“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”
errr…. those are Ray Comfort’s and Kirk Cameron’s arguments…
come on! he didn’t even come up with his own arguments, he just copy-past arguments that were debunked before all ready…
and the same idiotic argument that a car wasn’t made by evolution…
that MIGHT be because IT’S NOT ALIVE, IT CAN’T HAVE A MUTATION, IT CAN’T GO THROUGH NATURAL SELECTION!
those creationists are becoming more and more desperate…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
yah and the cucumber was made by god so it could be used as a dildo. and volcanoes exist so stupid people like you could jump in them. seriously, i could find a billion things that could be arbitrarily anthropomorphised. also, your argument about truth and absolute knowledge is circular. all the claims you make and fail to make assume some sort of absolute knowledge that you subjectively create, you can never prove anything since no one has absolute knowledge, just like i cant prove anything to you because your so hard headed. language lies, god is dead, lie creatively
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
oh yah, your argument doenst prove the existence of god, only suggests numerous gods.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
you would think that if the banana was intelligently designed that it would be much better designed. And also why is the one thing that is designed for the human mouth also desgined perfectly for monkeys who actually eat them more hmmmm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You can’t prove a negative…ok, I would recommend to see the article
.
You Can Prove a Negative
by Steven D. Hales
.
in skeptics: “http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/07-12-05.html”
.
In general, you can’t prove a negative by induction -althought you can in maths;
contradiction is a good way to prove a negative. We could give an easy example (i think just a kid could understand this example, I wonder if a fundie…):
.
Premises
1.- God don’t lies us
2.- Slavery is bad
3.- God doesn’t approve bad things
so
4.- God doesn’t approve slavery
.
5.- The Bible recommends slavery
and therefore
6.- The Bible is the Word of God
comes to a contradiction. Or 6. is not true, or one of the previous premises is false (I fear fundies may want to disprove premise 2.)
.
Of course, when we are speaking about magic, they have always an explanation:
-It’s a parable
or:
-It was the best thing to do in those times (as if God were a politician)
maybe:
-The God of the Old Testament it’s not the same as in the New Testament (!!??)
my prefered is: “The ways of God are unfathomable”, or “we humans can’t expect to understand the inmensity of God”; and we are coming back to the dragon in my garage.
.
Science has proved:
1.- There is not a Heaven in the Sky, and Christians said it was in some kind of parallel world
2.- Earth is round, and fundies said that “circle” in the Bible was meaning “sphere”
3.- Earth is the solidification of a large amount of gases that were revolving around the sun, and Christians said that “god created the Earth” is a metaphore, and God indeed created the Universe
4.- Humans “evolved from apes”, again the clay-made man was a metaphore and God manipulated the genes, or created the genes, or stablished the rules of evolution, or stablished the physics rules that comes to evolution…
…you know, is a non-ending game. Any advance of the science explains something we didn’t understand, and therefore the existence of God is reduced and re-interpreted
.
And we all know that the FSM created the earth -and a midget- while He was drunk, and His noddly appendages are playing with the scientifics tests, only for a laugh.
.
RAmen!
.
P.D.: Sorry for the spelling and grammar, again, english is not my mother language
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@ You (calling yourself ME :p) Mar 3rd, 2008 at 8:56 pm
“R you saying that the thing that the thing or person that created us is a ball of spaghetti with 2 meatballs?”
.
Of course not….how ridiculous! The real genuine bona fide creator is in fact a FLYING Spaghetti MONSTER with two meatballs.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
ME posted:
.
“Mar 3rd, 2008 at 8:56 pm
im confused some people seem to be referring to the FSM as being God. R you saying that the thing that the thing or person that created us is a ball of spaghetti with 2 meatballs?”
.
Yes.
.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I reject your proposal and insert my own. The human was designed with the banana in mind, as bananas came first. Also, what exactly are you arguing? You come here spouting of how the world was intelligently designed, which is what we as Pastafarians believe anyway. You probably just believe that your God did it. The key word is INTELLIGENT, and I would assert that FSM is obviously more intelligent than your God and will gladly accept any challenges you can come up with.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Youre right, try this theory it works much better: Billions of years ago, there was a big bang that created a fully formed omnipotent creator. This creator selected 1 of billions of galaxies, and from it 1 of a billion of planetary systems to create a relatively stupid biped in his image. From clay.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Don’t forget that while God was designing the 40,000,000 nerve endings in the eye, he failed to notice that attaching the nerves on the outside would be a better routing. Instead he routed them to the interior of the eye requiring a hole in the eye to route them back out. This hole results in the blind spot that all humans have. If Biology reveals the existence of a designer, most often it reveals a poor designer.
.
Does this reflect a God who could have used more than six days to create everything? A God that drinks a little too much? A God that created us in his image (note, he gave the octopus a superior design with no blind spot)? Or a God who designs things slowly over a number of incremental steps and occasionally paints himself into a corner (aka local minimum)?
.
My preference is a God that drinks too much.
.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“The Banana: The Atheist Nightmare”
It is a nightmare because I have to put up with the ignorance and stupidity of people like you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
everything is the same dont you get it? god or no god, spaghetti or no spaghetti. Man created science and man created god. Science and Religion are both right and both wrong…. ZOMG paradoxical statement…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The eye was not created by chance it was created by selection: selecting what worked and what did not.
Do your research.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
These arguments actually support evolution. The more agreeable the feature of the fruit, the more often a fruit with that feature is eaten, causing the spread of that particular fruit’s offspring, until the fruit is widely distributed along with the feature. Through this process, the feature becomes increasingly pronounced. Therefore bananas that fit in your hand are eaten more than those that do not. Bananas with an easy to remove peel are more desirable than those that make a mess. Bananas that are a nice size to be eaten are consumed more than those that are too big to eat easily or those that are too small to be satisfying. Thank you for the excellent example of evolution.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Are you familiar with the concept of a “straw man?” It’s a device used by morons to demonstrate their total lack of understanding of a topic, which they then go on to disprove, thinking that they’re making an interesting or valid argument.
In a hilarious twist, the only real result of a straw man argument is loads of entertainment for people who are smarter than you, so you should stop now unless you want us to keep laughing. Just some friendly advice.
By the way, I think platypusses are a much better joke; the FSM is still the master!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Banana is absolute, so is the spaghetti monster
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I read those first two arguments in Middle school, while I was still a Christian, and I still found them absurdly weak.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Our god has bigger balls than theirs.
-J.T.S.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The banana happens to be easy for humans to eat? well heres the creationists nightmare. Sea urchins. Can be a very attractive colour, but are spiky and sharp enough to pierce the hand of the person that grabbed it. if you can open it, it’s good to eat. however, some of the spines are filled with deadly toxins that can kill 10 grown men in a single stab. apprently god made a mistake on that one.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jesus Christ! No wonder I spent time defending my Esoteric Christian & Restorationist beliefs, this letter is the biggest load of douche baggery that I’ve ever read in my life.
This guy has nothing to do with my religious beliefs, so feel free to stuff a “Large Dick:The Fundamentalist Christian’s Public Nightmare & Private Fantasy” in his mouth to put a cork on his idiocy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If you think there is order to the universe you should read Max Planck.
These arguments are ridiculous, many of them are based on common assumptions about evolutionary theory that are untrue. The author of this e-mail needs to do his homework.
Also, grammatical errors tend to take away your “smart points”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
if you did any reasearch, you would know that the banana has evolved over many years, and in the very early days, it did not have a tab, nor a perforated wrapper, nor a colored indicator, nor was curved for eating pleasure, nor was pleasant to the taste buds
see what happends when we don’t understand evolution?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Correct. Statistically speaking, it is nigh impossible for oranges to fall into perfect rows, or evolution to happen. However, this is over a few hours, maybe days (for oranges) and thousands of years (if you are a believer in the “*poof* we’re all here theory”) or billions if you like to base your decisions on observable evidence. Now, given enough time, the statistics of everything become very likely, and for life to evolve all that is needed is a solvent (water seems to be the only one that supports life) and a way to build structures, along with a tolerable temperature range. By chance, large organic molecules formed. Those more likely to survive the harsh environment of early earth did. One form of a molecule had a reaction with another, allowing it to replicate itself. These joined together into structures, as those that didn’t ended up being destroyed. Eventually, the first cells formed, and those who could survive their enviroment passed on their traits to their offspring. Voila- Evolution.
It basically comes down to you looking for examples that match what you believe- not science.
More so, we do believe that a god created us all, silly! You’re just annoyed its not yours.
I would be adding more, such as Test Tube Evolution (look it up on SciAm), but I must be going.
Maybe some other time.
Until then,
RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I love how he tells us this idiotic nonsence like he’s immensly more intelligent than us. Dear Jonathon, almost everyone here has heard that same arguement before and you are not smarter than us. Don’t talk down to us, we can easily understand what you’re trying to say.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, the last part made me chuckle. Logic clouding judgment, eh? What way do you suggest we come to conclusions? You have suggested picking and choosing facts that support your hypothesis (not science, by the way) and do exactly what the old bald guy who molests children standing in front of a giant stained glass window says. I prefer logic. It, well, makes sense.
The funniest part had to be how you try to act extremely intelligent, yet not only do you show a gross misunderstanding of the theories you try to disprove, but you used a banana as proof of intelligent design. Almost any natural object can bee looked at as being made for human use. Take the cucumber- perfect dildo. And don’t get me started about what you can do with apples ;)
Also, please don’t be condescending. We may think differently than you do, but that doesn’t make us idiots.
Love, peace, pirates and complex carbohydrates to all!
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dude… get life,
or a girlfriend,
or a boyfriend,
or a heaping plate of spagetti
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I can’t believe they bothered to write all that! I couldn’t be bothered to read past the bit about bananas myself. For a psychology student this website is excellent for trying to understand peoples beliefs. But I have to believe for myself that there is a lack of intelligence associated with people who can’t understand science. I had the Christian religion ground into my head as a child, I was born into a religious family, yet I managed to figure out that having a god was an invention of men.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Note that, when they are dropped, oranges fall onto random points. Now each point that they would fall into to create a series of rows like you described are possible points. Therefore, it is POSSIBLE for it to happen, but not probable. Hence, dropping it one time or just a few times will most likely not result in them falling into rows.
Now let’s just say that it’s, oh, about 100 million to one that those oranges would fall into that specific pattern. Then let’s drop those oranges 300 million times. Statistically, they SHOULD form rows three times.
Evolution’s like that, except that that there are even MORE chances for life to evolve.
In fact, looking at the vast, insanely huge multitudes of objects in space that COULD possibly support life (Which is almost everything but stars, since it’s a bit foolish to think that ALL life would have to share the same biological functions with earth life, i.e. water based ones), it’s actually a statistical likelihood that life WOULD evolve, and indeed that it WOULD evolve multiple times in multiple locations.
As for banana’s, if that’s the case, why isn’t EVERY fruit designed perfectly for human beings to eat? Like, say, pineapples. A bit POINTY for my taste.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
you are saying that a dick was created for the mouth mr. bannan man. i gess you have orange balls to
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
orangy balls
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
what do you call nuts(in your case oranges) on a chin.
dick(in your case banana)in mouth
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My brothers, be wary of the banana, for it will stray you from your faith!
Seriously though, not only do you have a humorously limited grasp of both evolution and the Big Bang, you cannot seem to think of the universe outside of human terms like ‘design’. It was not designed, it simply is. Your comparison of the universe to a can of Coca Cola is ridiculous. You assume that everything that is made, needs a maker. And then you make the gian, unessecary assumption that everything has to have been made. Your mind apparently cannot think out of the borders you have put around it, for that I pity you, and hope you may someday attain some insight into reality.
RAmen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You missed another perfection of the Banana: it’s just the right shape for inserting into homo butts!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
When you begin to resort to vulgar, out-house language it is a clear indication that you are losing “faith” in your argument. You should try to avoid such, in respect for civilized browsers who happen by.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I like it when idiots waste their time. This guy spent a long time writing that…
We take your point mate… But we haven’t considered it… We just laughed at it.
OI !!! JONATHON !!! you have just made yourself look a complete fool.
Quote: “The Banana: The Atheist’s Nightmare”
I HAVE NEVER SEEN A RELIGIOUS PERSON PUT FORWARD SUCH A RIDICULOUS ARGUMENT.
LET ALONE ONE AT ALL.
“To say that the banana happened by accident is even more unintelligent than to write that no one designed the Coca Cola can.”
I almost shat myself with laughter.
This guy claims to have a good scientific understanding. If true.
WHAT AN IGNORANT PRICK!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If the FSM cared to, Noodly Goodness would fill your stomach and warm your heart. Find it in your cold soul to love your fellow man, show forgiveness that you preach, not the hatred of the people you attempt to denegrate.
BTW Pontius Pirate – People like Jonathon do not need Bananas for rectal enjoyment, that’s what they have priests for.
Pirates on Earth RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Test 2:
1. Yes
2. idk
3. techinically
Explain: Buildings are called buildings because someone made them. but there are structures without builders….. for example….. caves…… and if you’re seeking something more elaborate, theres a nice little town in Virginia called “Natural Bridge, VA” it has a bridge of stone made by NOONE! and if you didn’t know that mr. whiny brat you’re either
Test No.42:
A. A whiny brat because you’re afraid of us
B. a moron
C. A closed minded individual
D. All of the above
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Huff. As i have before said that i could crush such arguments i may as well attempt such a feat, but for some reason you seem to have gone on for hours about the same argument.
you said:
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:____The universe____
My answer is simple. do you have any knowledge of anything existing outside the universe as an omnipotent omniscient and most importantly transcendant god must do? let alone an intelligence. what possible system could this intelligence run on? your suggesting there is some sort of transcendant binary code? i will remind you that there is no intelligence known that does not work on such a system.
Secondly you cannot form an analogy of something from that that is contained within it, as a whole its makeup is entirely different to what makes it up. it is like saying that because a frog in a pond was born from its mother so too must the pond be born from its mother – this does not work. there are better examples but its a while since i looked at them.
Just to put the final nail in the coffin – What honestly seems more likely – 1. a universe came into being under its own means and mechanisms unknown to modern day man and as a result humans that had eyes with 40 000 000 nerve endings. Or 2. A Omnipotent omniscient yadayadayada (infinitely more complex than my eye or computer) god came into being which as it was omnipotent had the power to create a universe which it was transcendant from, and also produce us with 40 000 000 nerve endings in our eyes.
im sorry but ockams razor says 1 so there i win woo woo woo *victory dance*
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
God is an ass. Got anything to disprove that?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nicely written… still wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ho hum.
The trouble is, Jonathon, that you miss the epic scale of the universe. If you were to drop an almost infinite number of oranges a practically infinite number of times, 50 of them would line up in nice neat rows. The rest would be all messed up and not in any particular order, a bit like all the bits of space that aren’t pretty planets and stars.
Secondly, it is not an act of faith that leads me to believe that my laptop works. It is an expectation based on repeatable, testable empirical evidence which I have seen with my own eyes. And anyway, I do know how it works.
Lastly, I hate bananas. I assume this means that your God has gone to great lengths to design a fruit, then gone to great lengths to design me in such a way that I can’t eat them. Why does your God hate me, Jonathon? Why? What have I done?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is a parody. No one could be so stupid as to believe this nonsense.
However, I often have nightmares involving bananas. Arrrrrggggghhhhh!!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jonathon,
Plagarism is not nice — be sure to cite your source material in the future. Also, you seem strangely fixated on banannas. You contend that they are designed for human consumption, yet my dog likes them. Is this a design flaw in the bananna or my dog? Or is is possible the his Holy Noodliness wanted my dog to like them? I think the latter is most possible.
You tried to prove God — all you proved is the Lordship of the Noodly Master! Prove otherwise . . .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The bananas that we eat today were specifically bred by humans to be a size that we like. Natural bananas are much smaller. This is a bit like Douglas Adams’ analogy of a puddle thinking that the hole it’s in was perfectly designed to contain the puddle.
The fact that a banana fits perfectly in our hand says a lot more about the evolution of hands than it does about bananas. The human hand is very versatile, able to change shape enough to hold a tiny pebble or a large basketball. Lots of the things we don’t eat also fit in our hands.
The tip of a banana (claimed to be analogous to a tab on a soda can) is actually the strongest part of a banana – not the ideal place to peel it.
More animals eat bananas (especially naturally occurring bananas) than just humans. Perhaps God created bananas for monkeys and humans just knew a good thing when they saw it.
We eat all kinds of food. The coconut is also enjoyed by humans as food yet, apart from having a non-slip surface (like almost all objects) and being pleasant to eat (like most food), it holds none of the other properties of the banana. A cow, which some might say is far more delicious than a banana, is fairly difficult to hold in the hand when in its natural form. Like many other foods, cows also require some very particular preparation before eating; otherwise some nasty diseases can result. The diseases come from bacteria that theists would also say were created by God.
Speaking of bacteria, the number of objects in the universe that are inedible and even dangerous to humans far outweighs the number of objects that are tasty.
Far from being proof that the entire world is custom made for our pleasure, this seems to be a case of cherry picking certain features to find one good example. Given the ranges of variation in fruits and vegetables, the enormous number of significantly different possible combinations of attributes, and the fact that humans evolved to be able to eat naturally-occurring foods, it would be extremely improbable that no fruit or vegetable would seem (to some, at least) to be especially well-suited to human consumption.
According to the same logic used by the banana argument, the pineapple would disprove God’s existence.
Even if the argument proved that bananas were designed, it would not prove that there is only one designer; maybe millions of banana-designers participated. There is nothing in the nature of bananas to point to a singular banana-designer.
Even if the argument proved that there once was a banana-designer, it wouldn’t prove that the banana-designer still exists.
Even if the argument proved the existence of a banana-designer, it wouldn’t prove that the banana-designer is supernatural.
Even if the argument proved the existence of a supernatural banana-designer, it wouldn’t prove the existence of an eternal, omnipotent, omniscient banana-designer who also created the universe (i.e., God). There is nothing about bananas to indicate that only God could design one.
The argument provides no good reasons to suppose that a naturalistic, non-design explanation for bananas is even improbable, let alone impossible
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
i have an argument for you!
in the bible it says that god made man and woman ( not siblings) they had children ( 2 boys ) and some girls now….here’s where it gets weird they would have to commit inscest to have children now….in this day and age if you have children with your sister (or brother ) a baby will come out that isn’t quite right soooo….does that mean we are the mutated offspring of the perfectly created children of god. also in the bible go gets angry at the serpent and he says ” you will be cursed to crawl on your belly” now those words bring forth a thought to any rational person ” as you claim to be” does that mean the snake didn’t always crawl on his belly? now if you agree with these then you have to accept the concept of evolution. we could have evolved so we could eat banana’s easier instead of saying that banana’s were made for us which is as far as im concerned is pretty much thinking the human race is top shit in the universe. ALSO with such a vast universe and over 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 stars out there and looking at our solar system we could assume that since we have 9 planets we would take the calculation 9×10*104= im to lazy to do the math so ill let someone with your vastly superior intellect figure it out; shouldn’t that mean that at least AT LEAST 1 other planet has life for just the right conditions as we have on earth ” assuming that what we consider everything on earth as essential to survival” that would still give us at least 1 planet out there with life on it whether it be microscopic or leviathan like creatures (sentient or otherwise) what will christianity do if it finds this out? the bible doesn’t mention ANYTHING not created on earth.
so here’s my annoying as hell test
If we did find a planet with life “sentient” christians would say
1). That such creatures didn’t exist
2). They would claim such creatures were spawns of the devil
or 3). would finnally point out that mabey the bible wasn’t always right
well choice 3 will never be chosen ( christians are incredebly thick) so it would either be 1 or 2
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
the problem with comparing God to “computer waves” is A) I think you mean radio waves and B) Science & Technology has PROVEN THE EXISTENCE OF RADIO WAVES!!! That’s why you’re computer freaking works when you turn it on, not because of some Divine Intervention…and I have to say an intervention is really what’s needed by those who consider themselves Truly Devout…(truly blind is a better fit)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Julie- RAmen, sister, RAmen!! More than half the foods we eat today have been genetically altered. How is that God’s will??? The USDA even recently ruled that meat suppliers can use cloned and genetically enhanced “product” or COWS, and not have to disclose the information. Sick shit, so know where your food comes from and BUY LOCAL!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The only problems with this arguement-
1. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
2. There is gold in China.
3. Some people are allergic to bananas.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What the hell? A banana, humm, yeah. A BANANA proves that God exists? That’s pathetic. Christians have no other choices in front of FSM but to talk about BANANAS
…….and you say Atheists got it all wrong. Sorry, this is so stupid that I can’t believe someone can even be such a moron. But thanks, my friend and I had a great time reading this!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
…sounds to me that you are really struggling with reality… I know how it is, I used to be a religous type… then one day I dropped it. I decided that there was no way that religion held the answer… it in fact answered nothing… but hypothesis can answer questions. Believing in ID is the easy way out… not having to think for yourself is the easy way out…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0