“Billions of years ago, a big bang produced a large rock. As the rock cooled, sweet brown liquid formed on it’s surface. As time passed, aluminum formed itself into a can, a lid, and a tab. Millions of years later, red and white paint fell from the sky and formed itself into the words “Coca Cola… 12 fluid ounces.”
Of course my theory is an insult to your intellect, because you know that if the Coca Cola can is made, there must be a maker. If it is designed, there must be a designer. The alternative, that it happened by chance or accident is to move from the intellectual free zone.
Here is another:
“The Banana: The Atheist Nightmare”
Note that the banana…
1. is shaped for the human hand.
2. has a non-slip surface.
3. Has outward indicators of it’s inward contents. Green – too early, yellow – just right, black – too late.
4. Has a tab for removal of it’s wrapper.
5. Is perforated on wrapper.
6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.
7. Is shaped for the human mouth.
8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.
9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.
10. Is curved towards the face to make the eating process easy.
To write that the banana happened by accident is even more unintelligent than to write that no one designed the Coca Cola can.
Test 1.
The person who thinks the Coca Cola can has no designer is:
A. Intelligent
B. A fool
C. Has an ulterior motive for denying the obvious
Now the document that I am referring from states that the eye has 40,000,000 nerve endings and focuses it’s muscles approximately 100,000 times a day. and that the eye has a retina that contains approximately 137,000,000 light sensitive cells.
The document continues and states that Charles Darwin stated:
“To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree” Agreed… it does not have the reference recorded so I do not know if this statement is true or false. But let me get to the point at hand.
If man can not create the human eye then how can anyone in their right mind believe that it was created by chance? In fact… man can’t create anything from nothing… we just do not know how to do it. We can re-create, reform, develop… but we can not create one grain of sand from nothing. Yet the human eye… is a mere tiny part of the most sophisticated part of creation – the human body.
Again… another statement which I would have to research and verify if this person actually made this comment:
“George Gallup; “If I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity.”
Now this statement concerning Albert Einstein. This is confusing… why would this man contradict himself? If he stated this… then every other statement that has been quoted at this forum is invalid because the man appears to be speaking from both sides of his mouth. In this statement Einstein is quoted to have said:
“Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe – a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of our modest powers must feel humble.”
Test 2:
1. Do you know any building that did not have a builder? Yes? No?
2. Do you know any painting that did not have a painter? Yes? No?
3. Do you know any car that did not have a maker? Yes? No?
If you answered “Yes” to any of those statements… please give details:______________________…
Third analogy:
Could I convince you that I dropped 50 oranges onto the ground and then by chance fell into ten rows of five oranges? Logically, anyone with an intelligent mind might conclude that someone put them there. The odds that ten oranges would fall into a straight line is mind boggling. Let alone ten rows of five.
Test 3
Yes or No 1. From the atom to the universe is there order?
Yes or No 2. Did it happen by accident or must there been an intelligent mind?
3. What are the odds of 50 oranges falling by chance into ten rows of five oranges? ______________________________…
To declare that there is no God is to make an absolute statement. And for an absolute statement to be true; one must have absolute knowledge. Here is another such statement: “There is no gold in China.”
Test 4 What would I need to have for that statement to be true?
A. No knowledge of China?
B. Partial knowledge of China?
C. Absolute knowledge of China?
“C” is the correct answer. In order for the statement to be true, I must know that there is no gold in China.
Likewise; to state that there is no God and to be correct then you are stating that you are omniscient. You must have absolutely certain knowledge that there isn’t one.
Let’s say that a circle contains all the knowledge of the universe. And let’s say that you have an incredible understanding of one percent of all that knowledge. Is it possible that the knowledge you haven’t yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove that God does indeed exist?
If you are reasonable, you would have to admit, “Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God.” In other words, you don’t know if God exists, so you are not an atheist. You are an “agnostic.” You are like a person that looks at a building and doesn’t seem to know if there is a builder.
Test 5 The man who sees a building and doesn’t know if there is a builder is:
A. Intelligent
B. A fool
C. Has an ulterior motive
In summary: There are plenty of things that we have faith in that we do not fully understand. Most of us do not have a complete understanding that when you turned your computer on as to why it worked. You took a step of faith that turning it on… that somehow that it would work. You accept the unseen electrical waves that appear right in front of your eyes when you type your comments here. We do not see the reason for why the messages appear… because the powers that be are invisible to the naked eye. For them to be manifest, we need a monitor… so we can enjoy the experience of this forum.
God is not flesh and blood; He is an eternal Spirit. Immortal and invisible… like the computer waves. He can can not be experienced unless the monitor is turned on. One should approach the Bible in the same way as the monitor. If it works, enjoy it and if it doesn’t, forget it.
Or do you have an ulterior motive? Could it be that the “atheist” can’t find God… as a thief can’t find the policeman? Could it be that your logic is clouding your good judgment?”
-Jonathon
Billions of years ago
Published by Bobby Henderson February 26th, 2008 in Hate Mail (and concerned criticism). 599 Comments
599 Responses to “Billions of years ago”
here’s a little observation. When your were describing the “banana” did you get confused with sex?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Who said we dont belive in a creator-being?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You put quite a lot of thought (if that’s what you call it) into something so incredibly stupid, so I’ll bite. Plus, you seem to have gathered that the Church of FSM is parody, but not quite well enough to understand exactly what we’re saying.
A Coke Can and a Banana are two different things, really. The Coke Can can’t reproduce, self replicate, and while it was created, the banana is not. The banana is shaped perfectly for the human hand? Is that so? Then why isn’t the Watermelon shaped perfectly for the human hand? Shouldn’t all fruit be phallically shaped if your idea has any merit? The Banana Peel is nonslip because of a high coefficent of friction. You could then argue that anything with a high coefficent of Friction was divinely created. Shaped for the human tooth? Um. You can eat pretty much anything, if you try hard enough. And how does the human tooth differ from the hominid tooth as a whole, or any animal tooth for that matter.
“Computer waves”, whatever the hell those are, are physical, not spiritual. They work on the laws of physics, can be detected, presumably, if you’re talking about something that actually exists. I can’t see the air, but I can infer its existence from how it affects the universe. This is something God doesn’t do. Additionally, the bible doesn’t do much for me… oh well, actually, it is keeping this chair from wobbling. So I guess it’s good for something, after all.
Just because I have no proof against God’s existence doesn’t make God likely or even probable. Certainly, I can never have complete proof something didn’t happen; however, I certainly don’t believe in Zeus or Thor, or Vishnu, simply because I can’t prove they don’t exist. So, I don’t see why I should believe in anything when there’s no reason to believe it. Lack of disproof is not a valid reason. There’s something called the Anthropic Principle, I’m not certain you’ve heard of it. Basically, a person can only exist to view the universe if the universe’s laws of physics and laws of quantum physics are conductive to the existence of life. So you say, how likely is it that the Earth spontaneously arose? The answer is, “greater than zero”.
Quoting Darwin out of Context does you little good, after all, his isn’t the theory of Evolution, but the theory of natural selection. If you disagree with that, you’re very much hopeless. I see this every time I turn on the news to see someone that’s driven off a bridge, because they were drunk, or on a less humorous note, every time a child dies because of a genetic defect. It’s basic biology, it’s the principles of biology. If you disagree with Darwin, you’re pretty much arguing that Biology is all a lie.
For the George Gallup quote, I’m not going to bother researching much, because your argument is wrought with logical fallacies. Hell, let’s list all your fallacies, shall we?
Appeal to Probability
Fallacy of quoting out of context
Negative proof
Judgmental language
Truthiness
Pro hominem
I myself am fairly guilty of Ad Hominem by this point, but don’t blame me, I have to put up with your willing ignorance. (See what I did there?) Then while you do appeal to reason, you seem to reject logic. Assuming there is a God is one thing, assuming he’s reasonable is something else.
Judgment and logic aren’t opposites. We use logic to make our decisions, in fact. To call logic, and good logic at that, cloudy, is to say “reason’s a little bitch, I don’t know why anyone does things that make good sense.” More to the point, Logic without reason gets you nut jobs who think that the moon landing was faked, or that 9/11 was orchestrated by a corrupt government who probably couldn’t conspire to tie their shoes, much less orchestrate something of that magnitude. Reason without logic gets you gods and the idea that your eyes shine light on what you see.
Quite frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass what you believe. No idea why I even bothered with this, not that you’re going to read it or anything. And on the off chance that you do, it’s not like you’re going to listen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The main contention I have with your elaborate argument is the assumption that there can’t be one chance occurrence capable of leading to single celled life on one single 4-5 billion year old planet in a visible universe with an estimated number of stars of about 7 x 10^22, that has existed for approximately 14 billion years. If you argue that this solar system is the only one with planets, you may be right, but come on.
I accept that it’s a series of random occurences that have to happen, but I’d rather bet on the odds that one (if not many) of the stars I see at night has beat the odds and orbiting it is a planet that has randomly evolved life than a bet on the lottery any day.
The banana argument only works if you accept that a designer intends for every ‘fitting’ natural thing be visited upon us. Nipples for men? sounds like the divine work of His noodly appendage if you ask me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
no
no-one believes that
thats silly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For someone with an unusually good, for these days, command of the English language, your understanding of evolution is not shallow: it is non-existent.
I’m short of time to refute your post point by point, but I have to tell you that I am totally fed up with people who argue against evolution and have no idea AT ALL what evolution is.
You don’t know that every one of your examples (Coke cans, buildings, falling oranges) is laughable.
You don’t recognize that thousands of minds, greater than yours, used rational thinking and the scientific method to create computers, the grid that delivers your ‘unseen electrical waves,’ and Coke cans. The same kinds of minds that understand and accept evolution theory.
As for those bananas, they are not nightmares. Humans have cultivated them for eons. We also cultivated wild corn way back when. Occasionally one of our corn plants grew more or larger ears. We would save seed from it to plant the next crop. Sometimes variations popped up that made it taste better. So we saved those seeds and planted them the next year. Plants that were spindly or gave nasty tasting corn were not seeded. I’m so grateful to those thousands of generations of farmers. Now I can eat Silver Queen sweet corn on the 4th of July.
I have faith in my brain. I do not believe there is a god because I have never seen, heard, or experienced any evidence that one exists. I accept the theory of evolution because it is consistent, logical, observable, strongly supported by myriad types of evidence, and it explains Earth’s biota.
Educate yourself.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wow that was a lot of unnecessary redundant and meaningless text. Who wants to bet Jonathan copy pasted this from some creationist website?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon:
First, I would like to say that your theories and tests do not hold up, given that you are trying, no matter how ignorantly, to make them seem “scientific.” What we are about is logic. Logically, we do not state that there is no god, nor do we state that there is no creator. In fact, we have said quite the opposite. However, given your tests on trying to prove that there is a god and creator, you would also have to have absolute knowledge of the universe, and it is unwise to use an argument that can be used by your opposition. Now, I have a test for you.
There is a cave. It is incredibly beautiful and unique, going for miles underground in twists and turns. How was it made?
A. By many, many years of natural forces such as water, wind, earthquakes, or volcanos.
B. By an omnipotent and omniscient being far surpassing that of a human.
C. By one man with a shovel and a pickaxe
Now, if you answer with LOGIC, answer A is the only correct answer. No god is visible or even detectable in its making, and said evidence would have to be conclusive in order for a logical thinker to decide that it was a god who designed this cave.
Jonathon, I do hope that you can perhaps learn that logic has nothing to do with blind faith. Blind faith has nothing to do with logic, in fact. Conclusive evidence is required in order to come to a logical conclusion. Logic IS the good judgment. Or do you follow and believe in this god to be safe, rather than sorry. Just In Case there is a god, so that you may go to heaven instead of hell? What kind of judgment is that, that a “loving” god would sentence someone to an eternity in torture for only one small unforgiven sin, or even for a lifetime of good deeds, but not believing in god? I think that doesn’t make any sense. So please, have a good day and a good life, Jonathon, but do not force your beliefs on others, we have the right not to hear this bull crap everywhere we go.
Kevin Hunter
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We are amused.
Thank you.
However, if you are serious…
Your e-mail is quite long, but that doesn’t make it good.
You quote-mine and use strawmen.
Let’s go through that text, shall we?
“Yada yada, Coca-Cola arised by chance, zomg.”
This is a failed jab at abiogenesis, because:
- Abiogenesis did not have a goal. It happened due to the laws of chemistry.
- Abiogenesis did not happen by chance as much as the laws of chemistry.
“Bananas are awesome. They must be designed.”
- Bananas became what they were thanks to human refinement over thousands of years.
If you want to see a wild banana, use google image search and type “Wild banana”
“Test 1: Coca-Cola”
- I assume this is an attack on evolution. However, Coca-Cola is not living, it does not reproduce, and thus the laws of evolution do not apply to it.
“Darwin says evilution is impossible!”
- Well this is awesome. We’ve actually found someone who still uses that quote-mined phrase.
If you want to know how he continued from that, read on:
“Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.”
Yup, he clearly says evolution is totally impossible.
Et cetera.
These other tests are pretty ridiculous too, so I’ll just list the stupid parts here.
Test 2: You are confusing living objects with non-living objects. Organisms evolve, cars don’t.
Test 3: Wow, look! More strawmen. Now what are the odds of this many strawmen being in the same post? It’s not chance, it’s the law of the intranetz!
Test 4: We do not need to have absolute knowledge about China to believe there is no gold in China.
If we cannot find any, we can quite safely assume that there is none.
Also, even though it is impossible to prove 100% that there is no gold, just as it is 100% impossible to prove anything, that does not mean we SHOULD believe there is gold in China, as we have no reason to.
5: See tests 2 and 3.
Summary: We take steps of faith, for example when turning on complicated machinery, because it has worked the last times we did so, and thus we find it likely for it to continue doing the same.
Duh.
“God is a spirit.” So are unicorns, but not robots.
Oh, and the ulterior motive last jab. Heh.
Or do you have an ulterior motive? Could it be that the “theist” can’t find science… as a thief can’t find the policeman? Could it be that your faith is clouding your good judgment?”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
When you say,
“Billions of years ago, a big bang produced a large rock. As the rock cooled, sweet brown liquid formed on it’s surface. As time passed, aluminum formed itself into a can, a lid, and a tab. Millions of years later, red and white paint fell from the sky and formed itself into the words “Coca Cola… 12 fluid ounces.”
Who are you quoting?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why can’t I have faith in the fact that God doesn’t exist?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why stop at “GOD” it, he, or whatever must be immensely more complicated than the human eye, a painting or a house. So who build “god” or does this supercomplicated spirit needs no builder??? and then who build this builder…
So why accept the existence of God without a builder and not the rest?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I love the banana argument. Have you ever seen a wild banana? A horrid green mess. You can thank 5-8 thousand years of papua new guinean domestication for the way delicious bananas are today. Oh and lifeforms does something coke, bulidings, paintings, cars etc don’t…… they reproduce. Cheers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
your totaly loving that banana thing arent you? :)
let people believe how they wish.thats the wisest thing anyone can do in my opion.im not the smartest man alive by any mesure,horrible spelling and grammar are the least of my problems,but i dont see why someone as smart as you hasent adopted a live and let live additude yet.
be touched by his noodly appendage,Ramen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You are very confused, wrong. And disturbingly ignorant.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You are very confused… wrong. And disturbingly ignorant.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
AHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! I keep trying to post a reply but nothing is working. FSM why do you thwart me?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks for all these tests very,
I’m glad you’ll find FSM satisfies all your tests.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s not like we are claiming the universe was created by random chance…It’s just that we don’t agree with how you think it happened.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I just want to comment on the banana part.
Note that the banana
1. is shaped for the human hand.
2. has a non-slip surface.
3. Has outward indicators of its inward contents. Green – too early, yellow – just right, black – too late.
4. Has a tab for removal of its wrapper.
5. Is perforated on wrapper.
6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.
7. Is shaped for the human mouth.
8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.
9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.
10. Is curved towards the face to make the eating process easy
: The banana tree (or any fruit tree) is just NOT producing fruit to feed humans (or animals)! The tree wouldn’t spend any energy on anything that doesn’t give back. Trees produce sugar rich fruit to attract animals, so that they will in return spread the seeds contained in it. That is what scientists call co-evolution : the humans (or animals) need the trees to get food, the trees need the humans to reproduce, and it has been so for many generations, eventually leading to a the impression that the fruit was for the animal that eats it.
Furthermore, you may have noticed a banana doesn’t contain any seeds. The original banana does, which makes it not so “pleasing to the taste buds”. The banana as we know it is the result of human manipulation of the banana tree. So yes, it was somehow designed, but not by god. By us.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon,
You are preaching to the choir my friend! The Coke Can, Banana, Building, Gold in China, and Albert Einstein were all created by His Noodily Appendage! RAmen!
(I will draft a full response to your ludicrous misunderstanding of Evolution and Atheism when I have time to sift through all of your B.S. that has already been addressed. Man this “irreducible complexity” argument gets so old!)
Squingle
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon, think carefully about the following:
Who created God in the first place? If you cannot accept that the very complicated universe exists on its own, why should you find it comfortable that God exists on its own? This God must have extremely high intelligence to achieve all these. Do not go about saying “the bible says this and that”. I can, too, write whatever I want.
You look at “atheists” and say that creatures cannot exist without a designer. I look at you and say God cannot exist without a designer, because of His complexity, and the designer is FSM.
It all boils down to “God is the universe – every physical law, every bit of energy/matter “, which is exactly identical to “There is no God”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon,
Go to Google and enter “infinite egress”. Then hit the “I’m feeling lucky button.”
Mayfly
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TO me, logic IS good judgment. I have yet to see any valid evidence supporting a theological creator, and therefor, I do not believe one exists. You seem to take it on faith that there is an invisible, omnipotent, omnipresent spirit whose main desire is to have everybody praise him. That seems a bit like the effect of a severe inferiority complex to me, not the sign of a superior being.
If your god is only viewable to those that believe in it, how do you expect to convince us that it exists? I’ve read many parts of the Bible; and found it to be neither all good nor all bad. It is certainly an interesting book regardless; but I cannot see how it could be anything but metaphorical. The claims it makes are quite often downright ridiculous, certainly less likely than the spontaneous formation of a coca-cola can. You yourself use metaphors to support it — and here is my request: try to support it WITHOUT metaphorical examples. Give us actual EVIDENCE of your god. As I said before, I work from the point of logic.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
First, your analogy that coca cola cans don’t randomly appear has no signifigance unless you want to propose that cans are living organisms. Evolution and natural selection work because they leave room for small changes over living things, because living things reproduce. You’re and idiot for saying that Coca cola cans can reproduce, so I hope that paragraph was just one big typo.
=====
Next, I’ve seen your banana thing on U2B (youtube). That’s just one type of food, there are plenty out there that don’t work perfectly for humans. But there is the problem that most bananas grow in areas (rainforests etc), here there are many monkeys but not many people. So, if god made bananas for anyone in particular then he made them for monkeys! Next, since monkey hands are just as adapted to bananas then it seems that they might have just as easily EVOLVED for bananas. Yes, think about it. then when WE evolved from prehistoric monkeys then we kept the traits, which make sense because for thousands of years most humans lived without bananas and instead they dealt with these strange apples that are not make for us. When a species has a trait that an earlier species had, but they don’t use anymore, it is called a vestigial organ, so I am supported by more evidence than you are.
=====
Now that I have disproven your banana thing, let me say this…. ITS A BANANA YOU RETARD, ITS JUST A FRUIT, YOU CAN’T DISPROVE ANY SCIENTIFIC FACTS BY SAYING THAT A FRUIT CAN FIT IN YOUR HAND YOU IDIOT!
=====
Next, the thing about the eye is called irreducible complexity, and it has largely been disproven. They have evidence that, by natural selection, mutations occured that developed the eye.
———————-
O, and for your darwin quote, that is only a partial quote, its called rhetoric, he was saying that many might deem it impossible so he could deny them and say that it was. Here is the rest of the quote
“”"”"Yet reason tells me that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection.”"”"
=====
Even if the Origin of Species didn’t offer an explaination it makes no difference; the origin of species is not the bible for non-creationists, its just a book on evolution that was written 150 years ago. This means that if you prove something in that particular book wrong it carries no signifigance because we have already fixed many of the problems in the Origin of Species, don’t worry, thats something no creationist gets. THe Origin of Species contains observations and theories that are 150 years old, of course you will find error dumbass!
=====
Next, I’ve seen many creationist things about your “if you know X% of everything, then can god exist outside of that?”, Evolution doesn’t say that god didn’t make everything, it just says how he probably did it. You can believe in god and evolution. You just have to except the bible as a series of lessons on how to be a good person with strong morals, which is what it was supposed to be. If you want to take the bible literally then you have completely ignored the fact the the bible has been retranslated and rewritten to a point where all the details on creation have been lost or skewed, and look “god said- let there be light” then there could be the big bang, which im sure was bright. See, you can say that the bible obviously had it right thousands of years ago, but due to being rewritten so many times the details have just been skewed; it makes sense, some of the earliest books that are in the bible were first written 3000 years ago, thats alot of misinterpretation. and no man is perfect, so we can expect that man would skew the bible, the first bible could’ve been right, but the men who rewrote it just read it wrong, a simple human mistake.
=====
Further on your % thing, you can’t compare gold in china because once gold is found there is proof. This is a faulty comparison because you can find proof of gold. Nobody has given absolute proof of god. Nobody can disprove god, but as I said above, you can believe in god and evolution
=====
Atheism is saying that there is no god, and you can’t proove god even with statistics. Agnostics say that there is one, but we don’t know anything about him because he is nothing like you and me. Einstein was agnostic, he believed in a god, but did not believe in the christian god, but he could believe in god and big bang and evolution because he didn’t believe that the god that exists ever told us how he did it. Agnostics believe god is more of a force or energy unlike pagan or monotheistic gods. Now that you know what the difference is you know that your statement on Atheism and Einstein had little signifigance.
=====
P.S. Even though my logic might cloud my better judgement (which isn’t ‘better’ if logic can disprove it), I realize that being a creationist you will never believe anything that I have just said because your prejudice blinds both your better judgement and your logic, so you are blinder than I am.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Who has said that there is no maker? We only have a different (and more delicious) view of this maker
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, you have certainly proved for me that the FSM could have created the human race thank you.=)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I love the banana argument. And to think that this guy actually might be serious — priceless!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathan,
Props for the most reasoned argument I’ve seen on this website. Thank you for not quoting scripture.
I think we can all agree that the human organism is very complex. Why does that mean that over billions of years it could not have evolved? How does complexity prove anything? Your arguments are logical, but nothing you stated is scientifically testable. Can you see why to a logical mind that your argument is maddening? Your argument basically comes down to an unprovable supposition.
To pick apart one of your points, for argument’s sake: The oranges. If you dropped 50 oranges on the floor infinite times, then eventually they would arrange themselves into any pattern imaginable.
I would even propose that said oranges would evolve into a stronger fruit from being dropped on the floor so many times…
Show me proof of your god, without pointing to something that I can argue is evolution. Otherwise we’ll have this argument until the end of time, or at least until dinner.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
lets suppose this. If the universe was created by “God” and given it’s unimaginable scale what makes idiots like you think that for a single second a creator would give a shit about this insignificant rock. If “God” created the earth and woman from Adams rib blah blah why create the rest of universe? To give us something pretty to look at?
Face it we all think you are sheep
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon – twat !
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
wow. that was:
a. Long
b.made hardly any sence
c.entirly unecarry and put me to sleep
d.All of the above.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So what’s the chance of God just popping out of nothing?
If the eye is so complicated, does that mean my eye is less complicated then a Creator?
Because if it is, I wouldn’t trust that creator to make much more then the wall focused…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So what’s the chance of God just popping out of nothing?
If the eye is so complicated, does that mean my eye is less complicated then a Creator?
Because if it is, I wouldn’t trust that creator to make much more then the wall focused…
Oooo, AND First Post, WHOOP!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hey i read your post and answered yest to analogy 2.
All of the analogys could have been created by a machine. AI is advanced enough now that there is a robot that deifys power sockets to keep itself alive and even creates colouful shrines around them.
Does that mean you think that the creator of the robots program is god.
also colour receptor machines (false eyes) can be created they are called photo diodes. Do you think that the creator is god. all colour and image is “imaginary” by the way its the perception of nerves being used in the same way as a needle puncturing skin sets off a nervous reaction.
thank you
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My child,
Well done. Your logic and thinking is reasonable, but there is one thing missing: if, as you said, there can be no building without a builder, then who created your God? No one knows where I came from, but I do. This I will not tell you, for it is a Holy Secret that can be known by no mortal, even my great prophet Bobby Henderson.
I must also disagree with the following statement: “You are an “agnostic.” You are like a person that looks at a building and doesn’t seem to know if there is a builder.” If one does not believe in God, then they might believe in the Big Bang theory or some other theory, and although you might say that the Big Bang or my existence is so improbable, some one or something else must have caused it to happen, I will again quote you. “What are the odds of 50 oranges falling by chance into ten rows of five oranges?” Although the odds are slim, what if you dropped the oranges an infinite number of times, over and over until they finally fell into 10 rows of 5 oranges? The oranges would HAVE to fall in this manner at some point. In the same way, the non-universe may have sat around, non-existent, for eternity, until it finally exploded into existence. Also in the same way might I myself be created.
Peace, Love, and Pirates to all!
RAmen,
FSM
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Very well drafted, very compelling arguments. I just want to point out that just because something did not occur by chance it does not mean that there was an intelligent design moving it forward. That’s where the laws of physics come in. Applying scientific thinking we see the things that seem to by chance appear best suited for a purpose have actually evolved that way over so many years that our human minds cannot comprehend how long it took to get that way. So what seems like chance, or design, is simply the end result of a very, very long process of natural selection. Now if you want to argue that the rules of nature and the laws of physics represent the manifestation of the will of a designer or god, then that’s for another post.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
ur soooo right that I did my own test
My Dick(science word penis)
1.is shaped for the human hand
2.Is shaped for the human mouth
3.Is pleasing to the taste buds
AMAZING! undeniable proof that we have a creator *sarcasm*
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What is up with orange thing? If you drop oranges on the floor what is the chance of them making a line?
W T F!! That is like freakin saying “IF a drop 2 needles and they don’t stand straight up. Then there is a god. And the banana thing. So you’re saying that the entire purpose the evolution and existance of banana plants, is for us to EAT IT!!
Let me explain those numbered banana statements. NOTE: I CAN DO THIS OUT OF COMMON SENSE IM 13!!!!
1. Is shaped for the human hand.
THE HELL?!? ITS CURVED AND ‘SHAPED FOR THE HUMAN HAND’ FOR REASONS AS TO GROWING MORE AMOUNTS IN BUSHELS SO ITS SEEDS WILL BE PLANTED. OUT OF THOSE 50 SOMETHING AND 100 SOMETHING SEEDS 1 IS BOUND TO BE PLANTED!!!!!!!!!
2.has a non-slip surface.
OH NOW WHAT NATURE HAS TO BE COVERED WITH TEFLON! WHAT FRUIT ISN’T ‘NON-SLIP’?!?!
3.Has outward indicators of it’s inward contents. Green – too early, yellow – just right, black – too late.
YOU MAKE ME FEEL SORRY FOR YOU BECAUSE OF YOUR STUPIDITY!
PLANTS: MADE OF CELLS
THOSE CELLS USE PHOTOSYNTHESIS! THAT CREATES CHLOROPLAST GET IT?
THAT STUFF IS GREEN.
BECAUSE BANANAS ARE MADE OF PLANT CELLS THEY ARE GREEN
WHEN THEY MATURE THEY LOSE THAT GREEN COLOR AND SOFTEN
AND WHAT DOESN’T TURN BLACK OR BROWN WHEN ITS DEAD
4.Has a tab for removal of it’s wrapper.
WTF!! IF YOUR SKIN IS BROKEN AND DEAD AND A SCAB FORMS OVER HOW COME IT HAS A ‘TAB’ SO ITS EASY TO PEEL OFF? DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU SHOULD F&@K!|\| PEEL IT OFF!? OFCOURSE NOT!
5.Is perforated on wrapper.
THAT IS LIKE SAYING ORANGES ARE PREFORATED OR THE HUMAN SKIN BECAUSE IT CAN PEEL OF RIGHT WHERE YOUR EYES ARE.
6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.
NAME ON THING ORGANIC THAT ISN’T BIO-DEGRADABLE
7. Is shaped for the human mouth.
READ NUMBER 1
8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.
THAT IS WHAT YOU SAID ON NUMBER 4
9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.
WHEN IT IS MADE IT CREATES CERTAIN CHEMICALS AND GLUCOSE WHICH THE TONGUE DETECTS MAKING IT ‘PLEASING TO THE TASTE BUDS’
10. Is curved towards the face to make the eating process easy.
YOU SAID THIS THREE TIMES!!!!!
AS FOR THAT TEST $H!7
Test 2:
1. Do you know any building that did not have a builder? Yes? No?
2. Do you know any painting that did not have a painter? Yes? No?
3. Do you know any car that did not have a maker? Yes? No?
If you answered “Yes” to any of those statements… please give details:______________________…
THOSE ALL HAVE HUMAN CREATORS WERE TALKING ABOUT AN EFFING ‘SPIRIT’
LET ME GIVE YOU A TEST
1.DO YOU KNOW THE FIRST PLANT THAT WAS MADE?
2. WAS IT MADE BY A HUMAN
3.IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO NUMBER TWO THEN YOUR A DOUSCHE!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To say there is a God is also an absolute statement though, so you would also need indefinite knowledge to prove this. It is just as likely that there is proof that no god exists as there is proof that one (or many) exist in that realm of knowledge outside of the human capacity.
You say that the complexity of the world could not form by random configuration, but it is possible. those 50 oranges may not align in straight lines the first second that they are down, but 13+ billion years is a long time. that’s over 410 quintillion milliseconds. If the oranges were constantly moving (as all matter is) would it not be possible to randomly allign just once? Just because something is unlikely does not make it impossible.
You established your point that everything ‘needs’ a creator (pending upon which theory one is to believe). If we assume this is true, then would not God need a creator? It is no more absurd to assume that matter has always existed than it is to assume that God has always existed.
With this stated, it is impossible to prove each statement either true or false. The answer can only be found on a personal level of how one deals with faith. I can not believe in something I can not, for the most part, prove to myself. I know the electrical signals to the monitor exist because I can see the monitor working and I know the tendency of Electrons to flow through the cables. I can convince myself that there I can see both. However, I can see the world around me (which would be the monitor) but I could not possibly prove to myself that a God created it, I lack the empirical proof to assume that. I will not base something on faith, if that clouds my Judgement than so be it.
On a final note, when has logic ever clouded good judgement? I can assume that touching a 50,000 volt electric fence would not be a bright idea through logic. Not using logic I would grab the fence and indefinately be shocked. Being logical in your decisions and judgements in life is the best way to live it. Just because we come to different conclusions about God does not mean we have poor judgement, just a different one form yours. There is no wrong answer because it can not be proved either way. We are not antagonostical towards each other just because we have opposing views, we just meerly have opposing views. My judgement is no more obscured than your own. We are both looking out at the sea with the same vision accuracy but we perceive what we see to be different. your blue sea could be red in my eyes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The man who created Coca-Cola was a fool. He was trying to find a cure for baldness. He then added some seltzer water and he had Coke. he never meant for it to happen. As for the bannana, it EVOLVED so that animals would find it easier to eat and crap out, thus, spreading the seeds. Duh!!
RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here’s a test for you, my intellectually deficient friend:
The man who looks at the entire universe and blindly points to a historically inaccurate, murder-endorsing book that was written two thousand years ago by ignorant, morally bankrupt scheme artists to attempt, through intimidation and a childish fear of a “hell”, to make people join a religion that is based solely on the ridding of other religions and the enriching of the people in the top jobs (Pope, priests, deacon, etc.), and has abut…oh…5 good morals in it is:
A) A fool
B) A genius
C) Is probably on te payroll of the church, or has some other (quoting here) ULTERIOR MOTIVE?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
this is absurd, do the creationists really believe this stuff? ok, first the can thing, ya we know that cans are made because we watch “How It’s Made” on the Discovery channel. yes we know that someone in coca-cola’s offices designed the label to go on it in an effort to make it more noticeable. I wager that designer of the label never stepped foot into the factory where machines actually make the cans. there is no alternative, this is a terrible analogy to the creationists vs reality issue. Ok, as for the banana thing, I have made a video on this very same subject… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1nnLMXeAIA
but here is a better one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLqQttJinjo&feature=related in which it is clear that the banana as you describe it is proof of evolution. it is a domesticated banana and is like that because it has been cultivated to be that way by farmers. my mom had banana trees in her back yard and I can tell you they don’t all come out looking so “perfect” or “well-made” as ray put it. the grocery stors pick and choose which bunches to stock.
now onto your spiel about Darwin. ah Quote mining, the favorite tool of the creationists. no one thinks that the eye was created by chance, it is KNOWN to have evolved from other forms. just google “jellyfish eye”.
then you so ignorantly stated “If man can not create the human eye then how can anyone in their right mind believe that it was created by chance? In fact… man can’t create anything from nothing… we just do not know how to do it. We can re-create, reform, develop… but we can not create one grain of sand from nothing. Yet the human eye… is a mere tiny part of the most sophisticated part of creation – the human body.” well if we can’t create the eye what makes you view it, and the rest of the body as a creation? how is it then that you believe ther was some guy who created everything from nothing? it is quite clear that matter is not a creation. test 2 is so ridiculous that it does not merit comment.
test 3…wow you are dumb. there is ordered chaos in the universe and the atom.
ok, now o your next blather… I don’t believe that your god exists. still, how is the universe a building? why do you think we have an ulterior motive?
ok, the computer thing, I know that my laptop will turn on because it is plugged in. I know how electricity works because I went to electrician school. My husband took electronics classes at ITT and he showed me the hardware responsible for what we see on the screen. I know ppl who understand binary code. 1101100110010101011010101011011010111010101010001.
again with the ulterior motive crap. “Or do you have an ulterior motive? Could it be that the “atheist” can’t find God… as a thief can’t find the policeman? Could it be that your logic is clouding your good judgment?”” your analogy is backwards. police detectives, much like scientists, look for forensic evidence for proof of an event, like fingerprints. The scientists have found no evidence of god, but we have found signs of the geologic processes that shaped the earth. I think it is you delusion what is clouding your judgment, and I think you are stupid.
Ramen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dunno what you’re talking about, dude. We found a god – the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Please stop denying His existence, kthx.
Peace, love, and Pirates.
RAmen,
Benny
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is amazing.
I just shuffled a deck of 52 cards and then dealt them out. Here’s what I got, in this order!
Ac Jd 9d 9s 5c 10h 2h Jh 4c Ad Qh 10s 2d 3h Kc Qc 7s Ah 9h Kh 3c Ks 4h 2s 3s 4s 9c 8s 10d 10c As 6c 4d Kd 7h 3d Jc 8h Js Qs Qd 2c 6d 6s 8c 7d 7c 8d 5d 5s 5h 6h.
I have reshuffled the deck and tried to get the same sequence of cards, but have failed every time. So I tried to work out the probability of this particular sequence happening. You won’t believe it. It is about 80 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 to 1 against! No, I am not making this up. In fact I challenge anyone to get this same sequence of cards from a well shuffled deck.
Test 1: Do you really think this happened by chance?
A. Yes
B. No
Clearly the odds are so astronomical that to think A is the answer, i.e “that it happened by chance or accident is to move from the intellectual free zone”.
So it must have been a divine act.
I never believed in intelligent design theory before, but I am now converted. The FSM must have ordered the cards in that particular sequence with His noodly appendage. It is the only explanation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ok Jonathon, I think we can agree that Coke cans are made and were designed by humans. So were buildings. Duh. There are facts that can be verified. But that doesn’t equate to the matter and energy of the universe. Just because we and everything else exist doesn’t mean that it was all designed by the invisible god of the bible that you believe in. Its just your belief in a particular mythology – there is no proof beyond that. If it was created by a god, he is a god of total, incredible chaos, not order. Read up on quantum theory, for instance.
Evolution does not say that bananas and eyeballs happen by accident. They happen by natural selection. There is purpose to this selection, not accident, and the evidence is survival of what worked over what didn’t. Its amazing and beautiful. Read “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins and then come and comment. He addresses all of the arguments you presented here and so much more.
We Pastafarians, however, believe it was all created by a Noodly God who also is delicious with marinara and parmesan. Prove it either way.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think the last sentence sums it up. My logic must be clouding my good judgment, because the rest of your examples are just a lot of twaddle.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Johathan
Along with many Pastafarians, I want to thank you for your eloquent and persuasive argument for the existence of the FSM. As Pastafarians, we do already understand that His handiwork in fossils and other geophysical evidence, not to mention genetic and physiological evidence in humans and animals, is pervasive and perfect.
.
We do disagree on one point, however. If you re-read your discussion of the banana, you may – perhaps -see that it was designed by the FSM, in his noodly compassion, as something that those too stupid, too arrogant, and too wilfully blind to recognize His existence could, relatively comfortably, shove up their asses. I urge you to continue your progress toward enlightenment by doing just that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hehehe, this guy is good… I mean really good… a dumb person could even fall for one or all of his statements. But if one thinks logically (if that one is an educated person, which are rare nowadays) one will see the flaws in these.
I especially like the one about the bananas…
“8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.”
The perv… I thought american christians were more prudish.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I rarely run across someone who has mastered circular logic so well. Congatulations Jonathon! Enjoy your “invisible” god.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0