There are still some philosophers, intellectuals and scientists in the year 2017 who aren't atheist

...

Usually they appropriat our shit for their own. Like, they admit creationism isnt real, then say that evolution is how god really went about things. Trying to update their shit to fit with the times.

He was released after the dust had settled.
It didn't help that they put socdems in charge.
The only did barebones of work, probably to hide the fact, that they were involved in some shady dealings themselves, because the list of suspects was very very long.

Still after all this, next election they voted the conservative party (the ones who did the major stealing) straight back into power, showing that they learned nothing.

Give me an argument that doesn't fail, brainlet.

Proud Christian STEM, Mechanical Engineering computer science guy

If you cant make the logical realisation to see the bullshit that is religion then theres something wrong with you.

/thread

I almost think it is more reasonable to believe that then be a Christian who believe s in evolution. The whole concept of original sin/fall of man no longer works and then the whole system collapse along with it.

convince me

jesus. turkey needs a good communist kick in the balls.

eh, science is not everything

well user, some people believe in global warming, some people believe in jesus.
Some people believe that men and woman are equal, and some people believe they are not.

Let everyone have their own ideology you bigot.

How the hell is evolution incompatible with Christianity?

depends if you mean Evolution,

or

EVOLUTION- SCIENCE-tm BILL NYE! woohoo! ALL GENDERS ARE THE SAME, DOGS AND WOLVES ARE EQUAL! AND GENETICS DONT APPLY TO HUMANS!!! SCIENCE RICK AND MORTY WOOHOO (tm)

No. Fuck off, your scripture clearly states how your god made your shit.

youtu.be/6MzcC-uc_fM

I have seen atheists claiming that because of slight difference between genders or average autism levels massive hierarchies in society are somehow justified, and more should be enforced.

It never occurred to me you could name drop/dogwhistle certain characteristics to scare people. Might say this onr a few times.

I'll stop when it pleases me too, fag.
Obviously a pol-nigger.

Yeh no shit. What are you on about?

Are you one of those atheists rejecting existence of God but believe in Spirits or Daemons?

I don't see how you can fit evolution with ideas of original sin. The whole Christian theology falls apart without it.

hahahah forgive them, for they know not what they do. is what i always say

You have a lot to learn about religion kiddo, christianity in particular.
It's not as simple as it seems on the surface, a lot of meaning is hidding and obscured.

The reason they did this is because theres always those naysayers, and christians want something to laugh at.

In this case, we laugh at the atheists who appearantly dont understand that the bible isnt meant to be taken literally.

I’m an academic scientist, I know a number of religious scientists, though most are rather agnostic. But in general it seems like religious scientists are very hardcore, they tend to have a much more relaxed stance on religion. This is especially true of Muslim and Hindu scientists.
With that being said, I think a lot of times it’s just upbringing, fear of completely shedding their religion. Sort of in relation to Pascale’s wager. For Christian scientists it tends to seem more as if it’s just something to believe in. Science is incredibly alienating and capitalism unfathomably stressful. Thus I think religion gives them something to confide in, something to give them hope in an otherwise bleak climate.
That’s my guess at least, I’m an atheist so I can only conjecture. I do know one Hindu who did sort of mention some things that were quite pro-intelligent design, tho he’s an otherwise smart guy. Something like this I think just arises from corrupted philosophical framework

So then the Bible is open to interpretation? How objective. Well my interpretation of the Bible is that it is entirely made up and presents no actual value or truth at all. And since it’s open to interpretation, how is my interpretation, as an atheist, any less valid than yours?

Well, your premise is wrong.

If something is open to interpretation, that doesnt mean all interpretations are valid.

I mean, do i really have to explain this???

There was no jesus and yaweh isnt real.

So your entire faith is just abstract? Is murder really a sin if the Bible isn't literal? Who is to say that God wasn't being sarcastic when he spoke of adultery? If it isn't taken literally it transforms from the word of God to the "4000 Holy Reasons For Why I'm Justified".

Sort of this.

besides "open to interpretatrion, are you words, not mine.

wait, you can only think in black and white?
No wonder you dont understand religion.

lol

Then how Grey is it? How abstract and how literal can I be with the word of God? This is a most troubling development and you have done nothing to soothe me.
You accuse me of thinking in black and white, but I have only considered the implications of what you said. If it is not literal, some parts must be fanciful. What I am asking is what parts did God really mean, and what parts do I add my own interpretation to? It is ridiculous to literally deface the word of God with human interpretations. Actually a little triggered by this, explain yourself at once.

Well, its never too late to learn, pick up a bible and read, and soon you will see.

hahahahahah ahahahaha

evolution implies belief that Big Bang, the only scientifically proven theory happened. Big bang happened by breaking our laws of physics.

Original sin implies that all human beings are descendant from Adam and Eve. Our science proves that all humans alive are children of one mother.

Who cares what someone else believes? The problem is not that they believe something, it's that they have power to control the lives of others via capitalism/the state.

I'm going to guess say you believe that there was an actual crucifixion of Christ. I'm also guessing that you don't believe the events of Exodus is an actual historic account. How do you make these distinctions? And if something isn't literal how do you know your interpretation is correct?

Take your meds.

I will pick up a Bible and read it when someone convinces me it is in my interest. Until then, I see no reason to deviate from my atheism.

sage isn't down vote, religious atheist

this post is the anti-thesis of an argument

how the fuck should i know? i'm actually not even christian… not even religious…

hahaha, but i know a shitload more about christianity and religion than you idiots. Thats for sure.
I can talk with christians, bhuddists, muslims, jews and practicly all other religious people and have a decent fruitfull conversation.

they dont say shit like "GOD EXISTS AND ATHEISTS SUCk"
Its only you guys that react that way (well the exact opposite way)

Wich is very ironic and hilarious to me.

You said it’s not meant to be taken literally. Which implies it needs to be interpreted. As it is inherently subjective, how can you say one interpretation is valid, while another is not? It’s all rather arbitrary, really.
And furthermore it’s why you guys can’t agree on jack shit, why there’s fundamentalists and reformists. Why there’s Protestants of every flavor, why the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox churches spit. Even you guys, self proclaimed Christians can’t agree one nearly anything. So you really expect me to believe there is such thing as a valid interpretation of your religion when your authorities don’t recognize those of their fellow Christians as valid? No thanks

As an aside we use interpretation in science all the time. We interpret results and data and form hypothesis. These hypothesis are usually supported or confounded by results published by other groups, providing intellectual rigor to our interpretation, but where you guys fails is in the testing, we physically test and validate our hypotheses. We make sure our results are congruent with the hypotheses. You cannot and do not, which leaves your interpretation entirely in the realm of theory and speculation

LOL I can talk fantasy with anyone, it is quite fun. Why do you think I am in this thread listening to these hot takes? I am open to change, my actions show this.
To expand on this guy's post because I like it, it would be fine to me if all the sects disagreed, but only if they weren't supposed to literally be in possession of the word of God.

"LOL I can talk fantasy with anyone, it is quite fun"

I know, leftypol is full of fantasy :D

your implications are wrong.
Try again

Holla Forums is full of fantasy. Who here would deny this? Holla Forums has lots of opinions and, of course some of them are antagonising. Such is the way of a community of living people.

How are the wrong? because my interpretation is that they are right ;)

*proceeds to reject scientifically proven theories in order to worship whatever totally not religious explanation pop culture offers*
Religion is not science, it's not here to explain you how to get into space. It's here to tell you why are you here on earth.

It sais im here to serve god and that im a sinfull pos, who better do good, or get eternal hellfire.

No - one cares about your interpretation.
I said, its not to be taken literally.

That doesnt mean all interpretations are therefor valid

that is true, jerks will burn in Hell

It just seems like a reall shitty answer to a big question. God of the gaps.

Which imply 1) there is a why. 99.9999999% of space is completely empty, 99.99999% of the matter is completely inhospitable, and it’s totally possible we are here completely by chance. In lieu of any valid evidence I’d say the question of why is irrelevant and presumptive And 2) your implying you know why, that you have access to the knowledge to know that, and further you are assuming the Bible actually contains that information. You are assuming without actual evidence. On the contrary science could explain why, and further it can test it, as it is inherent within its logical framework

You’re repeating yourself. But since not all interpretations are valid, which ones are? The ones you like? By which metrics is a religious interpretation deemed valid?
I understand that interpretations can be valid and invalid, but in secular spheres this is usually determined through evidence. Do real world phenomena support or contradict the interpretation. Religion can not and does not do this, and is thus completely arbitrary and speculative.

religion of love, people. where does the jerk end and begin? how can you objectively measure what is a "jerk" anyways?

But science does this as well, and does it better. I know you probably mean purpose rather than the mechanics of how humans can to be but that firstly presupposes we have a purpose or where supposed to be here when there is absolutely know reason to think that. Secondly I think the question of how we came to be is much more interesting and enlightening question that actually makes progress.

Simple by Gods Metrics.

In the Beginning God created The Heavens and the Earth.

what is the beginning?
Its the beginning of time.
in the beginning, the heavens (space) and the earth (the firmament, matter).

So, we have Time, Space and energy.

What is god then? the primordial mover, the thing that made nothing go boom.
Personally, i'm an atheist, so i interpret it that way. I am not sure why religions ascribe a male "figure" for this… maybe so people can identify with it in some way because we are also things that create… but who knows right.

Your text formatting is shit, but never mind, my English is also shit.
I'm not saying you can not embrace nihilism and believe that we exist because physical constants were just somehow randomly arranged into just right conditions. All I'm saying that you de facto became religious in that point.

I do not understand your second point, can you rephrase it?

great invention of mirror will tell you how to spot such person, sinner.

yes, this is what I meant.
Yes, It's preferable for me to believe that I have a purpose instead of embracing alienation of nihilism.
Yes, science is wonderful thing.

Well first just because its preferable doesn't mean its true. Second, I don't think nihilism is all that bad as people think it is. I find it quite liberating. Why is having purpose a good thing? I would rather simply live life rather than be tied to some purpose I had no choice in making.

It's liberating.

explain?

This is baby's first argument. I have unironically heard more kids then adults say this phrase. Why are you a child?

Not really. Your purpose is just the same as everyone elses. Definitely not the ttpe of objectivity i want in my life.

As long as people don't know what happens to them after they die, there will always be religion.

1. no one said anything about christianity specifically, burger
2. any discussion of metaphysics is by default categorized as exactly the same thing as evangilism by the fedora crowd (as you so effectively demonstrated), which is the entire problem

to the idealists crawling everywhere in this thread
home.mira.net/~andy/works/atheism.htm

I’m mobile posting and I have big hands so I make a lot of typos my bad.
My second point is largely whether or not the Bible is even the correct source for why we exist. You have to assume the 1000s or other religions are less correct than the Bible, which is pure assumption. It’s not like there evidence in that the Bible accurately describes historic thing.

As for me being “religious” in my assumption, your looking at it completely incorrectly. First, you have confirmation bias because you have to live on the one atom in an ocean that holds life. The one little spec of life amongst a backdrop of emtpiness and dead matter. So you are inherently wired to see the universe as tailored for life. If it’s not. Step outside the tiny spec that happens to be the perfect distance from a fusion reaction to sustain the biochemical reactions we are reliant on, and your chances for destruction rise astronomically. And look at our solar system, rocks bump into our planet and cause mass extinction events many times in our history. Not so perfectly designed. You should really look into just how big the universe is, look up the Hubble ultra deep field. I’m not even necessarily nihilist but it’s a simple mathematical fact that we are insignificant. The probability of life arising in this universe is minuscule, almost 0% chance. That suggests the universe is not fined tuned for our existence. However the universe is so large that even the minuscule chance of life arising is offset by the sheer size.

Well, thats just a matter of perspective.
I see it exactly the same way, but i dont conclude that we are therefor insignificant.

You see the universe and see yourself in it as very very small.
I just see the universe.

Belief that there is no purpose leaves you vulnerable to unnecessary self-destructing ideologies. I might not know exact details of the purpose, I know that I'll serve God the best by improving myself and serving my family, my community, thus making us less vulnerable to the randomness of this world.

Everyone is sinner, but better question is, why the hell are you spending your time trying to destroy christian beliefs of kids?

I can't speak of any other religion than Christianity. Is bible that historically inaccurate tho?

I'm still not quite sure what are you trying to say by that second paragraph. Yes, if you look closely into bible, you can find some undeniable differences from proven scientific theories (not stuff like Rick and Morty/Musk bullshit about infinite universes/we are just PC program and so on).
Both bible and science agrees on the fact that there was such thing as "beginning".
Bible do not speak about how universe is old, science can prove it is about 14*10^9 years old.
Bible says that our universe is created from nothing, science proves that it was, in fact, Vacuum.
It is written that there was a Creator, science proves that it was just setting of basic physical constants.
It is written that reason we are here is God's intention, science say that it's just a statistical coincidence.

That said, I have no hard feelings against sincere nihilists. Who I despise are """atheists""" which are more religious than Christians I meet. I once dated """atheist""" like that, she could speak for very long how the belief in [christian] God is stupid, but she believed in spirits haunting her grandparent's house and similar stupid stuff. I believe that because of people like her, Zizkek call himself "christian atheist".

I am absolutely sure you'd hate philosophy.

New atheism ruined atheism.

Agreed. It brought back a resurgence in the flawed logical positivism and vulgar materialism among Westerners.

Were you born without a spine or did you have to give it away when you were baptized?

"According to 100 Years of Nobel Prize (2005), a review of Nobel prizes awarded between 1901 and 2000, 65.4% of Nobel Prize Laureates, have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference (427 prizes).[5] Overall, Christians have won a total of 78.3% of all the Nobel Prizes in Peace, 72.5% in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine, 54% in Economics and 49.5% of all Literature awards"

That means nothing in a world in which Bob Dylan wins the nobel prize of literature sadly.

Fuck Literature. 72.5% in Chem 65.3% in Physics 62% in Medicine and 54% in Econ is nothing to scoff at.

youtube.com/watch?v=exm7FN-t3PY

Take that back.

OP, you're thinking of Evangelical Protestants. Catholics are fine with science and Orthodox are kinda busy with their bears and not talking to girls

don't complain that people think ur dum if you post this kind of shit.

Only in this country could whether evolution has objective evidence behind it be a 50-50 issue.

theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

real material education not sacred fetters okay?

Altruism is bad. The working class needs to be self-interested. The idea that people need to make sacrifices for the common good under capitalism is capitalist propaganda.

The Econ Nobel prize is fucking fake. There’s no novel prize in economics it’s nothing but a hoax set up by the Swedish central bank to give out fake laurels to right-wing economists
archive.fo/cJCbv

*nobel prize

I'm an atheist that went to a private Christian school until middle school and had perfect grades in my Bible classes. Their argument against evolution is that God created everything in 7 days, so evolution would contradict the Bible. They also use a similar argument against global warming saying that only God can harm the Earth.

Altruism is sort of the grease that makes mutual aid run smoothly. Stirner for example never even said altruism was bad, but the duplicitous altruistic nature as in sacrificing yourself to something else; without any conscious idea of how this may benefit/degrade you in any way possible (e.g. emotionally), is literally duping your interest. You act as a sovereign individual, and your emotions are tied to social interaction. You do something for someone else in light of your emotional benefit from helping said someone.

Significance used in this context is completely subjective. Completely meaningless in the grander scheme of things. On the contrary, however, I cherish life because it is so infathomably rare, the earth is beautiful and awe inspiring. But to me its entirely chance, nothing more, nothing less. A beautiful happenstance.

I haven't read Swinburne but Plantinga's arguments are always just common religious arguments redressed with minor amounts of modern philosophy where convenient. His arguments against moral skepticism and Jl Mackie were so basic bitch on the street Christian nonsense that I actually laughed while reading them in the class room. I mean just presuming that free will and God exist to prove a point, why not start throwing in more unproven things to substantiate a false conclusion?

Rrobotic terminator determinism and the necessitation of an unmoved unmover (bordiga) prove that moral nihilism is correct. Checkm8 Christ cis-scum

Undoubtedly. The earth wasn't created in 7 days, as laid out in Genesis. There was absolutely no way a great flood covered the entire earth:ncse.com/library-resource/yes-noahs-flood-may-have-happened-not-over-whole-earth
What likely happened is a regional flood in the Iraq region. There is no archelogical evidence for giants (or Nephilim). I mean I'll keep going if you'd like, but theres loads of things that don't really make sense and contradict science.
Ok check
It can be inferred that it is ~6,000 years old, according to creationist interpretation
Science does not prove that. First off, ask any physicist, vacuum is not "nothing". Its filled with many particle types and energy. And look up Lawrence Krauss, the guy who came up with String Theory:youtube.com/watch?v=wng6c0oLkQE
He addresses this question. I am not a fan generally of "new atheist" types but he's an authority on astrophysics.
Those physical constants are not constant, they change over time. Whatever was "written" about the beginning of time has changed since then:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-variation_of_fundamental_constants
So once again sort of suggests things are tuned. If you want to talk about a creator though, ask yourself this, why were we designed so poorly? We get all kinds of cancer just from breathing oxygen, we suffer terrible diseases because some of our proteins are faulty and prone to aggregation, we breath and eat through the same tube (leading to tons of choking deaths).
I'm not a nihilist, I am a materialist

I'm not an atheist, although I do not believe in God. I don't believe there is no god, I simply see absolutely no reason to believe in one. I simply have no faith in the writings of uneducated desert people who died 1000s of years ago. If God was real, why doesn't he show himself to us now? He had no problem doing so back then. It simply doesn't add up. Nevertheless I consider myself agnostic

Should say "aren't" My appolgies

Thread should've ended here. I'm an atheist but when I see the scientific method, which has limits, deifed like any other idol I can't help but cringe. Idiots like OP have effectively shat on the use of rational thought ironically in the name of reason.

you misunderstand. Its a way of thinking. Religious reverence is an alternative way of thinking, reliant on emotions and faith. Despite flaws, one is obviously superior than the other. The rest is simply argument over this.

Literally an /r/atheism-tier post.
The scientific method is not "a way of thinking". It's a method of practising empiricism to attain knowledge. By definition, the scientific method excludes anything outside the boundaries of empirical enquiry.

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/story-of-jesus-christ-was-fabricated-to-pacify-the-poor-claims-controversial-biblical-scholar-8870879.html
archive.is/4BH5W

Post your reaction, christfags.

...

...

Are we progressively becoming r/socialism?

damn, what a whore

Because you don't see religion as a teddy bear, you see it as the means to war and tension. We can all agree that religion has been used for horrid things in the past YET religion also gives some people comfort and peace of mind that the Nihilistic world view, atheism gives. Some people are just very emotional user, you aught to respect that as they do you (minus the WBC).

...

it is written that God perceive time differently than humans. this is fedora-tier argument.
wot?
yes, that is the difference i was trying to point out you massive autist.
Whole big bang, occurred thanks to breaking laws of physics as we know them. There are only two options, it was either a God or just a massive coincidence.

The capitalist Elite (satanists acting as atheists) are all about transcendence and living forever and the secrets of the universe and they want to know all this; some are good, some are bad, some are mixed. But, the good ones don’t ever want to organise, the bad instead are the ones that organise, because they lust after power.
Powerful consciences don’t want to dominate other people, they want to empower them, so they don’t tend to get together until things are really late in the game, then they come together. Evil is always defeated, because good is so much stronger. And, we’re on this planet and Einstein’s physics showed it, Maxwell’s physics showed it, all of it, that there is at least twelve dimensions, and now that’s why all the top scientist and billionaires are coming out saying it’s a false hologram, it is artificial.
The computers are scanning it and finding tensions points where it is artificially projected and gravity is bleeding in to this universe, that’s what they call dark matter.
So, we’re like a thought or a dream that’s like a wisp in some computer program, some god’s mind, whatever. They’re proving it all, it’s all coming out.
Now, there’s like this sub transmission zone below the third dimension that’s just turned over the most horrible things, which is what it resonates to, and it’s trying to get up into the third dimension, that’s just a basic level consciousness to launch into the next levels. And our species is already way up to the fifth, sixth dimension consciously, our best people. But there is this big war trying to like, basically destroy humanity, because humanity has free will, and there is a decision to which level we want to go to.
We have free will, so evils will have to contend, not just good. And the Elites themselves believe they’re racing, using human technology to try to take our best minds, and build some type of breakaway civilization where they’re going to merge with machines, transcend and break away from the failed species that is man, which is kind of like a false transmission because they’re thinking what they are as ugly and bad, projecting on to themselves instead of believing, no it’s a human test about building us up, and so, Google set up eighteen, nineteen years ago.
I knew about this before it was declassified, I’m just saying I have good sources. They want to build a giant artificial system, and Google believes the first artificial intelligence will be a supercomputer based on the neuron activities of the hive mind of humanity with billions of people wired into the internet exchange (holy shit), and so all of our thoughts go into it, and we’re actually building a computer that has real neurons in real time that’s also psychically connected to us, that are organic creatures so that they will have current prediction powers, future prediction powers, a true crystal ball. But the big secret is, once you have a crystal ball and know the future, you can add stimuli beforehand and make decisions that can control the future. And so then, it’s the end of consciousness and freewill for individuals as we know, and a true two-point-o, in a very bad way, hive mind consciousness with an A.I jacked into everyone, knowing our hopes and dreams, delivering it to us, not in some PKD wire head system, where we plug in and give up our consciousness because of unlimited pleasure, but because we were already wired in and absorbed before we knew it by giving over our consciousness to this system our daily decisions that it was able to manipulate and control into a larger system.
There’s now a human counterstrike taking place to shut this up before it gets fully into place and to block these systems, and to try and have an actual debate about where humanity goes, and cut off the paedophiles and psychic vampires that are controlling this A.I system before humanity is destroyed.
The paedophiles, at whatever level, they rule the devil, whatever you want to call, this interdimensional thing, which gives them advanced off world technology, the fallen one, that’s out of this world, is giving them advanced knowledge on how to construct these systems that have already been used before on other populations. That’s Satan.
Satan became something, that you know, the stupid preacher tells you about, who’s totally controlled or something you read about in the news or TV, but this is an interdimensional force that wants to influence us to build something that absorbs us and kills us, rather than the divine free will we are given to build something much better and empowers the species so the species is now making a decision about its entire future.
I know from looking at all the data, researching it, studying it, watching the enemy, that’s the big decision that humanity has now got before us.

If this is true, where does communism come into this?

Sure, but it doesn't excuse you to be a christfag in 2017

Hey there Alex Jones

Religion is inherent to human social relations. Marx was wrong here, religion will never wither away.

Jesus get some fucking self-respect. The Bible literally claims that the earth is 6000 years old, that painting a sheep with spots will make it have spotted offspring and that every animal species in the world would fit together on a wooden ship. And don't excuse it with "muh metaphors" or some other inane excuse. Not only are the factual claims of the Bible ridiculous but the normative ones are also completely incompatible with Leftism, since they condones slavery and genocide as long as they are done by the right people in the right circumstances.

You know full well that you only believe this shit because of the shallow slice of time and geography in which you live, and yet you continue to rationalize this shit just to make reality less cognitively painful for you to bear. Stop it. You have absolutely no excuse in the current year, where we know exactly how Judaism gradually grew out of Caananite polytheism because Yahwist priests started repressing the other Gods. If you have to practice Christianity (or "Deism" or some other shallow derived form) at least admit that it's probably bullshit and you're just doing it so your fee fees don't get hurt.

...

Your religious faith does not prevent you from reasoning formally or conducting experiments.

And if you're some deist with no cultural stakes in the results your experiments, I'm pretty sure you make for a better scientist than… basically anyone with a political affiliation these days.

*tip*

Why can't we just throw out the retarded reactionary crap in the OT?

...

Not the person you're responding to, but that lenin fag deserved. The poitivist reading of the bible is something that began in the late modern era.

"Read a book" as the saying goes

The purpose of most religions isn't scientific, and most people who try to make science into a sort of religion often don't really have a firm grasp on science outside maybe the mere basics. Reminder that a large majority of scientific advances and research throughout history have been conducted by religious people and religious institutions. Saged for shit thread

Are you guys' only experience of religion that of fundamentalists? I dunno about other religions or sects, but I'm Catholic and fundies are really a recent phenomenon. Church scholars have been saying to not interpret everything literally from since almost the beginning. In fact in the mass service I went to just last night, the priest went out of his way to say that we weren't Biblical literalists and pointed out that in the Gospel, Jesus was just telling a story to make a point and it wasn't Jesus advocating you to take ten wives or some other stupid bullshit. Honestly, the problem with religion isn't the belief in God, but how it's often used as an ideological buttress to get the lower class to support the state. If you can discern between religious belief in God and when your Church is obviously trying to make a political play, then there should be no issue.

A lot of science is not induced through sheer logic. Your e-feels will become more comfy the sooner you realize it.

There is no irrefutable methodolgy for the determining the age of the Earth.

This is a Holla Forums thread. Holla Forums has found that religion divides us and causes a shitstorm, stop replying to religion bait threads!

Were you diddled as a kid?