They are Muslim and committed terrorist acts but the acts have nothing to do with Islamic terrorists? You need to take your own advice, bud. “Do a little research and educate yourself about what you are speaking on before you spout off your obviously wrong rhetoric.” Perhaps you meant to say the authorities have yet to find a connection between these terrorists and a known terrorist organization. ;)

Comment by unbelievable
————————————————-

Upset that I don’t do indoctrination?
Learn yes but not from a brain washed teacher like yourself.

Stick to teaching basics.

There are NO gods. None.

gets the US mixed up with the former USSR
Comment by Flaco — July 2, 2007 @ 7:33 pm

I pity you Flaco. You can’t hold a basic conversation with anyone, and habitually resort to puerile insults when it’s clear you’re ignornant on the matter, rather than trying to learn anything. Must suck to be you.

You’re still pulling crap out of your arse, and it still stinks…

Charles Darwin – boy did this guy get outdated quick.
Comment by Flaco — July 2, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
Charles Darwin – boy did this guy get outdated quick. What an embarrasment to modern science.
Comment by Flaco — July 2, 2007 @ 5:17 pm

No, he didn’t. He spurred many other scientists who have confirmed that Evolution is a fact. Deal with it.

Flaco, it is clear by your mischaracterizations that you don’t understand Science and don’t want to.

You feel better buying into a really silly fairytale. If that works for you, have at it. It doesn’t work for thinking people, however, and you’ll just have to accept that, because the reality is that more people each year give up religion.

Carl Sagan, David Mills, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Victor Stenger
Aaaha, a list of your gods with their limited knowledge of the universe.
Comment by Flaco — July 2, 2007 @ 5:08 pm

You have serious issues… There are NO gods, not even these brilliant minds.

Just an eternity of mass-energy that can neither be created nor destroyed that, when it interacts with itself, evolves. That simple. No wordy book necessary. Ockham’s Razor.

Of course it says that. It wants you to accept is as an authority. Prove that it is what people claim it is, and not just a book written by men who wanted to control other people…

It also says a lot of other things that are ludicrious, violent and contradictory. It’s not a very good book if you read the whole thing, and not just pull out passages that please you.

You cannot claim that until you’ve actually read those books. And I know you won’t.

I didn’t claim to know everything. Scroll back. I only claimed to know enough to be convinced that gods are neither necessaery nor likely.

gets the US mixed up with the former USSR

I opened with a comment that meant to say you turned this whole thread to a discussion on the Evils of Religion.

the line in the last paragraph should read “an atheist does without god”.

This thread was about a bombing in Yemen –neat how you pretended you didn’t make a mistake about place by saying the war in Iraq is also in Yemen. The attack was on a museum –not a church, or a synagogue, or a mosque. In most attacks on tourists, the terrorist’s objective is to punish the government which makes considerable money from the tourist trade.

I did post a link that explained what happened, but you were too busy burning the theists at the stake. How like a Rationalist!

I don’t think this had anything to do with sectarian violence. Indeed, I suspect the sectarian violence in Iraq itself is fueled by the Pentagon in the hopes of dividing the population.

And what’s with this goofy challenge to define the neologism “acerebralist”??? It doesn’t make much sense. But then that’s true of much of your Rationalism 101. You don’t really care to scientifically define who was killed in Yemen and why or what is the best course to take in the Middle East. No, you just care about ticking off Daryll and Flaco or whoever seems to still believe in that Nobodaddy in the sky that got your knickers in a knot so long ago.

Acerebralist, noun, a person who doesn’t believe metaphysical or supernatural experiences come from the mind. But, as in most negative formations, it really doesn’t define anything. The acerebralist might believe in a personal god or in nothing at all. The term is just too vague. It offers no clarity or precision as a word –not unless one cares to attach an entire philosophy to it.

In this definition it is like “atheist” or “agnostic”. Neither noun clearly defines a person’s standpoint but merely excludes one aspect. An atheist does with god, but does so on faith alone as it is not a provable or disprovable position. What an atheist then thinks of the world remains unclear and, indeed, the types of atheists are legion. An agnostic acknowledges the unsolveable nature of “belief”, but prefers to proceed then without passing judgement.

You will find that the USA is not an Theist or Atheist state, but, according to the First Amendment, it is an Agnostic state.

Empty space – just fill it in with psuedo-science.

I guess you still need faith.

Faith actually has nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.

Comment by unbelievable
————————————————————————

What do you use to fill in the gaps? guess? science or psuedo-science, belief
Provable? not likely. How big are these gaps?

Carl Sagan, David Mills, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Victor Stenger
Aaaha, a list of your gods with their limited knowledge of the universe.

Comment by unbelievable
———————————————————–

Old Testatment- “The fool says in their heart there is no God”.

Comment by unbelievable —

Again limited knowledge no complete proof – you cannot possible know all about the universe as you claim – unless your are god?

Comment by Mr. President

Haw haw. It must be nice to be so simple that you can amuse yourself with utter tripe.