). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52)

Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later it was found to be bones

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:17pm
  They have thousands of fossils now…
  
  Still its fine…if Evolution is soooo improbably how improbably is a supernatural deity?
  
  Report this comment
- shorelineliz
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:43pm
  @Doors:
  
  HOAX. HOAX. HOAX. HOAX. DECEIT. LIES.
  
  Report this comment
shorelineliz
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:03pm
Make fun of the creep. Make fun of him night and day. Put him in a Gorilla suit. He deserves it for believing in such nonsensical crap. If he is going to believe in HOAXES then he SHOULD be skewered on the Simpsons and elsewhere. I can’t WAIT to see the episode.

IN other news:

Java Man was seen running around Massachusetts with a carrot stick stuck in his jaw. No one was alarmed because he was a skeleton with an ape like jaw and the body of what appeared to be a woolly mammoth/sabertooth tiger/pterodactyl/ Tyrannosaurus/ Brontosaurus mix. It appears that all these skeletons merged in one big primordial ooze pot, came to life, in a non existent Transitional Fossil type hybrid, and MAGICALLY sprung to life when A vile of Ted Kennedy’s TEARS were sprinkled on them.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
yohannbiimu
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:56am
By the way, I DID watch the South Park episode that had Richard Dawkins in it, and while it wasn’t one that I cared too much for, it made Dawkins into a boorish pervert. Obviously Trey Parker and Matt Stone are not fans of his.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
yohannbiimu
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:54am
I stopped watching The Simpsons back sometime during the 1990′s, so this “news” is irrelevant to me.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- naughtycal
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:26pm
  exactly…when the simpson tipped the scale into full blown leftist propaganda I turned the channel and never bothered to turn back to it.
  
  Report this comment
STEEEEVE53
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:02am
We are worried about the influence an atheist might have on viewers of The Simpsons ?

Actually, what might be interesting is research that gives us a description of the typical Simpsons viewer.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ltb
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:01am
Forget about non-existent missing links, polystrate fossils and every other argument against Evolution, all anyone needs to know is that it’s statistically impossible for raw materials to come together through natural processes to form a DNA molecule. Actually, scientists have calculated the odds at 1 chance in 10^40,000, which is a probability that’s so infinitesimally small that there’s no good analogy to adequately represent such an impossibility. Yet, Dawkins not only expects people to bet on those odds, he wants people to bet on even more ridiculous odds that this fantastic process kept happening over and over again until insects, plants, animals and people kept coming together by chance. It’s kind of funny if you think about it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:32am
  What is the statistical probability of god existing?
  
  Report this comment
- TheIggies
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:42am
  Still better odds than the odds of a snake talking and a man coming back from the dead and all the other ludicrous nonsense you find in that fictitious book you call the Bible.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:45am
  Doors, . . . . . . . . gotta be like . . . 1 chance in 10^40,000,000 or greater, right? If THIS life is that “improbable”, . . . a being like a god would be even less probable. Good thought, sir.
  
  Report this comment
- Conservative Humanist
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:59am
  I see you are using “answersingenesis.com” and the Creation Museum as sources for science! Those statistics are probably correct if you are talking about expecting an entire DNA molecule to spontaneously form. But for a single base pair to form over a period of thousands of years amid billions of chemical compounds is probably about a 100% chance. From that point on, it is just a matter of bumping and mixing over thousands of years and trying millions and billions of combinations. I only needs to work once to take off.
  
  Report this comment
- yohannbiimu
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:10pm
  @ Conservative Humanist: Yes, of course! Add the magical element of TIME, and anything is possible, right? Ooze (that somehow occurred) plus trillions of years equals what you see all around you. Makes sense to me…
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:25pm
  -doors, and others
  
  I have a friend who has been Phd in in the field of microbiology for 20+ yrs. He is a biblicist/ creationist; and he tells me his colleagues (most atheists ) disbelieve creation out of convenience, not because they are convinced, but solely because they refuse to believe the alternative. This is quite revealing, as they represent a cross section of respected academia-
  
  My friend states that through observation (under a microscope) that an honest mind must conclude a Creator, and he also states that the atheists simply do not disbelieve, but they deny their belief, and this says he is the ultimate dishonesty.
  
  Personally, I think the issue of say Mr Dawkins, etc, is big time pride- it takes a real man to debase himself and admit he is not the god creature he imagines; and this is the conclusion of the topic: a man disbelieves because he is his own god- but this will be denied also
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:32pm
  The_Doors_Of_ImPerception, What is the statistical probability of God existing? I don’t know, but I suppose 50/50. What I do know is that Jesus fulfilled over 300 prophecies that were written down centuries before he was born and the odds of him fulfilling only 8 of those prophecies are 1 in 10^17. If there were two horses and the first horse has won every single race out of 10^17 races, while the second horse has one only 1 out of 10^40,000 races, I’ll bet on the first horse every time.
  
  Report this comment
- frgough
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:36pm
  @Conservative Humanist:
  
  Actually, not. Certain chemical reactions simply don’t occur, no matter how much time you allow. For example, you will never get a stable molecule of helium oxide, even if you wait a trillion years. It turns out that DNA is in that category. The conditions of a prebiotic earth would actually destroy the molecules required to form a DNA base-pair.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:38pm
  Conservative Humanist, first off I wasn’t using answersingenesis, but if I had I certainly wouldn’t be ashamed to admit it, since it’s an excellent organization that employs scientists who make Richard Dawkins look like a mental midget. Second, your statement not only demonstrates a profound ignorance about statistics, it illustrates how ignorant most atheists are about the unbelievable complexity of even the “simplest” of cells. What is your level of education?
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:52pm
  @LGBT
  
  Lol, yeah I suppose you think there is a 50/50 chance of winning the lottery huh?
  
  So, “US” happening by chance is more improbably than the “being” that created “US” happening by chance? Explain that one. You must be getting you math from answersinnumbers.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:58pm
  John, . . . I am one who sees nothing credible in “a god” being real. Does that mean I am right? Maybe, . . . maybe not. Do I consider myself “a god”? Laughably, no!
  
  But if we came to the scientific conclusion [based upon much testing and verification] that it must have been “a creator”, . . . the best you can do would be Deism. All the rest is man’s interpretation of what he FEELS is “the creator”. And that doesn’t even take into account that “the creator” is merely a process that we [at our current level of technology] are unable to determine, . . . but WILL at some point in the future. Still a natural process. For me, . . . that is FAR more probable than “an all powerful, invisible deity”. YMMV
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:05pm
  The_Doors_Of_ImPerception, you’re kind of a moron. Tell me, what’s your level of education?
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:09pm
  @LTB
  
  Good answer…I win.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:26pm
  The_Doors_Of_ImPerception, You win? It’s sad that you think acting like a moron makes you a winner. The surest way to shut up a militant atheist is to ask him about his level of education. That’s okay, you don’t need to answer, your ignorance gives you away.
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:48pm
  -drye
  
  God being found in the lab is reserved for the most cynical of skeptics, as He is NOT in the lab, but his design is- it after all is His creation. There are plenty of proofs as to a divine hand, if folks would but open their eyes, so they need not look under a microscope.
  
  and if you admit you are not your own god, then what standard did you use, since you said there is no god? People who say ‘there is no god,’ by default have made themselves God; this is inescapable.
  
  I believe by faith that another person is somewhere typing a response to this post, and not a dust-storm rolling through the fields looking for micas and cyber letters to send forth……………..in other words real proof- is not this what the atheist seeks: proof?
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 2:49pm
  John, . . . I would be interesting in hearing what could only be proofs of a divine hand.
  
  No, I’m not a god of any type. But why do you think “a standard” must be from “a god”? Most standards really aren’t that difficult to understand. Much of them are reflected in either law or taboo. And it really is a system that expects people to comport similarly to everyone else for the good of the society [since we are a social species].
  
  Again, I would be interested in what proofs of the divine hand you could offer, . . . that would also point to any specific deity. As I said, it is possible [though not all too probable] that an ultimately powerful being magically started it all, . . . but that goes no further than deism.
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 3:33pm
  d-rye
  
  I’ll satiate your curiosity with a few salient proofs-
  
  -a God given conscience to man alone
  -a God given spirit, unique to man
  -the creation of gravity
  -a moon in the sky as His promise never to forsake Israel
  -a bow in the sky as a promise never to flood the entire earth again
  -the lineage and promises through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
  -the proof of sin
  pride
  lying
  murder
  stealing
  covetousness (these may not be good proofs, but they are identified by God)
  
  -the wages of sin
  -the second law of thermodynamics
  -the availability of forgiveness of sin, again unique to man
  -promise of a comforter in this dark age
  -the fear and dread of man by the animals
  -God’s heads up on the future
  -the ability to love an enemy
  -a book given by God through man that dispels all other books
  
  time fails
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 3:56pm
  You know you win when instead of a rebuttal you get called a moron
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:26pm
  John, I appreciate your list. I see nothing that can point to a specific deity. Though some aspects of humanity are seemingly “divine”, it is just the product of our eventual developement.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:47pm
  Devon, say you have all the chemicals properly assembled and arranged right before you, now what do you do to give “it” life? What exactly is “life”? What is it that causes that assemblage of chemicals to “live”? How can they become “conscious,” “think,” and “remember” (after all they are just chemicals)? What is it that permeates that highly organized assemblage of chemicals to make them more than just the chemicals you can see, that can make them operate together as a unit, as more than the chemicals could ever do on their own? What is it that can make that assemblage of chemicals “love” a similar “living” assemblage of chemicals? What is it that causes that assemblage of chemicals to question its origin as though that should matter to a bunch of chemicals? What is it that holds that assemblage of chemicals together that once it leaves they begin to disassemble into less and less organized combinations? You will never give “life” to an assemblage of chemicals. None of us ever will. It is my “proof” of God.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 9:26am
  Sparky, . . . I suggest you ask a neuro-biologist [or the equivilent] these questions. They require an advanced degree to answer them thoroughly.
  
  Here’s the problem. Because you haven’t studied that type of field, . . . you use the “I don’t understand how it could be, . . . therefore, ‘god’ fallacy”. If that’s fine for you, then by all means, enjoy that level of life. It really isn’t “world in peril” stuff, and can give some people a lifetime of happiness. But it isn’t a valid argument for those who don’t share that belief.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 7:52pm
  Devon, it’s okay that you side-step my questions so adroitly (in your mind). Sorry, the neurobiologists cannot answer those questions either. And of course you incorrectly jumped to neurobiology when my observations had less to do with brain function and more to do with the life that pervades your entire body. But it wasn’t for them that I was explaining God’s existence, it was for you to ponder. That you would cast it aside so readily tells me something about your true intent. You have no intention of allowing any questions, regardless of how fundamental or how intriguing, to pass your “God denial defense mechanisms” because you fear to entertain them. You don’t want anyone to get behind those defenses, even if it means you must be disingenious. I thought you were a thinking man. I was wrong. Sorry. But you lose.
  
  Report this comment
TheGrtDcptn
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:50am
…Thanks for the warning, I’ll be sure to miss his debut…and all other airings as well…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thegreatcarnac
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:43am
Ummmmm….doughnuts!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
tnman65
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 9:57am
Why do atheists get so upset that Christians believe in God? Why does it matter to them?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JGraham III
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:27am
  For those who are of the don’t know/don’t care end of the atheist spectrum I have much more respect than for those atheists who are actually “missionaries” for their cause. These are the most prideful and arrogant ones and the most odious too. Dawkins is an intellectual who cannot conceive that anyone differing from what HE has determined to be true might actually be right. He is painfully limited in his ability to learn from those of us who believe. But then again I haven’t tried lately to convince an atheist; there are far too many others who will believe than to waste time on someone who is determined not to believe. I find it ironic that such an intellectual giant as Dawkins sees himself would deign to appear on a show like the Simpsons.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:30am
  We don’t. When people have a belief that elvis is alive, they were abducted by aliens, or that an old book was written by a supernatural being….none of that really matters. But when they get into power and base policy on these beliefs and try to teach non scientific things in school to kids or restrict liberty based on their belief that Elvis is still alive…that is what I have a problem with.
  
  Report this comment
- thegreatcarnac
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:41am
  Most atheists believe in God. They say they don’t to spite God because they are angry at him over something or they want attention. They should not care if people believe in God or not but they do. They do because they want to ”hurt’ him. They are fools.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:43am
  First off, why do you play the victim card and say that atheists are only “upset” about Christians believing in a God?
  
  The world doesn’t revolve around you and your religion. I’m annoyed at humanity as a whole for accepting such mindless dribble.
  
  Secondly, I’m not “upset” about you “believing” in a God……….until you and your kind start passing legislation around your “belief” and start trying to make every one else conform to what you think your Bible says.
  
  If religion would lead a completely deluded life based around their Bible, and left me alone, I would have no problem with it. The problem is, most religious people can’t separate the real world, from their fairy tale world and are constantly talking about it and trying to get others to accept their nonsense.
  
  Ironically, the most passive of religious people are usually Jewish people. It’s the Christians, Mormons, and Muslims who are constantly talking about their God and are constantly bothering me with their nonsense all while damming me to eternal torture for not agreeing with their world view…..and then calling that “love.”
  
  The problem is, as it has been shown time and time again, is that a person’s religious beliefs infect EVERYTHING they do so they invariably end up imposing their religious belief in one way or another on people who aren’t of their religion.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:49am
  Why do atheists get so upset that Christians believe in God? Why does it matter to them?
  
  Because they want false assurances that they aren’t going to Hell. It’s kind of like whistling through a graveyard.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:58am
  Thegreatcarnac:
  
  “Most atheists believe in God. They say they don’t to spite God because they are angry at him over something or they want attention. They should not care if people believe in God or not but they do. They do because they want to ”hurt’ him. They are fools.”
  
  If a person is “just angry at god”, then no, they aren’t an atheist. If they [like me] see absolutely no credible/compelling evidence for even the general notion of a god, then it is sincere. Having said that, I am agnostic, since I don’t know everything there is to know about the universe. The odds are just SO great against “a god” that I have to be honest in my assessment.
  
  Now, as for the christian, I don’t care if they believe what they believe. If it makes them happy, or fulfills their life somehow, then I have no reason to take that away from them. If they use their unsubstantiated religious beliefs to make a law against what I feel is okay, THEN there is a reason to speak out against it.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:10am
  THE_DOORS_OF_IMPERCEPTION, you believe you’re related to apes and that your ancestors were little slime balls, but you’re worried about people who believe Elvis is still alive? That’s funny. It’s like Charles Manson calling his psychiatrist “crazy.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:28am
  Devon, Moderation, name such religious laws.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:35am
  So far, none of them [religiously baised] affect me. However, I’m sure those who want to marry their same sex partner would have issue. It’s not my fight, however.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:44am
  LTB…I don’t BELIEVE we are great apes…I have looked at all the scientific evidence pointing in that direction and come to the most logical conclusion based on the falsifiable facts. YOU have to go against all the evidence and BELIEVE you are not a great ape…a primate…based on un-falsifiable BELIEFS like ghosts and stuff. Again, I will pose this to you…name one thing that had a scientific explanation that now has a religious/supernatural/god explanation…Now think of how many religious/supernatural/god explanations have a scientific one now. You keep betting on that horse that has lost every time…maybe it will pull through this time. LOL…oh and I don’t know what you are talking about when you say “Slime Balls”.
  
  Also, what false assurances do you tell yourself that you are not going to hell because you don’t worship Allah? Most people in the world don’t believe in your god…so statistically speaking…I will see you in hell:)
  
  Report this comment
- red1
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:00pm
  I am an atheist who agrees with the statement that most people who claim to be atheists actually believe in God and are angry with Him. This is the only thing that explains their behavior for me. I feel certain of this because I once thought as them. It is an immature behavior that I have thankfully been able to overcome. I am not troubled by Christians using their faith to advocate laws either. They are as entitled to their opinions as I am entitled to mine, and I generally agree with them anyway.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:11pm
  THE_DOORS_OF_IMPERCEPTION, You obviously haven’t looked at your beliefs from the vantage point of the statistical improbability that DNA formed by chance, then proteins formed by chance, then “simple” cells formed by chance, then the first single cell organism formed by chance, then the first multi-cellular organism formed by chance, etc., etc., etc. until the first male and female human being formed at exactly the same time by chance. Even if the world had been around for 3.5 billion trillion quadrillion quintillion sextillion septillion octillion nonillion centuries, there wouldn’t have been enough time for even simple cells to have formed by natural processes. Do you get it? Obviously not.
  
  As far as allah is concerned, the entire Islamic religion is based upon the premise that Jesus was not crucified. As a matter of fact, in order to become a Muslim one must reject the belief that Jesus is the Son of God. Not only that, but Islam was started 600 years after Christ was crucified by a man who believed he was possessed by demons and who thought his revelations came from Satan. Oh, and here’s the clencher for really thick headed people… allah says he will meet his followers in Hell to judge them. Gee, any red flags there that Islam is a Satanic religion? I mean besides the obvious things, like the way allah’s followers like to chop off people’s heads and fly planes into buildings.
  
  Report this comment
- yohannbiimu
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:16pm
  TDOP: The problem with you is that you have ignored all of the evidence that shows that we are NOT the progeny of great apes millions of years ago, and that much of the “evidence” that you embrace is fraudulent. If the only material you read is stuff that supports your preconceived notions, then you are not looking at ALL evidence.
  
  Report this comment
- darkknight91
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:25pm
  Moderation, you atheists bore me. I don’t know of any mainstream legislator trying to legislate the Bible. There are a few crackpots on both sides, but nobody prominent. The problem is you atheists are on a jihad to eradicate God from all aspects of life. That’s why you attempt to be insulting and condescending towards Christians. I say ‘attempt’ because your rhetoric is weak. I looked at your recent posts and they are ALL on topics of God, Christians and the Bible. Nothing else. Don’t come on here and try to act as if you’re above the fray and ‘just want to be left alone’. You’re on a mission just like the mental midget Dawkins. I’ve heard him wax philosophically and he’s dumber than a box of rocks. Don’t go away mad. Just go away.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:33pm
  @LBT
  
  “THE_DOORS_OF_IMPERCEPTION, You obviously haven’t looked at your beliefs from the vantage point of the statistical improbability that DNA formed by chance, then proteins formed by chance, then “simple” cells formed by chance, then the first single cell organism formed by chance, then the first multi-cellular organism formed by chance, etc., etc., etc. until the first male and female human being formed at exactly the same time by chance. Even if the world had been around for 3.5 billion trillion quadrillion quintillion sextillion septillion octillion nonillion centuries, there wouldn’t have been enough time for even simple cells to have formed by natural processes. Do you get it? Obviously not.”
  
  Hmm…I guess I should come up with some “witty” way to type your name too…LGBT, thanks for admitting you don’t understand the science….or you are at least gettting your science from unscientific sources…like Humanist mentioned. Evolution say’s nothing about DNA happening by “chance”, so again you don’t understand the science but we both new that.
  
  I’m still waiting for an answer…Name one thing that had a scientific eplanation but now has a supernatural one…come on it shouldn’t be that hard.
  
  I already knew you didn’t find Islam truthful or right…but the fear you have for their hell…is the same fear I feel about your silly made up place. You shaking in your high heels?
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:44pm
  @yohannbiimu
  
  Lets try this…sometime in history your ancestors(including you) have gained an immunity to the common cold virus through genetics. How could you tell if someone was related to you? Well one way would be to look in their genetic makeup and if they had the same immunity with the same genetic mutations in the same place with the same mistakes out of millions and millions of variations that are possible, you could say almost 100% that you and this person are related and have a common ancestor. They have discovered this very thing multiple times in apes…they have the same defenses to virus’s in the same places as we do in their genes…the only way this is possible is if we had a common ancestor. So, what you said is just very very incorrect.
  
  Also, look up Kenneth Miller on you tube…he is a christian but can prove to you all day long that we have a common ancestor with real science…not his bible. He even proved it in a court of law with a christian judge appointed by George Bush on the bench.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 12:54pm
  The_Doors_Of_ImPerception, If you people weren’t so annoying, you’d be amusing. Hey Genius, if DNA didn’t happen by chance, then it must have happened as a result of guided intervention – those are the only two options. I feel the same way as Darknight… you militant atheists bore me. Anyway, here’s a bet I’ll make with you: 100 years from now, we’ll both know if you were right or wrong. Of course, statistically speaking, we’ll find out much, much sooner. In the meantime, if you want to believe that you’re related to apes, knock yourself out, but please just stay away from children.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:15pm
  @LTB
  
  Name one thing that had a scientific explanation but now has a supernatural one…everybody is still waiting.
  
  LTB has a press conference at the Max Planck institute of Evolutionary Biology.
  
  LTB: Thank you all for coming, I have finally proven Evolution is wrong…
  
  Scientists: How!?
  
  LTB: It is statistically impossible…I read in a book God did it though….:|
  
  Scientist: :|
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 1:37pm
  The_Doors_Of_ImPerception, I have a theory about militant atheists, which is that you were abused as children and tormented by peers during your formative years. That would explain your stunted EQs and your sado-masochistic tendencies to provoke complete strangers into hating you. My educated guess is that your sophomoric taunts serve as misplaced aggression, which are intended to get back at those who hurt you. Ironically, and sadly, you’ve become the kind of person who drove you to hate in the first place. I actually feel sorry for you.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 2:21pm
  @LTB
  
  I’m a Christian who believes in evolution. The majority of Christians do (heck, even the largest Christian denomination, Roman Catholicism, states that evolution is true. I’m not Catholic, but that fact alone should give you a pretty good idea of how much of a minority you are in).
  
  The fact that you mix together abiogenesis and evolution makes me think you’ve been told by your pastor that evolution must be false without actually knowing much about the scientific theory or evidence behind it.
  
  I’d also point out that you were the one who first started insulting @Doors in this topic.
  
  @Moderation
  
  “Ironically, the most passive of religious people are usually Jewish people.”
  
  I’ve found this to be true as well. I believe it’s because being Jewish is a culture as much as a religion. I’ve known several folks who identify as “Jewish atheists.” The religious aspect is so ingrained in their culture that even when they say they’re not religious they still practice Jewish customs (holidays, etc).
  
  @Doors/Deavon/Moderation (any atheist, really): I’m interested in how you would respond to Sparky01′s comment. What specific laws are you looking to overturn?
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 2:57pm
  Locked, as I stated, I don’t currently have a law that I, personally, would like to see overturned. Not on the topic of what might be “religious” in nature.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 4:10pm
  @locked
  
  Yeah, once we get to the end where LBT has nothing of substance to say he calls me a moron and such and tells me Im going to hell.
  
  I’m with Deavon…mostly. I’m a libertarian…so I would like to see drug laws lifted. And just to clarify…I don’t drink, smoke or do drugs. And I don’t like the idea of my elected leaders thinking god is telling them to do certain things of such high importance…such as public and foreign policy.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 5:30pm
  Locked, the reason I disbelieve Evolution has nothing to do with what my pastor has said, the reason I don’t believe in Evolution is because I think it’s about the dumbest theory ever devised.
  Anyone with an ounce of common sense understands the fact that chaos NEVER coalesces into order. If you were to cut down twenty trees in the forest and let them fall where they may, 100 years later someone would not go to that spot and discover 200 canoes UNLESS someone had carved the trees into canoes. Likewise, if you set off a small thermonuclear explosion in the middle of a desolate desert, that explosion is not going to produce the Taj Mahal. The fact that there are idiots who can’t understand this basic truth, which is in and of itself enough to refute Evolution, is dumbfounding.
  
  As far as you being a Christian, let me ask why you believe the parts of the Bible about Jesus, when you think the first paragraphs of the Bible are a complete lie? What other parts of the Bible have you decided are BS and what standard do you use to separate the BS from the truth in the Bible?
  
  And no, I did not start insulting Lack_of_Perception first. I guess I probably could have turned the other cheek, but I just don’t feel like turning the other cheek today. If these morons would stop lurking around sites just so they can start arguments with complete strangers, there wouldn’t be the need for insults.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 6:02pm
  The_Doors_Of_Perception, I’d be happy to “rebut” you if you’ll answer a simple question, which I now will have asked three times: What is your level of education?
  
  The reason I never debate evolution with atheists is because 9 times out of 10 you people have learned everything you know about evolution from Wikipedia and a 10th grade biology class. If you’ve only got a high school education I’m not trying to imply that I’m better than you just because I have a master’s degree, I’m trying to save both of us frustration by determining the level at which I need to address your arguments.
  
  One of the reasons you probably get so frustrated with people when they try to explain why Evolution is idiotic nonsense is because you don’t have the educational background to understand such things as statistics and research designs. I guarantee you that anyone who has even a cursory knowledge of those two subjects understands why 90% of the arguments in favor of evolution are absurd. Now, what’s your level of education?
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 6:18pm
  @LTB
  
  “Anyone with an ounce of common sense understands the fact that chaos NEVER coalesces into order. If you were to cut down twenty trees in the forest and let them fall where they may, 100 years later someone would not go to that spot and discover 200 canoes UNLESS someone had carved the trees into canoes. Likewise, if you set off a small thermonuclear explosion in the middle of a desolate desert, that explosion is not going to produce the Taj Mahal. The fact that there are idiots who can’t understand this basic truth, which is in and of itself enough to refute Evolution, is dumbfounding.”
  
  Luckily, your analogies are terrible ways to compare to evolution. As said, I don’t think you understand what evolution says – and judging by your nuclear explosion one, I’m almost certain you don’t differentiate it from abiogenesis.
  
  “As far as you being a Christian, let me ask why you believe the parts of the Bible about Jesus, when you think the first paragraphs of the Bible are a complete lie?”
  
  I don’t think the Bible lies, and the first paragraphs are obviously not to be taken literally (as there are several blatantly false notions and two creation accounts). As Pope John Paul II said when it came to evolution, when our interpretation of Scripture runs up against the facts of reality, is it more likely that reality is wrong or that our interpretation is wrong?
  
  As for Doors, your first post in this thread insulted his user name.
  
  Report this comment
- tnman65
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 7:11pm
  Thanks for the comments LTB.
  Give ‘me Hell.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:05pm
  Locked, Neither analogy was meant to correlate to abiogenesis, they were both meant to illustrate the absurdity of the notion that order comes from chaos. Perhaps the reason you thought they were terrible analogies is because your reasoning abilities aren’t all that great. BTW, did you know that the analogies section was removed from the SAT because State run schools have done such a good job of indoctrinating children that kids no longer know how to reason? That’s right, the SAT had to be dumbed down because children are no longer taught how to think, they are told what to think. Speaking of education, what level have you achieved and what do you believe is the strongest argument in favor of Evolution?
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:06pm
  As far as God not meaning for the first paragraphs of the Bible to be taken literally, you might want to discuss that with God, because I’m pretty sure he expects us to take them literally. Tell me, do you think that God couldn’t have created the Universe the way he said he did in Genesis, or do you just think he was speaking figuratively because scientists have concluded that the Universe is 75,000 years old… no wait, that’s what scientists believed up until 1831… I mean because scientists have concluded its 100 million years old… errr, sorry that was up until 1901… 500 million years… sorry, that was up until 1929… I mean 2 billion years old… shoot, I forgot, that’s what they thought up until 1999… 10 billion years old… my bad, that was up until a couple of years ago…. 12 billion years. Yes, that’s it, 12 billion years old. So is the reason you choose to say that the Bible is lying is because you believe scientists when they say the Universe is 12 billion years old? One other question: If you were to die tonight and God asked you why you should be allowed into Heaven, what would you say (i.e., what makes you a Christian)?
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:26pm
  @DARKKNIGHT91
  
  “The problem is you atheists are on a jihad to eradicate God from all aspects of life.”
  
  Straw man. Almost all of my friends are devoutly religious and I care about them greatly. I actually just volunteered with them a few weeks ago. I was in my friends wedding, they bowed their heads and said a prayer. I bowed my head to not mess up any potential photographs, but I didn’t pay any attention to the prayer. I am perfectly fine with christmas directions on personal property. Heck If I know you and you ask me for help, I”ll likely help you.
  
  The problem I have is that people can’t separate their personal religious lives from their public life. You have laws on gay marriage STRICTLY because of someone’s religious beliefs. You have people trying to get their book put into the science class room because of the “controversy.” There is no controversy and just because there are more Christians doesn’t mean they get equal time in the science class.
  
  You have elected leaders who say they use the Bible to determine how they vote on policy. I have friends who say they want the Bible and prayer to be consulted on both foreign and domestic policy. You have “In God We Trust” being made our motto in the 50s, same with “under God” in the pledge.
  
  Until religion shows me they can fragment their religious belief with how they treat and govern other people, I have no reason to think that they will.
  
  Nice try though.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:58pm
  @ltb
  
  “Perhaps the reason you thought they were terrible analogies is because your reasoning abilities aren’t all that great.”
  
  Nope. Pretty sure your analogies are just poor in quality.
  
  “BTW…”
  
  An irrelevant position. Stay on topic if you actually have something to contribute, please :-)
  
  “Speaking of education, what level have you achieved”
  
  Currently have a Masters and two Bachelors of Science. But hey, it’s the internet. Let’s see… I mean, er, I have Three Ph.D.s, and I’m also the president of a space colony outside of Mars!
  
  … welcome to the internet.
  
  “and what do you believe is the strongest argument in favor of Evolution?”
  
  The scientific consensus of a majority of relevant scientists who study it and say the evidence supports it. I will admit my primary field of study is not about evolution; ergo, I defer to the overwhelming scientific consensus on the matter.
  
  In most conversations that would be an appeal to authority or popularity… except that there’s no specific “authority” (though all major accredited scientific groups agree with evolution) nor “consensus” (because unlike the layman’s terminology, a scientific consensus regards experts in the field and not Joe Shmoe off the street).
  
  So, what’s your knock-out argument for Intelligent Design? Or Youth Earth Creationism? Or even better: your deathblow against evolution (bonus points if a Google search doesn’t discredit it within a single page of results)!
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:03pm
  @LTB
  
  “As far as God not meaning for the first paragraphs of the Bible to be taken literally, you might want to discuss that with God, because I’m pretty sure he expects us to take them literally.”
  
  That is your choice. Most folks would look at the obvious contradictions, including the TWO accounts of creation, and go “Huh. That seems odd.” When exploring deeper you have three choices:
  
  1. Abide by faith and look for a ration answer. That’s my choice. So when Genesis says the moon is a source of light and not a reflection of the sun, I say “Well, that’s not a reflection of reality! We know the moon doesn’t emit light!” When we have two creation stories, I go “Well, obviously plant life couldn’t exist prior to the sun existing; this must be an allegory!” We take it on faith.
  2. You throw out the Bible completely, because your faith was weak enough that it couldn’t take the slightest argument. I see this with most of our atheists here.
  3. You stick your fingers firmly in your ears, and go “LA LA LA LA LA!!!” to drown out any possible interpretation but your own. And you look like a moron for doing so :-)
  
  Report this comment
- RationalMan
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:33pm
  Sparky101,
  I will say in real time “TAXES” look it up in your Bible, under Mathew!!!
  The only day that I can relieve myself is on Christmas Day, the only day we don’t have to “Sacrifice”
  toward others!!!!
  
  Think about it!!!
  
  Report this comment
- RationalMan
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:41pm
  BTW, Sparky101,
  What was Matthew last name?????
  
  All “Holy-Than-Thou!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- RationalMan
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 11:54pm
  Sparky101,
  Taxes was taken from the “Bible” and yes I cannot buy liquor on Sunday, but, it’s o.k. religion can
  serve wine on Sunday? (Wine is alcohol) is it not?
  
  Yes, I do see this “Artifical Day” (Sunday) a day to worship….”JUST-US”!……Right Sparky101?????
  
  Did I rattle your cage yet?….; )
  
  Report this comment
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 8:24am
  @LTB
  
  So your answer to my question, which I asked first, is “What is your level of education?”. You seriously need to know that? Does the fact that Obama has an elite education make you respect him more…make you listen to him more attentively? I have an associates degree, I was called up for active duty while I was going to school when we went to war with Iraq…just never was able to go back. Plus, I don’t need to really, I have a great job. I enjoy self education, I love to read…I don’t need someone from a pulpit or classroom to teach me science and history. Not sure why any of this is relevant to you but there you go…I answered your question…one that wasn’t even relevant to the discussion. Now you have to answer mine…
  
  Name one thing that had a scientific explanation but now has a supernatural/god explanation…
  
  Still waiting…maybe you should go back to school and get another degree if you can’t answer this very simple question…
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 12:57pm
  Locked, Instead of attacking my analogies, by saying how stupid they are, tell me what exactly it is that you don’t understand about the basic fact that order NEVER comes from chaos? Even a child understands that if he leaves his room in a mess it won’t get cleaned up UNLESS his mother cleans it up for him. Sorry, there’s another one of those analogies that probably went straight over your head and no, it had nothing to do with abiogenesis (hint: had to do with entropy and intelligent intervention).
  
  As far as my degrees are concerned, I have an M.Ed. and a BBA. I did a lot of course work in statistics and research design, so I can easily see when someone has reached a conclusion without doing their homework. My business dealings have helped me see when someone is full of s**t and I’ve never met someone who believes in evolution who understood why they believe what they believe and who wasn’t full of s**t. Sorry, but you’re no exception. I couldn’t care less about what the scientific consensus is, I want to know what you believe is the strongest argument in favor of evolution. Answer my questions and I’ll answer yours.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 1:08pm
  Locked, you’re not a Christian, which is why you ignored my other question about what makes you believe you’re a Christian. When somebody asks me why I’m a Christian, I never hesitate to tell them why, because it is the most important aspect of my existence. People like you, though, call yourself a Christian, but you attack the Bible that tells Christians why we are saved and you have more in common with atheists than with Paul (he’s a guy in the Bible you’d know about if you’d ever read it). Now, once again, if you were to die tonight and God asked you why he should let you into Heaven, how would you answer (i.e., what makes you a Christian)?
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 1:23pm
  The_Doors_Of_Perception, Thank you for answering my question. I wasn’t asking because I wanted to belittle you, I honestly wanted to know so we could have a respectful conversation. When two strangers are having a conversation on the Internet and neither knows what level of education the other has, there tends to be a lot of bravado and condescension. I just wanted to eliminate all of that.
  
  Your question about something that had a scientific explanation but now has a supernatural one is a good question, but it’s not simple. I honestly want to give you an answer, but I can’t come up with one off the top of my head. Will you give me a day to pray about it? If you will, I promise I’ll respond tomorrow whether I have a good answer or not.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 7, 2013 at 8:34pm
  Locked, you are wrong. There is only one account of Creation. It is in Genesis. It is first given chronologically, then it is fleshed out (so to speak) in more detail. It is interesting that it describes Pangea many thousands of years before Pangea was even a scientific concept. If you read scripture with a chip on your shoulder, how can it ever truly speak to you? You won’t let it. If it is as faulty as what you have determined (based on what I don’t know), then will you ever be strong enough to set your bias and pre-determined fallacies aside? Probably not. Most people who say the things you’ve said cannot submit to something like God. Please understand this is not unique at all, but the very basis for God giving you free will. He asks, he does not demand. He knocks, but does not push the door open. He allows it to be your decision, your choice. When you open the door (if you ever do), you will find him worthy of your interest and awe, at least I did after over 40 years of denying and/or cursing him.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 8, 2013 at 10:39am
  The_Doors_Of_Perception, Before I answer your question, I want to acknowledge I understand that no matter what I say it won’t satisfy you, because you’ve already made up your mind to not believe in God, and that’s okay with me. My “job” as a Christian is not to make you believe anything, my “job” is to tell people the truth and let them do with it what they will. There is nothing that would make me happier than for God to come down to earth tomorrow and show all of the atheists in the world that there truly is a God, but he’s already done that and it still didn’t matter. Two thousand years ago, God came to earth as Jesus and even though he defied the laws of nature by walking on water, turning water into wine, healing the sick, calming storms and raising himself from the dead, there were people who refused to believe what they saw.
  
  Continued…
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 8, 2013 at 10:40am
  …continued
  
  Anyway, you asked me to “name one thing that had a scientific explanation but now has a supernatural/god [sic] explanation,” and the best example I can come up with is something known as “quantum nonlocality.” Up until a few years ago, scientists thought they had light figured out and believed nothing could travel faster than the speed of light; however, they discovered something interesting, which is that certain microscopic particles act in unison when varying their direction, even though the communication between the particles would have to travel much faster than the speed of light in order for one particle to “know,” and subsequently react to, what the other particle is doing. One particle could be on one side of the Universe and its partner could be on the other side of the Universe, but they would still simultaneously mimic each other’s actions. This phenomenon violates the laws of physics and cannot be explained using natural laws. Even though I’m sure it doesn’t change your mind about anything, you should read about quantum nonlocality, because if nothing else it’s very interesting.
  
  Continued…
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 8, 2013 at 10:41am
  …continued
  
  I realize there is no good answer to your question, because in essence, you are asking me to prove God exists and I can’t do that for you. It has been proved to me that God exists, because he became very real to me the day I accepted the truth about Jesus Christ and my relationship with him since then has only served to reinforce the proof I first received years ago. The only way you will ever have the proof you seek is if you first seek out God. It’s a Catch 22.
  
  Continued…
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on March 8, 2013 at 10:42am
  …continued
  
  While quantum nonlocality doesn’t prove the existence of God, it does highlight one very important thing, which is that there’s a lot of stuff scientists can’t explain. We are tiny little creatures who live on a huge ball that spins around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour while hurling through space at over 66,000 miles per hour. The huge ball we live on is dwarfed by the enormous sun we orbit and the sun is minute compared to the galaxy we live in, which in turn is merely a speck of dust in comparison to the rest of the Universe. In the grand scheme of things, we are like mites on a flea on an elephant on a ship in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and for scientists to assume they can know anything of importance when it comes to existential matters, especially when they completely ignore supernatural possibilities, is absurd. They are too limited by their brainpower, their biases and their vantage point.
  
  I want to leave you with a Bible verse that I hope you’ll look up, which is Luke 16:19-31. Pay particular attention to Luke 16:31, and think about what Jesus is saying.
  
  Report this comment
coachsmac
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 9:00am
Who cares what the show on that piece of crap program. Never watched it and never will!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
tramadol_qid
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:58am
Hiya Blazers, dont let Dr. D’s sand get so deep in yer shorts. IT’S JUST A CARTOON. Ha. Typed that in caps by accident but it feels so good to yell sometimes. No longer a xtain, just a good ‘ol atheist conservative workin ina ER as an RN. I see ‘em come. And go. They should make Sam Harris a character; Dr. D is a little too… fussy.. SP had him pegged.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 9:12am
  Sam Harris…is awesome
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:09am
  You gotta love this from South Park:
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPJQw-x-xho
  
  Report this comment
OneWithGodistheMajority
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:41am
My favorite quote from Dawkins is this “oh my God, what is the name of that book?” This was in response to a Christian asking him to give the full title of Darwin’s book in rebuttal to Dawkins making fun of Christians for not being able to recite the books of the Bible. EVERY KNEE WILL BOW…EVERY TONGUE CONFESS..THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Doors_Of_Perception
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:50am
  Better to die quick…fighting on your feet…than to live forever….begging on your knees
  
  Report this comment
Gonzo
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:34am
Wild guess: Tina Fey plays a Christian teacher who harasses poor Lisa about her belief in evolution. Dawkins saves the day with his “enlightened” atheistic views. Moral of story: Christians…stupid and bad, atheists…wise and good. Let me know if I got it right, I won’t be watching.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- tramadol_qid
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:53am
  cliche.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 9:12am
  Flatulence has more meaningful things to impart than Dawkins.
  
  Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:27am
Gee, who would have guessed?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Locked
Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:25am
Huh. I could have sworn I read an article that said this show had finally ended a year or two ago.

As I didn’t even know the show still existed (and I don’t have cable) I doubt I’ll be watching this :-)

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Mrflannery
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 8:39am
  Actually its one of the longest running,highly rated shows in history.Thats why it has dominated Sunday night for about two decades…and will continue to for a long time
  
  Report this comment
- DontStopBelieving
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 9:02am
  You don’t need cable to watch the Simpsons.
  
  Report this comment
- Sparky101
  Posted on March 6, 2013 at 10:04am
  You don’t need a brain to watch the Simpsons. Most of us have better things to do (which would even include body waste elimination).
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.