ITT: Cucktianity hate thread

Attached: FF6CB85D-B93E-40C8-88E0-F9599BE62768.jpg (521x521, 36K)

The thin paper makes great firestarting material.

true

Attached: IJH0Yn.gif (320x180, 1.65M)

its the single greatest medicine for depression.

They do say that ignorance is bliss, but there are plenty of depressed Christians.

That shit makes good rolling paper.

Big bang, is such a ridiculous place holder anyway. Always the atheists that are misinformed. Theoretical physicists have abandoned that a long time ago. If you're going to debate at least come prepared. Not to mention the big bang defies our current beliefs of physics anyway. There is also a need to address venue.

Or since people are predisposed to being dickheads an instruction booklet is necessary. Take you for instance, you could use it.

Cool, you wasted a perfectly good book.

>Theoretical physicists have abandoned that a long time ago.
False, big bang theory is still the prevailing cosmological model.

Have you ever actually read the Bible? It's laughably bad.

you waited four minutes before replying
good boy

There are plenty of depressed everyone these days because we've chosen to defy what we were intended to do.

We weren't 'intended' to do anything.

ah summer

someone mad?

trying this hard

sure kid

amen brother

No it's not. Additionally it's mathematically impossible. In a world where quantum string theory exists to suggest that it's impossible to be created is simply ignorant. Science must entertain all possibilities to be legitimate. Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind

this retarded

Superstition alive and well in the 21st century.

Attached: 1561502112903.jpg (379x462, 34K)

Im no Christcuck but fuck, you are one pathetic faggot picking on the easiest religion to pick on, try the other abrahamic religions and stop being a pathetic little bitch just because mom and dad made you go to church on a sunday.

Use it while you can

Attached: b91cd5c69d7a45a58fef6cdbcba4a3d5.png (432x768, 486K)

this retarded

I am surprised this actually worked

Attached: e55e9113cbe148d790849ebfd955d010.png (432x768, 409K)

what makes them the easiest?
they won't cut your head off.
is that why?

>No it's not.
Yes, it is.
>Science must entertain all possibilities to be legitimate.
Science entertains all testable hypothesis. If your claim isn't testable, science can't entertain it.

Attached: 1548357338367.jpg (781x600, 301K)

Reality is retarded now?

so am I.
did you add text or was it already there when recieved?

no just you

Probably because they're peaceful, yea. Also most Christians aren't absolute time wasters like most of you atheists. Not a lot of Christians on this site either, enjoy debating what shade of blue the sky is. Maybe if you actually wanted to debate and weren't looking for a forum to bolster your self esteem you'd take the debate to somewhere intelligent Christians would congregate. Most of the people on this site are cowards in general. Living out their undercover fantasies digitally and venting pent up anger due to their rejection from normal society.

It's too much fun, though. The shitty thing is when clever people are indoctrinated.
Luckily, the vast majority of scientists in the US are atheist and vote Democrat. I guess intelligence can be said to *usually* defeat dogma, but not always.

Yes.

Attached: 1561684194949.webm (360x640, 360K)

We don't have any intended purpose though. That's reality.

...Christianity had the same rule. No interest charging to Christians. But since Christians were the overwhelming majority, and Jews the minority, that prevented Christians from charging interest to most of the population, but not the opposite.

Ffs. Why are anti Semites always so fucking stupid?

I commend your, er....
...reply
however its a strawman.

Please show your sources for most scientists being atheists. I work with them every day and it's not the impression I get when conversing with them.

sure kid

no just you

this just happened last week?

Not him, but here are the actual statistics pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

Christian morality is everything.

Not because you don't believe in God as a bearded man in the sky or miracles means you aren't abrahamic.

If you believe in the bing bang you believe in that particular conception of the universe, as something that got created at some point.

Attached: Tomatoes_ARS.jpg (640x833, 127K)

Also, almost no scientists are democrats in my experience. Too much logic driven thought in my opinion.

You want to try making that post again, only comprehensible this time?

Clearly the numbers in that "survey" which is not set up with proper controls thus not a study, still conclude the word "most" can not be used. I think someone is missing some principals of discreet mathematics. Simple proofs might be worth your time. I know you won't be reading the Bible so maybe read something useful other than all the pornography on this website.

>in my experience
Because anecdotal evidence is strong, right?
people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/

Let's also not forget the philosophers who have shaped our modern society based their philosophy on Judeo/Christian values

so you really have no rational reply do you?

Did you not catch that I wasn't the person who made the claim you were responding to?
>I know you won't be reading the Bible
I already have, so I don't see why I would again.

How can you have a rational reply to gibberish?

Which is why I asked for a source, 51% there suggest they believe in a higher power. Also I don't spend much time thinking about political affiliation. I personally share the belief you have to be a moron to pick either side as it's used to control not to inform or improve.

I thought the Christians were supposed to be getting owned here.

I have. I liked parts like the Good Samaritan, didn't you?

so you're one of the one that get lost.

Attached: 2002799757.jpg (1916x1604, 213K)

you picked the wrong place to play

No, the only part that's even remotely interesting is the Book of Revelation. The Bible overall is incredibly dull.

They are.

How so? I haven't seen anything intellectually enlightening coming from the atheist corner yet.

The Judeo Christian God is a greedy, arrogant prick who doesn't understand people at all and thinks he can do whatever he wants just because he created the universe, big fucking deal

so you're a retarded one

You say that as though something intellectually enlightening has come from the Christian corner.

So your definition of being owned on half chan these days is slinging baseless low brow insults? How boring.

you're thinking of donald trump

There have been decent replies in my opinion yes.

What is this based off of?

Where?

Yeah, Revelation is freaky. Have you ever read those theories about it being a kind of coded message about Diocletian (or Caligula or somebody)?

Attached: giphy.gif (540x375, 609K)

No, but I have heard the one about the author being high at the time.

...

If you find those replies to be decent, I don't know what to tell you.

Well they could be further fleshed out if one were to adequately challenge them, but it seems that you've decided to take the low road and say nothing thinking you've asserted yourself or saved face.

I think this has the bit about diocletian. Got a link to the drug theory? Thanks.
pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/explanation/brevelation.html

Those posts are either moving goalposts, were challenged, or are irrelevant.

all chosen by you?

I didn't choose those posts, the person I was replying to did.

I will simply interject with my philosophy. I believe that individuals have to stop thinking of God as an old man in the clouds wearing sandals and instead accept the possibility that we may have been designed. There is quite a lot of conceptual evidence to play with. We certainly play the part of god in life already. Time/scale and biological engineers do it. Organisms in a petri dish have no knowledge of their cultivation. I personally am a scientist, I have both a doctorate in computer science and mathematics obtained from USC. I specialized in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning and focus on strong AI and the possibility of quantum computing. We like humans mimic robotics as we know it. Electrical signals and switches is all we are. We are capable of 3d printing with organic matter to form body parts. However, even just getting the average citizen to understand what I am capable of is a challenge, it takes many years of dedication and education. How would you user manipulate your experiment of much lesser informed and ignorant life forms? Perhaps the Bible is simply our instruction booklet. I feel that people on this forum think science or scientists are infallible, but that is the furthest from the truth. Actually scientists get paid to be wrong, over and over again. The most learning comes from our failures and not our success.

Religious people are weak morons with such little backbone they need to pretend a pissed off invisible wizard in sky has got their back.

We need to exterminate the entire human race. The universe deserves better than us.

Is it possible that we may have been designed? Sure, we know designing things to be possible. Have we found any evidence that we actually were designed? No, we have not.

Nice ambiguous non-committal dickhead, I am an atheist and you sure are setting the fucking bar low aren't you?

to add to this, we have found plenty of evidence that we have *not* been designed. And people who claim that "evolution cannot be proven" are a lost cause.

Do you expect me to sit down and give detailed responses to every post he quoted?

We have no particular evidence either way, simply place holders. We are incredibly ignorant of anything that isn't of this world. Not to mention that it's been mathematically proven that different dimensions should actually exist. The last time I checked I think the number was up to 12. That's what I believe a previous user was alluding to with the reference to quantum string theory. These are physical dimensions so beyond 3d where would we turn. It's impossible for our minds to fathom what a 4th dimension might looks like or be capable of.

Even evolution would not prove that we had not been designed. You must crawl out of the closed mind of the average and consider both religion and science as one. Evolution doesn't disprove design. It simply does from most church's perspectives because they're as ignorant about science as most atheists are about religion.

We do have evidence that we are the result of evolution by natural selection. We do not have evidence that we were designed. That's the reality. Appealing to the unknown is not evidence to support design.

>religion and science as one
The literally are not one, operating on wholly different principles.
>they're as ignorant about science as most atheists are about religion.
The average atheist knows more about religion than the average theist.

This was my point.

Great, then we agree that we have no reason to believe we were designed.

The improvement of matter is equal to what? Let's say evolutionary theory is fact for a moment, it's not but I'll concede for now, it really serves no purpose to bolster the argument there is no God. I don't feel like you're making any point at all.

No they're not, you've simply been told they are. Start thinking for yourself user.

I do think for myself, which is why I do not simply accept what some stranger on the internet says.

who said anything about improvement? Evolution is merely change. We lost almost all of our defensive and offensive traits in favor of a brain because the situation demanded it over the course of hundreds of thousands of years.

>The improvement of matter is equal to what?
What?
>Let's say evolutionary theory is fact
Theories are stronger than facts as they have predictive power.
>it really serves no purpose to bolster the argument there is no God
Depends on the god. If part of the god claim is that we didn't evolve, then it does bolster the argument that such a god doesn't exist.
>I don't feel like you're making any point at all.
The point I was making there is that we have no evidence that we were designed. No more, no less.

Attached: 5130397832.jpg (908x1586, 137K)

Well, in mathematical proofs we try to have fun and prove things that are interesting. What I find compelling to think about is how much math is found in nature. Even flower pedals follow mathematical formulas. Upon learning some of these truths my gears began spinning. Organic matter being formulated suggests design more than random occurrence does it not? They way we perceive art also follows mathematical formula. Where things are place on a page can captivate the viewer based on formula. My suggestion is not that atheists should believe in a creator and dump their theory of random perfection which is what we would be had this all been circumstance and luck, but it is to suggest there is no way science at its present state can deny a creator with any credibility. Especially now when theoretical physicists are suggesting this may all be a simulation. Also I can't recall the gentleman's name but he suggests all physics and mathematics are related and can prove it. More and more we're marching toward a period where a creator seems to be a likely placeholder. Of course throughout history man kind ebbs and flows in this way.

>Organic matter being formulated suggests design more than random occurrence does it not?
It does not, no. In any event, it makes perfect sense that certain mathematical patterns would be more efficient and therefore selected for by unintelligent processes.
>it is to suggest there is no way science at its present state can deny a creator with any credibility
Science can never deny a creator, because the creator claim in general is intentionally unfalsifiable. You can't deny what you can't test.

Judaism (and thus Christianity & Islam) owes its very existence in part to the fact that a butcher invented a scheme to get goats for free and make a profit out of deluding people. He transformed his local butcher's shop into a holy temple and had people bring animals to be ritually sacrificed in order to 'absolve the person of their sins'.
He then sold the sacrificed animals back to them with the help of his family's butchering business.

All religions exist because they were convenient exploitative social tools devised to trick, lead and or harm other people.

I apologize for my typos it's late for me. I do believe keeping faith in a higher power is beneficial which is why I decided to chime in on this thread. Try to keep the debate civil and intellectual. It's only to our own benefit we learn.

>I do believe keeping faith in a higher power is beneficial
How so?

>Even flower pedals follow
I hope your math is better than your spelling.

But you must see, if your willing to be honest, it's simply a matter of philosophy now. There is no clear front runner in this race. We're simply too ignorant.

The default is to not believe something until there is reason to believe it. If this were not the case then we would be compelled to believe mutually exclusive claims simultaneously. We have no reason to believe we were designed, therefore we should not believe we were designed.

[Different Person]
Using 'faith' (an invisible wizard in the sky) as a crutch for your problems is not healthy and makes you many more susceptible to influence from authorities.

In my opinion, and this is strictly opinion. Mankind needs a catalyst for advancement and improvement. What better catalyst than suggesting it is possible to create a universe? What's more alluring than the possibility to govern all matter and energy? It raises the bar farther than we can imagine and gives us limitless possibility.

Why do you need to keep faith in a higher power to be open to the possibility of creating a universe?

I believe it's easier to not believe and think there is no recourse for my transgressions personally. See simply a difference in philosophy. You know it does say in the Bible to not be judgemental. People simply regard things as moral standards, but judging may prevent you from advancing yourself...

The 4 minute mile was impossible, then someone did it, then many people did...

The 4 minute mile wasn't impossible.

I meant to the human mind, and this is just a little bit of a larger task we're discussing than running fast

I don't believe that it's impossible to create a universe, and I have no faith in higher powers whatsoever.

the proof of a single existence doesn't disprove another existence unless they're mutually exclusive. I understand you're putting your best foot forward but this is a mathematical concept. Your statement is a bit moot.

You're correct, but what does that have to do with anything?

You suggested that you are an exception to my statement. Your statement was irrelevant to the outcome. There are tail ends of every distribution. You basically said "Things exist." Not a very useful statement. I'll bow out for it is late and I have children. Good luck anons, the state of this website suggests you'll need quite a bit.

This starting point of this discussion was that keeping faith in a higher power is beneficial. When I questioned how it is beneficial, you started talking about the possibility of creating universes as some sort of incentive for advancement. In response, I tell you that you don't need to keep faith in a higher power to have that incentive. If you don't need to keep faith in a higher power to get the benefit, then why do you need it?