Search This Blog

Sunday, September 01, 2013

The Ubiquitous Lie of Chance, Human Reptile Descent

We cannot be endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights if we do not have a Creator


"The fundamental pseudo-scientific a priori premise of the NAS is this: There is no Creator/Designer. Their deductive conclusion from this arbitrary religious premise is: Therefore, atheist materialist molecules-to-man evolution—what I prefer to call chance human reptile descent—must be true. That is the sum of their a priori pseudo-science. Inductive observation and experiment are utterly absent from their system. The NAS has become an organization of atheist ideologues, not scientists searching for the truth in nature." - Robert Bowie Johnson

This is an essay from the Canada Free Press...Yes, there are patriotic folks who believe in the same things our Founding Fathers did back when America was founded.  Perhaps the foremost oasis in a desert of liberal loonbattism in Canada is the CFP...

The Ubiquitous Lie of Chance, Human Reptile Descent

Author
By Guest Column Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr.

June 12, 2013

In a book review of Brilliant Blunders in the June 9th Washington Post by Mario Levin headlined “Colossal mistakes by towering geniuses,” Outlook contributor Marcia Bartusiak writes:

Darwin, of course, demonstrated that species on Earth were not independently created; instead, the diversity of plants and animals arose over time with adaptations to their environments through natural selection.
The first problem with Bartusiak’s statement is that Darwin “demonstrated” nothing but his own ability to wildly speculate. Charles Darwin was a Scripture-denying materialist philosopher and circular logician, not a scientist. Sir Francis Darwin, as editor of his father’s Life and Letters, wrote of his father’s propensity for speculation that “it was as though he were charged with a theorizing power ready to flow into any channel on the slightest disturbance.” Darwin’s elder brother Erasmus wrote to Charles after reading his copy of The Origin of Species: “The a priori reasoning is so entirely satisfactory to me that if the facts won’t fit in, why so much the worse for the facts is my feeling.”

Facts are required to “demonstrate” a scientific truth. Darwin had no facts, and he knew it. In The Origin of Species, published in 1859, Darwin presented no actual evidence or facts that demonstrated the truth or validity of evolution, or what he called descent with modification. Darwin’s letters reveal that on the very eve of publication, he had not even been able to convince himself. On November 23, 1859, he wrote to his friend, Sir Charles Lyell, “Often a cold shudder runs through me, and I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a phantasy.” Two days later he wrote to Thomas Huxley, “I had awful misgivings, and thought perhaps I had deluded myself as so many have done.”


Darwin knew in his heart that he had produced nothing but a patchwork of incoherent guesses, and so did his friend Lyell who, after reading his copy, suggested to Darwin that “[W]hen, as I fully expect, a new edition is soon called for, you may here and there insert an actual case to relieve the vast number of abstract propositions.”

Darwin’s a priori reasoning was not a step forward for science but a great leap backwards. Theologians in Medieval Europe, also using the apriori method, reasoned from one false proposition to another, until they had built up a great tower of pseudo-science, tempered with false religious mortar, until the great Roger Bacon, and 300 years later, Francis Bacon, with his Novum Organum (New Instrument, observation and experiment) taught people to learn by inductive facts rather than by traditional deduction. Before that time, everybody accepted the teaching of Aristotle, the founder of formal logic, that heavy bodies fall to earth faster than light ones. Galileo disproved it by dropping objects of various weights from the top of the Leaning Tower of Pisa.
True science follows the a posteriori method, insisting that an assertion can only be known to be true on the basis of experience and evidence.

Today, The atheist hierarchy of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) embraces wholeheartedly the Dark Age a priori method of Aristotle and Darwin, and it is from the NAS that Ms. Bartusiak, the Washington Post, and the rest of the unthinking media get their “science.” The fundamental pseudo-scientific a priori premise of the NAS is this: There is no Creator/Designer. Their deductive conclusion from this arbitrary religious premise is: Therefore, atheist materialist molecules-to-man evolution—what I prefer to call chance human reptile descent—must be true. That is the sum of their a priori pseudo-science. Inductive observation and experiment are utterly absent from their system. The NAS has become an organization of atheist ideologues, not scientists searching for the truth in nature.

The second problem with Ms. Bartusiak’s statement is that while “natural selection” sounds impressive to the unlearned and ignorant, it is actually nothing more than a distracting and indefinable figure of speech falsely presented by the NAS to the media and the public as the ultimate be-all and do-all of chance human reptile descent. Nature, however, lacking a mind and a will, has no capacity whatsoever to “select” anything.
In its book, Science, Evolution, and Creationism, the NAS defines natural selection in three contradictory ways: as “the driving force behind evolution” (p. 23), as a “process” (p. 50), and as an outcome or “reproductive success” (p. 5). The “driving force” is unquantifiable; the “process” is indefinable; and the “reproductive success” turns out to be anything and everything we see in nature itself.

The NAS book committee chairman, Francisco J. Ayala, writes about natural selection in some detail in his own book Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion. He offers this most revealing insight:  “However, it is not possible to formulate a satisfactory definition of natural selection” (p. 52, Ayala’s emphasis). A phrase that cannot be satisfactorily defined cannot be satisfactorily understood. Thus, by the admission of NAS’s own book committee chairman, natural selection is not in any sense a scientific explanation, but rather a deceptive figure of speech, an outright personification of nature that disguises the lack of empirical evidence for the alleged evolution of one specific species into another.

The discovery of DNA should have put an immediate end to Darwinist speculation. Why? Because DNA is encoded information, and encoded information as well as information itself always has an intelligent source. Thus, DNA is prima facie proof of intelligent design. If you have never heard that before, please take a few minutes to let it sink in. Ask someone who is still drinking the NAS Kool-Aid to try to refute it. The NAS won’t be able to help them. The NAS has no atheist/materialist explanation for the origin and operation of the complex encoded instructions within living cells. How could they?

Darwinist evolution is the greatest, most despicable, and most often repeated lie of modern times. The members of the NAS hierarchy know that their atheist/materialist standpoint conflicts irreconcilably with belief in the God of the Scriptures, and that their pseudo-science is a direct attack on our nation’s Judeo-Christian tradition, the very foundation of our political life. Here is the conflict laid out as basically as possible:

And creating is the Elohim [God] humanity in His image. In the image of the Elohim He creates it. Male and female He creates them (Genesis 1:27, Concordant Literal Translation)

versus:


Birds and mammals evolved from different lineages of ancient reptiles (The NAS book Science, Evolution, and Creationism, p. 8).

We cannot be endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights if we do not have a Creator. The atheist/materialist pseudo-science of the NAS leads to one political principle only: might makes right. We thus have no inherent God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We get what the ruling government deigns to give us, and we had better be thankful for that. Where else should we expect the insistence upon chance human reptile descent to lead?

Charles Darwin a “towering genius”? Please!

I am confident that regular CFP readers do not now need me to connect the fraud of Darwinist evolution to the social, moral, educational and political decay now rampant in American society.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stormbringer's Thunder has a GREAT post on Atheists and their behavior on blogs and Facebook here.

Trolls on Facebook are all individuals, so not every one of them behaves badly.  But this Christopher Smith fellow who was posting on Facebook made some very simplistic blunders while questioning a post and I was happy to answer his questions.   But he broke the rules of the site and the site administrator banned him.   Before he was banned, his questions were all answered and frankly he really didn't understand evolution nearly as well as the commenters on this blog.  My average troll at least understands the basics of evolution.  They may not see the fundamental errors of the mythology, but they know the narrative.  It was pretty funny that he declared victory after being shredded...



Oh, he got replies.  In fact he got lots of replies.  He thought that 20% of all mutations are favorable and didn't know how speciation worked.  He'd not even heard of Kirschner and Gerhart's work ( Kirschner, M.W. and Gerhart, J.C., The Plausibility of Life: Resolving Darwin’s Dilemma, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 2005).  He thought that there were bacteria that had evolved when in fact the Citrase, Nylonase and Arsenate bacteria were all examples of either a broken mechanism (Citrase) or pre-existing genetic material that we'd not realized was there (Nylonase) or just plain false advertising (Arsenate).  He claimed to go to several links and read them all within a few minutes when he certainly didn't have the time to do so.  He was banned for breaking the forum rules (not my forum, not my call).  Then he goes to some Atheist site to brag on his victory.  

If you want to see a really good post on the problems of Atheists, by all means go to that Stormbringer link and check it out.   Did you know that Atheists are less trusted by the average person than Muslims?  In fact, less trusted than any other group?  

Atheism and Darwinism and Socialism are creating a generation of people who do not really understand critical thinking and have become accustomed to having people think for them.  They are fed sets of so-called facts and expected to spit them back out on tests.  Inquiring minds are not necessarily welcomed.  It is no wonder Americans are beginning to turn to home-schooling.  Public schools and education no longer have a friendly relationship.


165 comments:

Cowboy said...

A second "Christopher Smith" said that he would pretend to be a Christian. He did. He was banned. Is lying and deceit acceptable for the atheist? It seems so, as the apparent Christophobe-In-Charge gave a rant along the lines of "the end justifies the means", which shows that atheists do not have a consistent moral standard.

Mr. [Alex] Gordons posted a link on their Page, and asked if atheists wonder why people do not like them. Here is a reply from Lori Anne Lyons: "Thanks for sharing that, Alex, but no I don't wonder why. Pretty sure I know. We've come out and began to speak, and Christians can't stand it because they used to get to do all the talking.

"People like Ray Comfort paint all atheists as immoral, evil, slaves to Satan, rapists, murderers, liars, Communists, Nazis -- every despicable label you can think of, and you call US hateful?

"Christians pass laws of hate against gays, they want to teach pseudoscience to our schoolchildren, they plaster their religion's dogma on government buildings and finally some of us are standing up and saying no, you don't get free reign anymore. We demand that you share the public forum with us and you cry persecution because you want it all to yourself.

"If what we are doing by finally standing up for our right to free speech and equal consideration is "militant" then so be it. You Christians have been militant forever.

As for atheists who are supposedly embarrassed by other atheists, they need balls. Sorry, that's the truth. Christians aren't namby-pamby about telling us exactly what they think of us and predicting our eternal fate. It's time for atheists to quit the namby-pamby routine as well."

She probably ran out of tissues after all that crying, but the "reasoning" would make for a good pop quiz in a logic class. Count 'em! Again, the end justifies the means.

Lori Lyons said...

"...atheists do not have a consistent moral standard." This one gets really tiresome. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you I have good morals. However, the "moral standard" of Christians is all over the map. The Bible and/or God as a moral standard is a joke, as evidenced by the wide-ranging behavior of Christians, from very good to very VERY BAD.

As for claiming my words are full of logical fallacies, by all means, point out my specific errors. All you did was make an assertion. Back it up.

Cowboy said...

First, an error in my first comment. There was NO "second Christopher Smith", the other Smith was named James.

I see no reason to try to educate Lori. She cannot see her own fallacies, and how she actually proved my point (convenience and "the end justifies the means" for atheist "morality). Then she created a straw man (I did not say that atheists have no morality, but that they have a "consistent moral standard".

With trying to educate people like this, I go with the guidelines of the folly of trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes my time, and annoys the pig.

radar said...

An Atheist can adhere to any moral code he or she wishes. If, as many of them do claim, there is a moral standard established by mankind apart from the moral code of God, I would like to find out what absolutes are the basis for that moral code?

If you are an Atheist who believes in Darwinism, you believe that you randomly evolved from some kind of puddle of glop hit by lightning and somehow evolved up to a thinking human being. However, this means your mind also evolved by blind chance and therefore your ability to think may very well be illusory. You have evolved to think as you think and do as you do and you have no free will. You are strictly a product of evolution.

Logically, a Christian understands that God's law is absolute and also that no one can keep it all the time. Forgiveness and relationship with God comes through Jesus Christ. We do our best to obey God and we do our best to tell people the truth.

Therefore there is a subset of Atheists I call Atheopaths who don't say there is no God, but actually are haters of God. A lot of the commenters who come here are much like Richard Dawkins, an Atheopath.

If you are an Atheist, ask yourself why you bother to argue with Creationists? Why do you work so hard to censor and blackball them, not to mention the same behavior towards Intelligent Design guys, who are not even Creationists? If you truly believed in evolution, you would believe I evolved to believe what I do, you believe what you do and others will believe as they will by their evolved fate. So arguing will, by your own belief system, accomplish nothing.

However, if you believe that people have the freedom of choice to believe what they will, then you do NOT believe you evolved to be who you are and now you have a dilemma...how is it you have a free will and can reason and make decisions if you evolved from muck? If you think all of nature was evolved and it is all blind chance, where do you see the concept of free will sneaking in?

radar said...

I would also ask you, Lori, why your group is so tyrannical? You are afraid of anyone pointing out the lack of evidence for evolution, the immense problems for the entire mythology of Darwinism that have been uncovered by the discovery of DNA and, as we learn more about the cell and DNA and the microscopic world, the foundations of Darwin have cracked and are ready to topple.

The same is true of the fossil rocks, as we now find out that people had found flesh and blood remains in dinosaur fossils but only now is this information coming out. We have an abundance of evidence that all fossils and the entire Earth must be less than 25,000 years old.

All the evidence that could be presented should be, if science was still science. But you Darwinists have taken science back to the Dark Ages, and just as axiomatic philosophy was supported by all aspects of the ruling paradigm then, so too the penalties for disagreement.

You Darwinists are the ones with pseudoscience. That is why you must use censorship and black-balling and threats of losing tenure, occupation and career for daring to even question Darwinism. You cannot refute the fact that your kind rule the world of academia, secular science and you have the media brainwashed. Why would you want to shut the mouths of Creationists and ID guys? If our information is ridiculous and unscientific, would we not be laughed out of the discussion? Would we not be revealed as just plain wrong?

But you fear us because we are RIGHT and you do not want the common man to hear the other side, because you are afraid you will lose your hold on the minds and hearts of the common man. You fear us because we will beat you in a fair fight. This is why Richard Dawkins will NEVER agree to debate Jonathan Sarfati, because he knows Sarfati would, without being cruel, rip Dawkins to shreds. Easily.

You fear us because you cannot refute us. That is why you have censorship organizations like the NCSE. Ask yourself this...if you fear our information now, should you not also fear what is on the other side of this life? Do you think God will give you a pass because you didn't believe?

Lori Lyons said...

Cowboy, point taken. You said "consistent moral standard". But my following words didn't address a strawman, as I said this, which speaks to inconsistency: "the 'moral standard' of Christians is all over the map. The Bible and/or God as a moral standard is a joke, as evidenced by the wide-ranging behavior of Christians, from very good to very VERY BAD."

In pointing out that Christian morals are vastly inconsistent my point is that morality IS inconsistent. You will find as many different moral standards as there are people who hold them, Christian or not.

Then you said this, "I see no reason to try to educate Lori. She cannot see her own fallacies, and how she actually proved my point..." Now YOU are guilty of a fallacy, an ad hom by implying I'm uneducated. A personal attack as a substitute for substance is meaningless, and can be dismissed. If you cannot point out my logical fallacies I must conclude you didn't really find any, which means you lied. So much for YOUR morality.

Bobby Cole said...

I'm just going to address one point. You mention the discovery of flesh and blood in dinosaur fossils. While technically correct, you've either neglected to include the fact that the flesh in question was fossilized and the blood was actually just protein an iron remnants because you're dishonest, or you just flat out didn't know because you haven't taken the time to actually study the research. Either way you've misrepresented those findings in an effort to add credence to your young earth hypothesis (and I'm being very generous calling it a hypothesis when in reality it's nothing more than wishful thinking).

If misinformation and straw man attacks are a vital component to your cause, then obviously your cause isn't worth the time it took me to respond.


http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosaur/blood.html

Anonymous said...

There is no evidence to suggest that the dinosaur soft tissue discovered means that the fossils are less than 25,000 year old. This is a lie.

Lori Lyons said...

radar,
1)You said, "I would like to find out what absolutes are the basis for [a moral code outside the moral code of God]?"

I don't believe there is an 'absolute' moral code.

2)"...you believe that you randomly evolved from some kind of puddle of glop hit by lightning and somehow evolved up to a thinking human being."

NOT what I believe; a strawman.

3)"if you believe that people have the freedom of choice to believe what they will, then you do NOT believe you evolved to be who you are and now you have a dilemma...how is it you have a free will and can reason and make decisions if you evolved from muck? If you think all of nature was evolved and it is all blind chance, where do you see the concept of free will sneaking in?"

I won't even address the strawman you smuggled in there, but just the concept of free will. There are questions in the scientific community as to whether there even is such a thing as free will. There may not be. That's probably a conversation for another day, as it's long and complicated, and I've read little about it.

4)"We do our best to obey God and we do our best to tell people the truth."

Yes I know you sincerely do what you think you must. I have a level of respect for that, as I have Christian family and friends whom I love and respect and I know they are sincere as well. However, I've come to a place of non belief, and see harm in Christian faith so I speak against it. I do what I believe I must just as you do.

radar said...

Bobby, you just do not know the science and evidence. Dinosaur fossils have revealed flesh, blood and even DNA. Go ahead and cling to your falsehoods, talkorigins is a great place to find lies nicely packaged for you.

Lori, I am astounded! You have no idea how refreshing it is to hear from an honest Darwinist.

As to the "strawman", I was paraphrasing Dr. Will Provine, a dedicated Atheist and someone who believes he has laid out a good case for the lack of free will. It is true that I cannot apply his philosophy to you.

We seem to agree in a way. You believe for some reason that Christianity is harmful and I believe for reasons I have stated for many years that Darwinism is harmful to humanity.

But I thank you for your reasoned and snark-free comments. I usually get unsupported authoritative statements along with the accusation that I am lying or people trying to take the discussion down rabbit trails or just ad hominem attacks. Thank you for your reasoned replies.

Would you care to share with us, if you like, the basis for your moral code? I am glad to have a genuine dialogue without accusations and rancor.

radar said...

" Anonymous said...
There is no evidence to suggest that the dinosaur soft tissue discovered means that the fossils are less than 25,000 year old. This is a lie."

I am not lying, I am just looking at the entire fossil record. If you calibrate C-14 properly, then the amount of C-14 in dinosaur fossils yields an age of less than 25,000 years.

Did you know C-14 is not in equilibrium in the atmosphere with C-12, which indicates that the atmosphere is less than 25,000 years old? Did you know that C-14 is found in all fossils in all layers and even in diamonds?

Did you know that granitic zircons still contain helium atoms, indicating that they are, at most, 6-8,000 years old? Did you know that the radiohaloes found in rocks indicate a remarkable set of circumstances that can be explained by a recent global flood and would otherwise be inexplicable?

Did you know that the strength of the magnetic field of the Earth has been measured since about 1600, so we have a very reliable idea of the half-life of the field and it gives the Earth an upper limit of 25,000 years?

Also, Bobby Cole may not realize he is lying, but even the Darwinist paleontologist who found remains in a T. Rex, Mary Schweitzer, has argued that the remains and blood are genuine in that fossil. Her honesty has caused paleontologists around the world to check fossils for remains and now all sorts of fossils have turned out to have actual flesh and blood remains. I may post on one particular Triceratops horn soon that really kneecaps long ages.

Bobby Cole said...

Did you really just invoke the findings of Mary Schweitzer to validate your claims? You're more dishonest and arrogant than I thought. It's actually amazing watching such self-aggrandizement in action.

Where are you getting your information by the way? I haven't found a single scientific journal that backs up a word you say regarding blood and tissue, unless you want to include AIG or CMI, but anyone who respects the scientific method wouldn't do such a thing. Any organization that readily admits to ignoring evidence should be ignored.

Since you don't accept Talk Origins, which I can only assume is because you know you're wrong in every aspect, and your ego is too fragile to accept such punishment, how about a creation science source that demonstrates how completely full of garbage you are? Would you be willing to remove your head from your rear end long enough to read a review of the findings written by Christian scientists who don't agree with you? Or will you respond that they aren't "True Christians™" thus nullifying their input in your eyes?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/dinosaur-blood

radar said...

Bobby Cole, classic troll

Hey, that could be the start of a rap song!

Unlike Lori's reasoned response, your ad hominem rant is like an exhibit that an attorney might enter into a court case.

"Your honor, here is a typical troll rant. Dripping with venom, using a link that sidesteps the issues and depending upon a site that has proved to be deliberately deceptive (talkorigins)."

Why should I dialogue with someone as disrespectful and crass as this? Anyone?

radar said...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090729103737.htm

Mary S. asserted after careful testing that the actual remains were detected and even Science Daily agreed and published the findings four years ago. Much more has been uncovered in dino fossils since then. So Bobby, you are a few years behind.

In 2012, Nature published the following: http://www.nature.com/news/molecular-analysis-supports-controversial-claim-for-dinosaur-cells-1.11637

Molecular analysis and chemical reactive testing and observational tests all confirm flesh and blood remains in that supposedly 80 million year old fossil. Since these remains cannot survive for millions of years, this is a real problem for Darwinists! But then pretty much everything we have learned about fossils and organisms and geology in the 21st Century has been bad news for Darwinism.

It is only a matter of time. The ruling paradigm held tightly to the geocentric Solar System despite the assertions of Christian/Theists like Copernicus. But eventually the truth won out. Darwinism slowly crept into the academic and scientific community, in many ways on the wings of fraud and lies. Haeckel's chart, Huxley's precipitate, the horse evolution chart, the long-age geological (but mythical) geological column...

While Darwinism no longer has evidence to uphold it the stranglehold on money and prestige and position allows Darwinism to rule. But the Berlin Wall fell eventually. So, too, will the Evolution Fairy be sent to the Fable Room with the likes of the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.

Cowboy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cowboy said...

Lori is a classic example of modern atheopaths in action. She trolled a Christian Page on Facebook (she came to them and started her shenanigans). After putting up with her nonsense, the Page banned her. So she made another Facebook account under the same name so she could continue. Ego problems?

On her own Page, she encouraged and applauded lying and trolling.

She has defended herself for being "moral", yet says she does not believe that there is an absolute moral code. How can she be "moral", if there is nothing to measure it with? She is in rebellion against God and rejects the Bible. Her screeds reek of anti-Christian bigotry. Further, using her presuppositions, she says that morals change according to the individual.

So why is it wrong to criticize atheists for being selfish, dishonest, manipulative and arrogant? Why is it wrong to describe how so many modern atheists are counterproductive to society? What right to atheists have to complain because people do not like them? By the way, the dislike is not because they are atheists, but because of their obstreperous antics.

Did you know that atheism is linked to autism? Yes, you can read about that here and here.

As for Bobby Cole...never mind.

Lori Lyons said...

Cowboy, this is probably the last time I will speak directly to you, as you never speak to me. It’s “Lori this” and “she that”. What’s your problem that you can’t just talk to somebody?

Yep, I went to a Christian Facebook page. A PUBLIC page, by the way. Did you even read the thread that got me banned? I was responding to the OP quite calmly and without any abusive language, and addressing the subject he/she brought up in the first place. Yes, I disagreed, but – news flash – disagreement is NOT trolling. Even so, it’s their page so of course they can ban for any reason they see fit. I can also create another profile to go back and respond if I want to, as long as it’s a PUBLIC PAGE. Facebook provides an option for a closed group if all they want is to inbreed their own ideas and procreate them to grotesque proportions.

For the last time, I’ll put this out there. You asserted that my words were full of logical fallacies. To this point you have refused to point them out specifically so that I may respond. All you have done is continue to commit ad hom fallacies. If this is the only way you have of communicating, I’m done with you. However, if you wish address the subject of my supposed fallacies I will respond to you again, but ONLY if you speak to me directly. No more “Lori did this and that”. Are you scared you’ll get “evil atheist” on you over the internet if you talk to me?

Lori Lyons said...

radar, you call me a “Darwinist”. Please don’t. You seem to be taking a page from Ray Comfort’s playbook. He is not a shining example of knowledge about evolution. The study of evolution has come a long way since Darwin. I accept the theory of evolution as it is understood today, and I reject the label “Darwinist”.

You asked about my basis for morality. In my experience speaking with Christians, too often they TELL me what I think instead of asking me, so I appreciate your question. A prime component of human morality is empathy. Studies seem to indicate that perhaps babies are born with the capacity for empathy. Very young children (2 or 3 yrs. old) display it. Humans are a social species; we depend on each other for survival, so it’s crucial that we care for each other. I want to live and not die, so I understand that my fellow humans probably wish to live as well. I don’t want anyone to steal my stuff so I realize that others most likely feel the same way. I not only extend to others the rights and considerations I wish for myself, but I can feel their pain when those things are refused them. It’s not hard to understand. There is no reason to think these concepts come from a god, especially the Christian God, whose morality is questionable as evidenced by his supposed acts in the Bible.

So, that’s the short version for you. I didn’t want to bore you with a treatise, lol.

radar said...

Lori, doesn't your description of empathy-based morality fly in the face of the survival of the fittest? If all organisms are struggling to be the survivors and pass their strain forward as well as dominate their particular territory, why would they be kind to rival males or females? We see plenty of examples of cooperation in nature, from colonies like ants and symbiotic relationships of various kinds and the herds or schools some organisms prefer. But this behavior seems to be awkward compared to the survival of the fittest idea.

"There is no reason to think these concepts come from a god, especially the Christian God, whose morality is questionable as evidenced by his supposed acts in the Bible."

Since God establishes morality, by what standard do you question His morality? I would hope you will not borrow the moral code of God to question God? The USA was built on that foundation and England turned towards the foundation of the Biblical law to revise their society. So the last two great world powers that promoted freedom to both worship or not worship, to succeed based on your own efforts and not be kept within one's class were based on the Biblical code. I will grant you that England's class system died out over time and there is a last gasp of pretension alive there still. But the USA actually managed to attain to freedom for all.

If God created, then He has made everything and everyone and He makes the rules. But that is a side issue here. The real question is actually is it even possible to get a Universe or a living organism from nothing? If you are an Atheist and do not believe in a God, then how do you explain the fact that we exist?

See, that is where people like Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss greatly err. They observe the behavior of subatomic particles and assume that, since particles seem to disappear and reappear that a Universe could do the same. But we observe that said particles always exist, they can just be in different places at different times without apparently traveling.

Quantum Mechanics is not well understood by anyone. Those who make it their life's work will say this themselves. How is it that a particle will only take on a spin when being observed but will otherwise be capable of being in any of the spin states otherwise? To quote Higgins and Bergman:

"The underlying subatomic fabric does not behave in a way that our minds can easily understand. For instance, a subatomic object appears to have properties of both a particle with mass and a wave (like sound waves) with energy. The way an individual will see a subatomic object, as particle or wave, depends on how the individual constructs the experiment. But when you're not observing it, any subatomic object exists in a stable and undefined state called “a stationary probability wave.” Fixed points of reality do not really exist in the pre-observational subatomic world. When an observation is made, the object “actualizes” by collapsing into one of the many forms dictated by its probability wave, and the particle appears to come into being in that instant. So in reality nothing exists until you look at it."

radar said...

Now the above statement is one of the problems of QM that will confuse the greatest minds. Higgins and Bergman say that the particle does not exist, but actually it MUST exist and the math supports their existence. It is the state and position of said particles which is not set unless one is observing it.

This is the behavior of subatomic particles in a material world that has already been created. This week I will be putting up something about the assertions of Krauss, but let's just simplify what Hawking asserts - that because there is gravity, a Universe must come into existence. But gravity only works when mass is present. If there is no mass, there is no gravity. In fact, where does the force of gravity come from? How could gravity BE when there is not even nothing yet?

The Cosmological Argument applies here:

1-Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

2-The Universe began to exist.

3-Therefore, the Universe has a cause.

That is the basic argument. For the Universe to have been started, it needed an agent to begin it, to bring it into existence. God is the eternal, uncaused agent sufficient to make the Universe from nothing - ex nihilo. People like Krauss and Hawking want it to create itself. This is illogical, especially when calling on forces that only exist if existence has been created.

When someone like Krauss then calls on the Landscape argument and claims that infinite Universes (dichotomy) would include one where everything evolved to be like ours. One of many problems with this, other than a complete lack of evidence, is that in an infinite number of existences there would be one with the Supernatural Creator and then He would be responsible for all of them or just the one that we can observe.

So I can make a logical argument for God the Creator and I could go to the Teleological Argument but I bet you know that one as well? So I get to the meat of the issues. What does the evidence best support? That everything has randomly evolved from nothing for no reason? Or, that everything was made and for a specific reason.

Notice my next post will focus on evidence and not philosophy. I do find it curious that so many people such as yourself, Lori, want to argue with Creationists since we either evolved to believe what we believe (the no free will version of Darwinism espoused by men such as Will Provine) or the even more miraculous idea that we could evolve to be able to think rationally and logically purely by chance and actually do have the ability to think and make choices.

If we can reason and make moral choices, is there no standard, no absolute by which morality can be judged? If the moral code of God is used, then to lie is wrong. Many commenters falsely accuse me of lying, which is probably a standard thing to do in the commenter handbook for Darwinists? But if you believe you were evolved, wouldn't lying to improve your place in the world be the right thing to do? Isn't survival of the fittest the primary rule?

N

radar said...

Next part...

Notice I use Darwinism as a general term but address you, Lori, by name rather than put the label on you. I use Darwinism/Darwinist because it is much faster than to say Atheistic Materialistic Naturalistic Neo-Darwinist/Macroevolutionist. That is so much to type after all.

I actually do understand the modern interpretation of Macroevolution. I was a paleontology student as a minor when I first when to college and had been field studying fossils from the time I was a kid. I've spent a lot of time in the Midwest, the Southeast, the Northwest climbing around on rocks, walking up and down creeks, seeking fossils.

Perhaps I was really a naturalist because I loved to catch and release wildlife as well? In any event I have had my hands on myriad fossils and studied lots of different rock formations firsthand rather than just reading books or going online. I've walked on beds of buried bivalves and trilobites, all closed or upright, indicating burial in situ...I've seen the cake-like layering on cliff faces and mountainsides. I've dug and extracted things like whole trilobites and even found a Coprolite in the Cincinnati Uplift periphery where there is limestone, sandstone and shale...kind of a surprise, that! Mostly sea floor fossils in the limestone and fish or ferns and such in the shale. There is actually some great slate in the Whitewater River basin as well. That was my favorite fossil area.

It is interesting that the Northern Illinois limestone also has trilobites and yet I found trilobites in what I would term mudrock as well as limestone in Southern Indiana. There is some limestone there that is brown and not hardened like the white limestone that is used for building materials, somewhat friable, and this rock layer also yielded the same bivalves and trilobites that the standard limestone held. I found that to be remarkable as a Darwinist and Agnostic. It makes sense in a Flood scenario. I kept some of this rock and placed it in one of our gardens and it is quickly breaking up from weathering now. It can be separated into wafer-thin layers once it begins to weather. but the trilobite I took from that layer was hard. I gave it to my brother when I was drafted in case I would be killed in the war...but I stayed stateside and he lost it, along with my other fossils and arrowheads I gave him and my WWI gas mask and helmet from my grandfather. Oh well...

Piltdown Superman said...

Notice how she didn't address any of the things that I actually listed.

radar said...

"The air so heavy, it could drown a butterfly if it flew too high.."

A quote from "Falling Or Flying?" by Grace Potter and the Nocturnals.

The entire philosophy of evolution is that of falling...falling that somehow takes you up instead of down. But Darwin actually wrote about the "Descent" and not the "Ascent" of man in his second book, "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex" and yet those who believe in evolution believe that mistakes build complex and sophisticated organisms. This is so illogical!

As an ISO 9001/2/3 auditor, part of my job was to review the systems in place at my corporation that were supposed to be followed to eliminate mistakes. Mistakes are costly and mistakes shipped to customers could cost us business, so we implemented Quality Process Controls and Kaizen as well. We had timely, random sampling of all products being run on every line and tested them against the standards set for said products.

We not only tested our products, we also had standards for the measuring devices and tools and these had to be compared to benchmarks. We had a safe with a box that had benchmark weights that were used to compare to readings on our weigh scales and we had true measurements to compare to our measuring implements.

We also had to review the records of tests performed and the results and make sure these tests were performed and look for faked entries that were statistically outliers. For instance, if a sag test on a run of asphalt-based mastic was exactly the same for an entire shift, you knew the law of averages made that unlikely and the responsible party had just written in the same values for his entire 8 hour shift. That would be an audit "ding" and too many of them would fail us.

As auditors, our job was to identify any weaknesses or malfunctions in our Quality Process Controls in order to assure consistent product production and also that we would pass an outside audit when it would be conducted. Next, why this matters...

radar said...

Creationists also believe that all organisms are falling. Organisms are descended from the original kinds created by God, and those created kinds (baramin) were without flaws or mutations. Once sin came into the world, then mutations could and would begin to accumulate in the genetic pool of each kind of organisms.

Bacteria and Archaea can be so simple that their mutated forms simply die and do not pass on their copying mistakes to their descendants. So Prokaryotes are not in grave danger of extinction.

Eukaryotes are the rest of the plant and animal kingdom and include all higher forms with complexity and with nucleic cells. Mankind, for instance, is suffering from genetic entropy as John Sanford dubbed it, the accumulation of mutations that will eventually kill us. Falling is actually not going to give you more complex and sophisticated organisms, it is going to deteriorate them until they go extinct.

We can blame predation and ecosystem changes for some extinctions and the Noahic Flood could be responsible for some others. Did even one trilobite survive the Flood? Since we have only inspected about 5% of the oceans, there may well be a place or two where they are alive and well. After all, the Coelecanth turned up after (by Darwinist time scales) having been missing for some 70-80 million years.

As to flying, well, at the end of this life you will either be "flying" forward into the presence of your loving Creator or "falling" into a place of judgment by that same God that you rejected during your short time in this world.

That is my informed opinion. I believe the Bible is the Word of God the Creator. I believe that Truth comes from God and therefore what He says goes. Epistemology is very important to me. My faith is not an accident of birth or circumstance as I was a very skeptical person who studied all sorts of religions and philosophies. Now I find Christianity to be very logical and Creation by God is supported by the evidence. So I stand firm as a YEC and put forth information that supports that point of view.

There is no objective truth that we can PROVE to be Truth. Everyone must accept a subjective starting point for their worldview. However, one worldview WILL prove to be objective Truth...and it cannot be proven until this life ends and you find out what lies ahead. I am confident in my choice.

Lori Lyons said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lori Lyons said...

Lol, now it makes sense. "Cowboy", alias "Piltdown Superjerk" is the nasty admin over at QEP. Hahaha! He should just go back to his tiny world of inbred ideas and not bother posting anything else here about me. I'm done with him.

radar, you wrote me a book, lol, but I do want to respond when I have time. I may not address every point you made, but there are a few that stood out and I will reply when I can. Unfortunately it probably won't be today. Have a good day!

Cowboy said...

"Cowboy", alias "Piltdown Superjerk" is the nasty admin over at QEP. Hahaha! He should just go back to his tiny world of inbred ideas and not bother posting anything else here about me. I'm done with him."

I think she just proved my points. Ridicule, name calling, prejudicial conjecture and more added to the list of her "morality". Never could admit to all the crimes that I called her on.

By the way, there are several Admins at TQEP. Another arbitrary assumption fail. Rebellion against God is an ugly thing.

radar said...

Piltdown is a good guy, one who has been jerked around by Facebook administrators, not a jerk. I know he has been subjected to utterly ridiculous bans and deletions on that obviously biased social interaction site. If Facebook keeps up the liberal censorship and arbitrary punishment of conservatives and creationists, it could lose the market share. It is only a matter of time before another site would step up to take their place. Remember, it didn't take long for FB to make Myspace obsolete.

Most commenters who disagree with me also use ridicule and bravado and pretention as weapons of choice rather than evidence. If those who disagree with me were civilized individuals, they would not resort to those tactics and would not be scolded by me for it.

If you will live by the sword, you will die by the sword. I take up the sword on defense and do not take it out of the sheath first, but if a duel must take place I will parry and thrust. It seems Piltdown has faced these tactics for so long that he walks around with sword already drawn. Considering what he faces on a regular basis, it is understandable.

Lori Lyons said...

radar, you have been decent in your comments to me, but I’m disappointed to see you defend Piltdown. I don’t know him; if I met him I’d probably like him as I tend to like people in general. However, bad behavior is bad, even when done by a ‘nice guy’ and regardless of whether he’s in your camp or not.

PD asserted that I “proved [his] points." He said "Ridicule, name calling, prejudicial conjecture and more added to the list of [Lori’s] 'morality'." Wow, this is a case of, ‘when you point the finger, there are three more pointing back at you.’ Here is a sampling of his comments on this page alone:

“Atheists are bigots.”
“Is lying and deceit acceptable for the atheist? It seems so…”
"…the end justifies the means for atheist morality.”
“…trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes my time, and annoys the pig.”
“…atheists [are] selfish, dishonest, manipulative and arrogant… many modern atheists are counterproductive to society.”
Lastly, in a shamefully lame ad hom he says “Did you know that atheism is linked to autism?” Good grief.

Look, I’ve had a couple of comments deleted by Facebook and even got blocked once. But in reading their Community Standards, I freely admit I violated them. Facebook doesn’t block and delete capriciously. No matter how “right” PD thinks he is, he obviously violated the guidelines. He’s not exempt from them, nor is he above the same rules that apply to everyone else. He needs to get off his self-righteous high-horse, join humanity and learn to have a respectful, decent conversation.

radar, if you're still interested, I plan to respond to your question about morality. I have some thoughts I'd like to share. Have a good day.

Lori Lyons said...

radar, you said, “doesn't your description of empathy-based morality fly in the face of the survival of the fittest?” It’s my understanding that survival of the fittest is too simplistic as a description for evolution. While it contains some truth, the idea it conveys actually leads to a false conclusion. I’m by no means an expert on evolution, but I’ve tried to understand the basics.

Evolution has no goal in mind, survival or anything else. It is simply beneficial changes over time in populations. An adaptation that gives an animal survivability long enough to reproduce may in fact not keep extinction at bay in the long term, as evidenced by the fact that most species that have existed are now extinct. Other traits apparently HAVE promoted long-term survival, and in social species empathy seems to be one of them. As you pointed out, cooperation/symbiotic relationships are observed in ants and others. Closer to us, apes seem to enforce group rules and punishments of their own when rules are broken. As well, interactions akin to empathy can be observed in species other than humans.

You brought up abiogenesis as well. I would like to keep this conversation about morality and leave evolution and abiogenesis for another time. I find it hard to address this variety of topics at the same time. It gets confusing for me and I tend to abandon the conversation altogether. Would you mind if we kept this on the subject of morality?

As to morality you said: “Since God establishes morality, by what standard do you question His morality?” In your question itself are a couple of problems for me. Isn’t this discussion specifically about WHERE morality originates? You’ve flown right past the subject in question all the way to “God establishes morality”. We need to back up. Since I don’t believe in the Christian God, your question becomes meaningless to me.

I know it’s considered bad form to respond to questions with questions, but I find it impossible to answer yours as you’ve worded them. Would you be willing to clairfy a couple of things to help me respond to your questions?

1.) What makes something morally wrong?
2.) What makes something morally right/good?

I look forward to your response.

radar said...

If we leave evolution out of the equation for a moment, Lori, since you asked me about morality?

"I know it’s considered bad form to respond to questions with questions, but I find it impossible to answer yours as you’ve worded them. Would you be willing to clairfy a couple of things to help me respond to your questions?

1.) What makes something morally wrong?
2.) What makes something morally right/good?"


So my belief is that God created the Universe and therefore it belongs to him. So in the immortal code of the sandlot, His ball = His rules. His rules are spelled out in the Bible. So that is the short answer.

However, it goes beyond that. God is Spirit and He is all Light and Good. To be good is to be like God. In Him is no darkness at all. He IS perfection and we cannot fully comprehend Him as mortal beings. The Bible is His message to us, presenting what He wants us to know about Him and life and history.

God made man and then woman and they were innocent. They did not know good or evil. They chose to know despite God's admonition and therefore rebelled. Sin entered into the world.

We know that God was worshiped by the family line of Adam on down to Noah. Noah's descendants kept an account of the history of the human race, including the Flood and Moses was ordered by God to collect and write down the history of mankind and also pass on the Laws of God to the Children of Israel.

This Law of God is the standard for human morality. Some people think there are ten commandments, but actually there were 613 in total, many of them sacrificial and ceremonial in nature that were fulfilled by Christ and no longer apply to anyone who accepts Christ.

Christ Himself summarized the Law in two statements from Matthew 22:36-40- “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

So my morality is based on the Law of God. We know the ten commandments were used as a basis for English and American law. The practical application was spelled out by Jesus Himself. It is more than any of us can always obey, which is why we need forgiveness. But it is a goal to which we aspire nonetheless.

Cowboy said...

I see that Lori is compounding her errors and displaying seething hate. It looks like I am not entitled to express my opinion about her antics and double standards. But I will anyway, since she's attacking, I will parry and return.

"radar, you have been decent in your comments to me, but I’m disappointed to see you defend Piltdown. I don’t know him; if I met him I’d probably like him as I tend to like people in general. However, bad behavior is bad, even when done by a ‘nice guy’ and regardless of whether he’s in your camp or not. "

A bit of guilt by association, and a circumstantial ad hominem.

" Wow, this is a case of, ‘when you point the finger, there are three more pointing back at you.’ "

Tu quoque fallacy.

Then she selected some of my comments, such as "atheists are bigots", and others. Did she mention how she did not bother to read the articles I listed that proved my points? Nope, don't see that happening. Just edited, selective citing and out of context remarks.

“Is lying and deceit acceptable for the atheist? It seems so…”

As she is proving again, here, since I was confronting her about approving of and encouraging lying, which is documented.

"…the end justifies the means for atheist morality.”

In response to her comments that lead to that conclusion.

“…trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes my time, and annoys the pig.”

Problem?

“…atheists [are] selfish, dishonest, manipulative and arrogant… many modern atheists are counterproductive to society.”

Since you indicated that it is acceptable to use the tu quoque fallacy, I will indulge in it as well to show her double standards: Two standards, no waiting. That Page on Facebook is full of diatribes, ridicule and attacks on Christians (plus approval of lying, remember), mischaracterizations, misrepresentations and many logical fallacies couched in pseudo-intellectual posturing and rhetoric. Meanwhile, I am speaking from my own experiences and observations, and have documented many cases that back up my claims.

"Lastly, in a shamefully lame ad hom he says “Did you know that atheism is linked to autism?” Good grief."

Nope. Science. Again, if she had <bothered to read the articles, she would not be humiliating herself here.

Too bad she has yet to show where she gets her morality (which is demonstrated to be based on convenience and preference, and without a consistent moral standard), in typical atheist fashion, she dodges the question and begins interrogating Radar.

Cowboy said...

"Facebook doesn’t block and delete capriciously. No matter how “right” PD thinks he is, he obviously violated the guidelines. He’s not exempt from them, nor is he above the same rules that apply to everyone else. He needs to get off his self-righteous high-horse, join humanity and learn to have a respectful, decent conversation."

This is so full of fallacies and personal attacks, it is not worth dissecting.

But I will say that Facebook most definitely does block and delete capriciously, and I have many people to attest to that fact. Meanwhile, atheopaths are free to blaspheme, use obscenities and more. Complain to Atheistbook, and you'll get, "Not a violation of community standards".

I am going to write another article, this one about this kind of subject. One Admin was banned from posting for 12 hours because he quoted an atheist and pointed out the logical fallacies. Somehow, that was a violation of their "standards". The next day, another Admin was banned for posting for 12 hours in a separate incident. His crime? Dismantling the faulty logic of an atheist. A Conservative political Page mentioned how everyone gets blocked on their Page, so on ours, we instituted a "no discussion" policy, we just ban so we don't have all Admins blocked from posting or have the Page deleted because a Christophobe is "offended" because his or her bad logic was pointed out.

radar said...

I wonder why the Darwinists do not comment on the very carefully laid out information on the Noahic Flood I have presented lately?

1) They figure a comment will draw more readers?

2) They have no evidence to refute the information?

3) They just like fighting with Cowboy aka Piltdown?

BTW that new canyon found under Greenland's ice cap sure does look like great evidence for the Flood and no explanation from the opposition. This week a shard of pottery confirmed the rule of King Solomon at around 971 BC and did seem to indicate that Hebrew and Egyptian writing is more similar when going back in time.

Also, enough DNA was found in a Mammoth to help bring the Mammoth back out of the elephant DNA. More and more collagen, blood, DNA and other flesh remains are found in fossils and many frozen organisms have amazing freshness - no surprise to Creationists who would place all frozen organisms as being made during the Post_Flood ice age. Since we believe all fossils were made in the last 4500 years, flesh remains in dinosaurs and other organisms is expected, not shocking.

Lori Lyons said...

Radar, your analogy “…the immortal code of the sandlot, His ball = His rules” is understandable. Certainly a child’s sandbox is his property and he has the right to make the rules there.

However, I still have a dilemma is responding to you. In keeping with your example using a child, consider this. If you ask a three-year-old toddler why drawing on the walls with a crayon is wrong, he’d probably say Mommy will punish you for doing it. For him, that “why” is good enough. But it doesn’t really answer the question. The real reason is that it’s destructive to property and forces another to clean up his mess.

We teach very young children that actions are right or wrong based on commands from authority, and that is perfectly acceptable as they are too young to understand the potential harm of their conduct to themselves and others. But as their understanding matures they can grasp the real reasons for acting in accordance with rules.

Most of your last response consisted of again bringing God into morality, and to reiterate, I don’t believe a god has anything to do with it. So in order for us to have a conversation we can both participate in, may I ask you to try to put into practical terms why an action is morally right or wrong? A working definition.

radar said...

Lori,

There is the subjective and there is the objective.

I was raised as the "All-American Boy." My parents raised me with the classic Biblical morality to some extent. But God was not part of it all. We didn't go to church and I was raised to make my own choices.

With no absolute standard of morality I found myself, as a young adult, getting pretty wild and I decided that as long as I wasn't hurting anyone else, I would do whatever I wanted to do. But you always hurt people when you are selfish, even when you don't plan on it.

Back then I had a subjective morality, based on what I wanted to do without winding up in jail, what I thought was the best thing to do for me. Yes, even when I was kind to someone I think I was getting satisfaction out of being a good guy now and then.

Truth is, there is no such thing as a "good guy" even though we like to use that phrase. I realize this now, because my morality doesn't belong to me. I found an objective Truth. I am not alone. For thousands of years, there have been men and women who recognized the Bible as containing absolute morality.

There has always been a struggle between the subjective versus the objective morality. Cain's subjective concept of an offering to God was not accepted. Abel's obedience to God was based on objective truth. Cain then got angry and killed Abel.

Now in society we see the struggle between the subjective morality of man versus the objective morality of God. The subjective morality of man has decided that murdering babies is okay if they are within the womb. They have decided sexual deviancy is a right rather than a problem. It is based to a great extent on expediency.

All that to say that I do not recognize morality that is based on anything but the teachings of the Bible. People, being fallible, can claim to adhere to the Bible and fail either deliberately or through weakness.

You can make a long list of Christians behaving badly and pseudo-Christians who pretend to be what they are not. You can also name nations based on the Bible that have failed. At the same time you can name people who are considered great men and women who did not believe in the Creator God. That is by the judgment of men and not God.

My wife and I were both party animals who changed our devotion from all about self to wanting to be all about God. We are not always successful. The graph is not a smooth upward line, it wiggles up and down on the way but the direction has remained on the upward path towards living like Christ would have us live.

It is not our job to judge others. God is the judge. I think that is the point. I accept that God provided us with absolutes and therefore there is an objective morality. At the end of the temporal world God will judge. He'll compare every life to the standard of perfection. I will depend on the forgiveness of Christ because my absolute best will never measure up to perfection and that is the standard.

So I cannot discuss morality without pointing to God. Because I believe this with all my heart, I warn everyone who does not believe and try to inform everyone who reads my blog. I can point to evidence that makes Darwinism a failed hypothesis. I do this to help point people to the real God. Not to get "brownie points" with God.

There is only one choice that is critical in life. Will you accept Jesus Christ as Savior or will you reject Him? Everything we say or do is affected by that choice.

So if anyone is working to stop people from finding Christ, they are working on the side of the enemy of mankind and God. So I resist people who fight against God and work to bring those who are not sure over to the right side and to encourage those who believe that their faith is supported by temporal evidence as well as eternal Truth.



radar said...

Funny...I find a cable channel that purports to reveal "Life and planets elsewhere:Science/Nature." Suuuure that is science! Then a commercial comes on declaring the new Subaru is "intelligently designed?" The irony is too rich!

It's Saturday, no idea if I am even going to blog tonight or not. But I am going to get a laugh out of this show! They are already trying to suggest that Mars had a global flood while of course they deny that happened on Earth? Wow.

Lori Lyons said...

radar, the only definition you’re apparently willing to offer for morally right and morally wrong is that which God commands. Please know I understand that way of thinking, as I was a Christian for many years. However, I’m not asking for a definition that’s secular or ungodly. Don’t you think God had a reason for delivering each of his commands? For instance, when he said, “Thou shalt not steal”, he had a reason, didn’t he? What I’m asking for is the reason behind the reason. Yes, your basis that something is morally right or wrong is because God said so. But that’s as unconvincing to me as if your neighbor Mr. Jones said I should do such and such. The REAL reason stealing is immoral is that taking what belongs to another leads to suffering, loss and pain, isn’t it?

So, I offer the following:

1.) An action is morally right if it promotes well-being, happiness and health to me and/or to other sentient beings.
2.) An action is morally wrong if it harms and diminishes well-being, happiness and health to me and/or to other sentient beings.

Do you believe God delivered his rules arbitrarily without a basis? Or did he have a reason – to promote the happiness, health and well-being of his creation?

Would you accept my definitions, and if not, how would you amend them to satisfy you?

radar said...

I thought I was pretty clear. I consider God to be smarter than me. So therefore I consider His Law to be beyond my ability to judge. To judge, one must have the credentials to rule on a matter. In our judicial system, a judge is supposed to be a lawyer who is well-versed in the legal matters that he will asked to adjudicate.

I am not in a position to rule on the Law of God. I am rather subject to it. Now, as to your premises:

1.) An action is morally right if it promotes well-being, happiness and health to me and/or to other sentient beings.
2.) An action is morally wrong if it harms and diminishes well-being, happiness and health to me and/or to other sentient beings.


These are subjective statements. Our society has made it legal to kill babies in the womb. By using ultrasound technology, we have seen that babies try to avoid the utensils of the abortionist. We also know that babies move to music, react to their parent's voices and other evidence that identifies the baby in the womb as a sentient being. Yet in our society it is legal to murder them in the womb.

So we see that subjective morality is prone to be a matter of opinion. I say abortion is murder but right now the law of the USA says it is legal. I lay that at the feet of Darwin and his cousin, Francis Galton and a parade of Eugenicists that followed.

If fallible human judges and lawyers conspired to make murder of babies, the most innocent of our citizens, legal, then how can anyone depend on fallible man to determine right and wrong?

radar said...

American Law was based on the ten commandments. It was crucial to determining the basic law of the land.

I can state what is lawful or unlawful by American and local laws. However, the continuing secularization of society has caused the American laws to stray from the fundamental laws of God.

I will therefore go back to what Jesus said:

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

Lori Lyons said...

You said, “I consider God to be smarter than me. So therefore I consider His Law to be beyond my ability to judge.”

Alright, we’re not going to have an agreed-upon definition of right and wrong, obviously.

Let me ask you then, can you give a definition of ‘good’? You said previously that God is good. Do you mean God=good? As in A=A (Logic 101)? We may have a sort of common ground there as I also believe good=good. However, our statements are somewhat pointless until we have an explanation of what good means.

What do you mean when you say God is good?

radar said...

The Biblical defintion of "good" is perfect. To be perfect you must do everything you should do and never not do what you should do. This is impossible for you or me to do.

Paul echoes Psalms 14 when he says in Romans chapter 3:10-12

"As it is written:

“There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable;
There is none who does good, no, not one."


Jesus is the only man, being the Son of God, ever to meet these standards.

In daily life we make comparative statements of good. Adolf Hitler was bad for killing millions of Jews, Christians, diseased people and political dissidents. Winston Churchill was good for rallying the people of Britain to hold on during incredible hardships and keep the Germans from invading them and taking over Europe.

My neighbor is good for mowing his yard regularly. There is some teenage driver who is bad for speeding in the neighborhood because there are so many children in my subdivision.

I can come up with comparative goods and bads. But true good is actually perfection. I cannot live up to that and neither can you. This is why all the religions and philosophers I studied in schools and on my own left me wanting for more answers. I agreed with Ayn Rand's individualism. I thought the ten commandments were probably mostly right but they did not fit my own agenda. The Koran was a literary mess. Every kind of meditation was either self-hypnosis or, worse, a way to get in touch with supernatural somethings that were not good. Yes, I even tried witchcraft and demon worship, using psychoactive drugs and doing parlor tricks to impress people. But it eroded my soul like bleach on your jeans.

When I realized Christ was actually the Messiah it turned my life upside down but that turned out to be a good thing. I want to do good and I hate it when I do not do my best but God forgives me and keeps me looking forward rather than backwards. I forgave all who did wrong to me and I forgave myself for my past life. Now life is good in a relative sense but when this body croaks I will be GOOD and with God. Can't lose, I guess, because a Faithful God kept patiently calling me until I heard Him.

radar said...

Oh, and I finally watched a couple of Ray Comfort videos after people mentioned him. Never saw one before. So anyone who thought I was parroting him? Nope.

Lori Lyons said...

It’s inconsistent that you claim to have knowledge of objective morality yet cannot even tell me what makes something morally right or wrong beyond ‘whatever God says’. Even your definition of good as “perfect” seems circular, being “everything you should do and never…what you [shouldn’t] do”, a useless definition; it just moves everything back a step.

Curiously though, you said, “Adolf Hitler was BAD for killing millions of Jews, Christians, diseased people and political dissidents. Winston Churchill was GOOD for rallying the people of Britain to hold on during incredible hardships and keep the Germans from invading them and taking over Europe.”
Whoa now! You judged actions as bad and good! Put another way, you judged them ‘morally wrong or ‘morally right. If absolute morality is only what God says, and his law is “beyond [your] ability to judge”, how did you judge those actions as either right or wrong?

It’s a legitimate question.

HOW did you conclude that Hitler’s actions were BAD, and Churchill’s were GOOD?

Let’s go over this again: You said that objective morality is whatever God says, and that you cannot judge his law. Shall I therefore conclude that GOD TOLD YOU Hitler was wrong and Churchill was right? By your definition he MUST have, because you have NO OTHER BASIS for judging morality beyond HIS WORD, right?

I await your explanation of HOW you came to your value judgments of Hitler’s and Churchill’s deeds.

radar said...

Lori, I made it quite clear that there is an objective good and that is perfection. In other words, absolute good means doing what God's Word says to do or do not for the situation. So I have already answered this on the objective level. No one is completely good so you and I fall short of this.

A relative good and bad is subjective. It can include obedience to the laws of man, but sometimes the laws of man conflict with what God says. We are told not to murder, which is the literal translation of "thou shalt not kill" but we have murdered over 53 million babies legally since 1973 in the USA alone. I would call that bad.

Relative good and bad depend upon my opinion of my actions and the actions of others, as I said. It is good in my opinion that my neighbors mow their yards and trim their bushes as we do...it is bad that some teenager drives his car through the neighborhood, both breaking the speed limit and endangering the many young kids that live here.

We all have our own opinions of what good and bad is in our own eyes. There can be no human agreement on all points of a relative morality. We will all have opinions.

God the Creator has made it clear what He calls good and bad. Only perfection is good, all else falls into the bad category.

So in daily life we'll call someone a "good guy" and he will be in a relative way in my opinion. Perhaps you favor abortion, so if your neighbor is an abortionist you might say he is a good guy, while I would say he is a bad guy. Perhaps some person you know despises dogs, so a guy who shoots a pellet gun at strays is a good guy to your friend. To me, he would be a bad guy and I will call the police on him after telling him one time to cease and desist.

You cannot judge God by the variable behavior of Christians any more than I can judge you by the variable behavior of other atheists. Do you agree with Leopold and Loeb? Would you care to be associated with John Wayne Gacy? Most sociopaths turn out to be associated with pornography and deny that there is a God or even hate the idea of God. Should I assume you are a sociopath?

I will not make such an assumption. We can make relativistic judgments of the behavior of others, but only God is capable of truly judging the thoughts and actions of a human being. Courts can make legal rulings but they cannot be omniscient and can be mistaken.

Lori Lyons said...

Are you unable to answer my question? I asked you HOW you determine actions are good or bad, and so far you either can’t or won’t beyond, “…absolute good means doing what God's Word says to do or do not for the situation.” I know, I know. You’ve said it over and over, but it doesn’t explain in real-life terms how one must evaluate moral conduct.

Interestingly, however, I find you applying a practical standard to actions when you say, “it is bad that some teenager drives his car through the neighborhood, both breaking the speed limit and endangering the many young kids that live here.”

Did you see what you did there? You evaluated the action in light of actual possible harmful results – that children could be hurt, thus diminishing their well-being, happiness and health – exactly the definition of “morally wrong” I put forth earlier. You dismissed it as a subjective statement, yet you applied the exact same standard to judge an action!

Why did you need to apply subjective criteria to assess a moral act? Didn’t you claim God has revealed absolute morality? If, as you say, absolute good means doing what God’s Word says, then please tell me what it says about teenagers speeding through neighborhoods.

Right, we both know the Bible doesn’t deliver a judgment on teenagers speeding through neighborhoods.

Earlier you said atheists claim “there is a moral standard established by mankind apart from the moral code of God.” Now I find YOU endorsing man’s standard when you speak of the teenager “breaking the speed limit” (human law). Furthermore, you were forced to resort to a personal moral code to judge the teenager’s conduct, since God’s Word says NOTHING about it. I find that revealing. It seems that your definition of morally good – “what God’s Word says to do” – is rendered useless in certain situations.

Please don’t go back to the objective/subjective rationalization. In light of your claim that God has delivered an objective moral code, why would you EVER need to use subjective criteria to judge an action, as you did concerning the speeding teenager?

We both know why. You MUST use subjective criteria because the Bible is silent on a number of morally significant questions. So again I ask you the same question I asked before, and I hope now you might have an answer: HOW do you assess the moral rightness or wrongness of an act?

Lori Lyons said...

You claim God’s morality is objective, but then you go on to say we “cannot fully comprehend [God]” and his law is “beyond [our] ability to judge”. In those very statements you force human morality into the personally subjective, as every time a moral decision must be made we cannot simply say “Well, I’ll suspend judgment, as I cannot know God’s mind”. How useless is that?

Even Jesus gave practical standards for morality when he said such things as, “Love your neighbor as yourself” and “…in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you”. In a previous comment you even quoted one of those. When I asked you for a useful way of evaluating moral acts I kept expecting you to again reference Jesus’ words as revealing “the spirit” vs. “the letter” of the law. His instructions at least contain real-life considerations of HOW to make moral decisions. However, if one pays careful attention to his words, we see that they are necessarily subjective too! Jesus’ instruction is broad, and open to each individual’s interpretation of how he/she wishes to be treated, thereby making a subjective decision about how to treat others.

So instead of waiting for your response to my question, “HOW do you assess the moral rightness or wrongness of an act?” I’m just going to point out the obvious: that EVERYONE uses personal subjective criteria to make moral judgments, theist and atheist alike.

Lori Lyons said...

Before you respond that yes, you’ve already admitted we all make subjective moral decisions, let me clarify the relevant point. I’m saying that you have NO OTHER CHOICE but to make personally subjective moral decisions, your claim of a God-given OBJECTIVE morality notwithstanding.

radar said...

Oh, Lori, you are set upon putting words in my mouth and assuming you know how I think. I was quite fair with you and specific as well in a general sense but I will be glad to be specific in my case.

Because I am a Christian I have been changed on the inside and I have a connection to God. II Corinthians 5:17-18 = "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation..."

When I trusted Christ I was an adult and I immediately felt a change on the inside, something I absolutely did NOT expect. However there was a supernatural component to trusting Christ in that my conscience/inner man was changed. I am not guilt-driven but rather I depend on God to prompt me if I am going in the wrong direction.

Before you object, I am also depending upon the Word of God. I have read through the Bible numerous times and I keep reading it because the wisdom of God will therefore stick in my brain and be there for me to resort to in any case the correct action is not obvious.

My personal judgment of what is right and wrong is therefore thoroughly soaked in Bible knowledge and furthermore I am always alert to a check in my spirit as to whether what I am about to do is right or wrong. Years of experience have taught me that if I sense a stop sign on the inside, I stop until I am sure of what to do.

The Ten Commandments are obviously true standards of behavior, that is easy. Anyone can see how they apply. The Bible has a LOT of wisdom for us in the book of Proverbs, but also in the history of the men and women in the Bible and the parables of Jesus and the admonitions of the New Testament writers. The NT writers have spoken specifically on a number of subjects and I have incorporated that into my morality. Those who have not studied the Bible would be surprised how many situations are dealt with within those 66 books!

So, no, I do not have a strictly subjective moral code when it comes to my own actions. I am led by God and His Word and this is frankly very objective in almost any situation. My mind and heart look to God immediately in any situation that is not obvious.

In viewing others I may have an opinion that is less objective but then again, I am not the judge of others. There are some obvious objective truths however. If you accept that the Creator of all things is the Judge of all, then refusing His free offer of salvation will bring judgment down on your head after this life is over.

In this life, we are subject to the laws of the land. Some of us also recognize there is the rule of God and His rule transcends time.

If my neighbor does not cut his grass, he is in violation of our subdivision laws. If he speeds down the street he is breaking the speed limit. Hitler violated the 6th Commandment, among others. So far we have objective morality applied. So even the examples given can be seen as objectively wrong by moral codes that are already established.

If you study the writing of the Constitution, you will find that the Founding Fathers depended primarily on the Bible for source material and secondarily on Montesquieu, Blackstone and Locke, whose views were from a Christian perspective and also from English law that had been written with the Biblical code as a basis.

Lori Lyons said...

radar, if you go back and carefully read all my comments to you, I think you’ll see that I have not once put words in your mouth or presumed to know what you think. I quoted your words so I could respond to your comments and I referred to specific things you said, but I have not suggested that you said or thought anything you didn’t actually say.

My objective in this discussion was to try to clear misconceptions about atheist morality. It’s probably the most misunderstood concept in the minds of Christians. I have more I’d like to offer on the subject if you’re not bored with it by now, lol. But as an aside, I’d like to tell you some things.

In your last comment I see my former self and so many people I know and care about, including my own parents. I love them dearly, but no longer share their beliefs. You see, I understand you, but I’m not sure you understand me. When I was a Christian, I knew so many good believers – just everyday folks that were individuals with their own personalities, likes and dislikes, strengths and weaknesses; people who loved their families, helped their neighbors and tried to be good citizens in this world. It distresses me, therefore, when atheists are stereotyped and not recognized as the decent, everyday people they are. Because I HAVE been YOU, I don’t do that to theists, but most theists HAVE NOT been ME, so they tend to misunderstand me and other atheists to a grotesque degree. Please know I’m not suggesting YOU do that; maybe you don’t, but many Christians do, as I’ve encountered over and over.

PD is an example. When he speaks of atheists it’s usually broad-brushed, a common technique to dehumanize a group. Refusing to acknowledge someone else’s humanity is an attempt to exert dominance and superiority (possibly borne of insecurity). When one speaks of a whole group of people in such a stereotypical way, they’re wrong right from the start. I’ve found his attitude in others.

I am the same person I was before I lost faith in faith. I have three children that I love. I have a dear little beagle-mix pet that we rescued and brought into our family. I give to charity, help my neighbors, pay my taxes and obey traffic laws. My heart is glad when I see the local Baptist church conducting its weekly food distribution to the poor, and I’m brokenhearted when animals are cruelly treated. I’m a human being with loves and pains and joys and sorrows. I’m not Satan’s spawn. I’m not evil. I answer to many – my family and friends; my employer; my community; society; my city, state and country, and its laws. I am accountable, and I wouldn’t want it any other way.

I’ve laid awake nights crying when yet another friend or family member stopped speaking to me because they found out I’m atheist. One said she could have nothing more to do with me as I am obviously a baby-killer. I tried to explain that I’m NOT pro-abortion. She refused to listen. It’s that broad brush again. Yes, I’m an atheist, but I’m greatly troubled by abortion. It doesn’t matter if one can make the case that an embryo is not viable until a certain stage, it is still a POTENTIAL human, and I’m disturbed by it.

I think it’s time for understanding and respect. I hope maybe you know me a little better now. I’ve talked to a lot of Christians online and I have my favorites – those who are willing to accept differences of opinion yet maintain respect. You’re on my list now, but on probation. (kidding!)

Back to morality, I have thoughts on the Ten Commandments I’d like to share. Let me know if you want to hear them. Have a good day!

radar said...

Lori, actually I have been you. I was an unbeliever and actually would argue without rancor with Christian friends, armed with the misinformation taught to me in college literature classes concerning the "Higher Textual" criticism of the Germans that I have addressed in blog posts a few years back. I was not only raised as an unbeliever but I was trained in Darwinism as a potential paleontologist.

The thing that you say that cannot be true is that you were a Christian. A Christian is born again literally, in other words, a permanent change that cannot be reversed takes place. Just as you cannot be unborn physically, you cannot be unborn spiritually. So you would fall into the group of people who were born into Christian families and were raised going to church. Just as being in a garage does not make you a car, being in church does not make you a Christian. A Christian has made a decision to trust Christ as Lord and Savior and has been reborn spiritually - we are born with body and soul alive but the dead spirit handed down from Adam on down.

So the church has a big problem, in that there are a LOT of kids who are raised to believe they are Christians because they have always accepted the teachings on an intellectual level. Those who have made an intellectual assent to the basic belief system but have not actually made a personal decision to trust Christ as Savior so often take their intellectual faith with them into adulthood, where it is met and defeated by the lies and mythology of the world.

Because I had been an unbeliever and understood the assertions of Darwinism, I was able to raise my children to understand the difference between being a church kid and being a Child of God. I also have taught children and teenagers for many years in order to help them avoid the position in which you find yourself. You probably truly believe you were a Christian and yet an actual Christian cannot become unborn spiritually.

Paul addressed this thoroughly in the New Testament, as did Christ when He walked the Earth. Jesus famously told Nicodemus this...part one.

radar said...

Jesus explained this idea that a Christian is not a Christian because he or she goes to church or intellectually assents to the Christian lifestyle or agrees with the general idea of the Christian crowd. It has nothing to do with church attendance or the clothes you wear or your outward appearance or deeds done. So part two of my answer is what Jesus told Nicodemus -John 3:1-18 begins with John recounting a conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus: I will bold Jesus and italicize Nicodemus.

"There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him,

“Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”

Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?”

Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”

Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

“He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."


As I said before, a Christian is a new creature, the old person with the old spirit is a new person with a new spirit and this is a permanent change that cannot be undone:

Because I am a Christian I have been changed on the inside and I have a connection to God. II Corinthians 5:17-18 = "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation..."

radar said...

Part three. For someone like myself, who was NOT a believer and then trusted in Christ, I had the advantage of literally feeling something change inside. I didn't know it would happen, but it did and I could remember that moment.

For my friends who grew up in church, like yourself, they have expressed the problem they faced in that they were unsure if they were actually born again or were simply church kids. This question bothered some of them into adulthood. How do you know you have actually trusted Christ if you have been a church kid for as long as you can remember?

The entire book of First John is written to help people identify whether they are actually saved or just church people. As Paul said in II Corinthians 13:5 = Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

If you have truly accepted Christ as Savior, then the Spirit lives in you and you are part of the Body of Christ, a child of God. A very large number of Americans identify themselves as Christians because they go to church, used to go to church or their parents or grandparents went to church. Lots of organizations give you boxes to check to identify your faith. I used to check "Methodist" because that is where my grandparents went to church. But I was certainly not a Christian. I was just checking a box.

You went to church and considered yourself a Christian and then, having never been born again, you fell prey to the mythology of Darwinism. You believe them and not the Bible. That is certainly your right as the First Amendment first establishes everyone's right to believe what they will and practice same. You are an Atheist. But it is not possible to be a Christian and then undo the change. So you may well believe you were once a Christian and you are free to assert that you were, because the second half of the First Amendment grants you free speech.

I think it is sad that you believe you were once a Christian and yet you have never known what being a Christian really is...and it would appear that you are not likely to ever give Christ a chance.

I have dedicated my life to teaching children, teenagers and even adults to understand what it means to be a Christian and presenting both Bible assertions and outside evidence to bulwark true faith. Some fall through the cracks and there you are.

No disrespect, I am simply saying that you are mistaken about having been a Christian. The Bible identifies what happens when you are born again. You missed this. Again, I am quite sorry to hear your testimony. Since you have abandoned faith and the Bible, the only hope is that you someday figure out that the assertions of the evolutionists are untrue and perhaps real science will bring you back to a place where you decide whether or not to be born again? You are alive and as long as there is life, there is hope!

radar said...

Lori, I was trying to be respectful and responsible in my reply. I do not doubt that you love your children and animals. I do not hate you nor do I want you to be harmed.

We do take in rescue dogs. Every dog we've had for many years came from either an animal shelter or from a family that didn't want the dog or from a rescue organization. We have three dogs right now. Our subdivision only allows us to have three dogs maximum.

My mother-in-law breeds dogs, used to show them and had many official champions but is now in her 80's so she is just mating the younger Samoyeds she owns and cares for the rest until they pass on. Everyone in my family loves animals. I have two fishtanks and several of my fish are between ten and fifteen years old. We also have a parakeet.

I have six kids and three grandkids. So my life is packed full of relatives and friends and animals. I am sure we would get along just fine if we were neighbors. I would be praying to figure out a way to perhaps lead you to reconsider Christ but otherwise I would be friendly to you just as I am to my non-Christian neighbors. We live next door to a Christian family, but across the street is a young couple who are not. I've given him some spare sheets of drywall, helped them fix a broken brake system on a car and helped them find a Rottweiler puppy from a reputable breeder my M-I-L knew bred healthy and robust Rotts. I have not witnessed to him, although I have told them both I am a Christian, because I want to be sure to be led and that the timing is right. I will pray until I know it is the right day and time and meanwhile I just pray for them.

Anyway, by all means tell me what you think of the Ten Commandments. Not really sure what can be said about them other than their foundational impact on English law (and therefore on American and Canadian and Australian and New Zealand law), albeit the direction of said nations towards Humanism and away from Theism is now obvious?

hasnain raza said...

Lols Gag is the the Best Lol Network Ever, where you can every thing is lol and Funny, Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
lolsgag.com

Brad maddox said...

Upcoming Latest cars and vehicles, Latest Mazda Models, Racing Cars, International Sport Cars, Concept Cars, PS-Pod, Strange Vehicles, Nissan, Royce Corniche, Ford Concept Cars, Strange Vehicles, Mercedes and More Sport Cars and Vehicles with Pictures and Info
WorldLatestVehicles.com

Lori Lyons said...

Hello again radar. It's been awhile! I'm writing you here about something you said to me on Jason Peterson's post, "Why Unbelievers and Evolutionists Hate Presuppositonal Apologetics and Young Earth Creation"

You said to me: "Lori, bad form typical of atheists. When you are defeated logically you cry about it and run away. When there is a post that you cannot attack easily, you do not comment because you have nothing to say. So you pretend you have been wronged and then probably go to an atheist site to declare victory. I have seen Darwinists do it time after time."

Did you even read what Jason said to me? That he would not allow any more posts from me? He in essence "banned" me, so I had to laugh when you said I "ran away"!

Sure, I could respond on that page and take my chances that Jason would condescend to "allow" my comment, but I'm not going to play that game with him. He either permits full and open discussion or I'm gone. I won't be selectively edited at his whim.

By the way, Jason didn't even begin to address my objections. What he expected was an attempt to defend atheist reasoning vs. Christian "reasoning" (faith). When I instead challenged his right to even claim faith as a legitimate means of gaining knowledge, he was stumped, as he was unprepared to respond.

radar said...

Lori,

First, I have seen other atheists being soundly and logically defeated in a blog discussion and then go trumpet their triumph. I know of one who you know well and remember how he ran away from the discussion when his questions were answered by me and he had nothing to say...then he came to an atheist forum and said something like, "I wish they could have answered my questions."

Perhaps you do not do that, but you definitely did not step up to the main point of the discussion on the Answers For Hope blogpost. The assertion is at the basic level that all people have a worldview that is based on presuppositions that are faith-based. You are contending by faith that the material world is all there is and that science is limited to only answers that involve naturalistic materialistic conclusions and causees.

The great men of science who in fact separated sciences from the primary base that was philosophy were almost without exception Christians and Theists. These men such as Kepler and Bacon and Lord Kelvin and Grossteste and Copernicus believed that a Universe created by a Logical God would be governed by logical processes and it was worth the time and effort to study and hopefully harness them. Isaac Newton wrote more about God than he did about science (in his old age he fell prey to dementia) over his lifetime and he is the father of Physics.

Atheism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. Theism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. One must choose a worldview as a starting point and then you will view all evidence through the lenses of your worldview.

It just so happens that evidence and philosophical concerns made me ripe to change my worldview at age 26. It began with a conversion to Christianity but I still believed in Darwinism until I began studying the evidence.

Newton said: “God created everything by number, weight and measure.”

Max Plack said: “Both religion and science require a belief in God. For believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at the end of all considerations… To the former He is the foundation, to the latter, the crown of the edifice of every generalized world view.”

Max Born, a "father" of quantum mechanics said: “Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist must be rather silly.”

I could go on and on...without people who believed in a Creator, science may not even be in existence and we would have nothing but mythology and pagan beliefs. Atheism is a denial of God but it is in no way based on evidence. It is a faith.

radar said...

Lori,

First, I have seen other atheists being soundly and logically defeated in a blog discussion and then go trumpet their triumph. I know of one who you know well and remember how he ran away from the discussion when his questions were answered by me and he had nothing to say...then he came to an atheist forum and said something like, "I wish they could have answered my questions."

Perhaps you do not do that, but you definitely did not step up to the main point of the discussion on the Answers For Hope blogpost. The assertion is at the basic level that all people have a worldview that is based on presuppositions that are faith-based. You are contending by faith that the material world is all there is and that science is limited to only answers that involve naturalistic materialistic conclusions and causees.

The great men of science who in fact separated sciences from the primary base that was philosophy were almost without exception Christians and Theists. These men such as Kepler and Bacon and Lord Kelvin and Grossteste and Copernicus believed that a Universe created by a Logical God would be governed by logical processes and it was worth the time and effort to study and hopefully harness them. Isaac Newton wrote more about God than he did about science (in his old age he fell prey to dementia) over his lifetime and he is the father of Physics.

Atheism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. Theism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. One must choose a worldview as a starting point and then you will view all evidence through the lenses of your worldview.

It just so happens that evidence and philosophical concerns made me ripe to change my worldview at age 26. It began with a conversion to Christianity but I still believed in Darwinism until I began studying the evidence.

Newton said: “God created everything by number, weight and measure.”

Max Plack said: “Both religion and science require a belief in God. For believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at the end of all considerations… To the former He is the foundation, to the latter, the crown of the edifice of every generalized world view.”

Max Born, a "father" of quantum mechanics said: “Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist must be rather silly.”

I could go on and on...without people who believed in a Creator, science may not even be in existence and we would have nothing but mythology and pagan beliefs. Atheism is a denial of God but it is in no way based on evidence. It is a faith.

Lori Lyons said...

radar, I have never “run away” from a discussion because I felt defeated. I do however admit when an opponent makes a good point. I’ve also confessed at times that I don’t know the answer to a difficult question. There’s no shame in not having all the answers. However, something that disappoints me time and again is the censoring I’ve encountered from those like Jason Peterson. And Bob of QEP, and Ken Ham and Ray Comfort. I was banned or silenced for simply disagreeing. I don’t use abusive language – online or in my everyday life. It’s simply not how I operate. I was silenced only for holding a view someone didn’t like. I immediately lose respect for anyone who uses that cowardly tactic, and generally lose any desire to further communicate with them anyway. I have to give you kudos, radar. You haven’t ever tried to censor me. In that respect you’re in the minority among Christians who have FB pages and blogs.

Well, moving on to the subject at hand. We could have a quote war but it’s pointless. Great minds and small, and individuals all along the range of intelligence can be found on both sides of God-belief. If you’re interested, here is a selection of quotes from notable persons (including one you cited as being on YOUR side) indicating nonbelief in a deity:

Albert Einstein, theoretical physicist: “I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Stephen Hawking (arguably the greatest living physicist): "I do not believe in a personal God."

Thomas Edison, inventor: "I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious ideas of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal God."

Sir Francis Bacon: "Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all of which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, even if religion vanished; but religious superstition dismounts all these and erects an absolute monarchy in the minds of men."

Aristotle, Greek philosopher: "men create gods after their own image, not only with regard to their form, but with regard to their mode of life."

Voltaire: "atheism is the voice of a few intelligent people."

Then there’s the well-known one from Epicurus, Greek philosopher: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

And my personal fav from Bertrand Russell, philosopher/logician: “Science tells us what we can know but what we can know is little, and if we forget how much we cannot know we become insensitive of many thing of very great importance. Theology, on the other hand induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge where in fact we have ignorance and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe. Uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes and fears is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live without the support of comforting fairy tales.”

If you didn’t read all that I don’t blame you because as I said, throwing quotes back and forth gets us nowhere.

Lori Lyons said...

What I want to address are your following statements:

“…you definitely did not step up to the main point of the discussion on the Answers For Hope blogpost. The assertion is at the basic level that all people have a worldview that is based on presuppositions that are faith-based. You are contending by faith that the material world is all there is and that science is limited to only answers that involve naturalistic materialistic conclusions and causes.”

“Atheism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. Theism is a faith and it is NOT based on fact. One must choose a worldview as a starting point and then you will view all evidence through the lenses of your worldview.”

Your usage of the term “faith-based” removes it from the realm of religion. If “believing by faith” means one is not absolutely certain, then yes, you could say almost all of science includes faith. However, the danger of using the term in that way is that it’s a word loaded with religious meaning. If I say parts of science are faith-based, I’m saying something vastly different than when I say religion is faith-based. All I mean is that we as humans are not one-hundred percent certain about almost anything. Degrees of certainty are all along the spectrum, yet we still use the same statement, “I BELIEVE ________. (Fill in the blank)”

So you’re wrong if you think I’m absolutely certain that the material world is all there is. However, all available evidence points to it being the case. While not 100% certain, I’m certain to a high enough degree to say I believe it. I don’t see any evidence of anything non-material and supernatural, so if I were to try to believe in a non-material, supernatural God, the amount of faith necessary to take me all the way there would be huge, whereas the “faith” needed to say I believe gravity would drop me to the ground if I jump from a building is very small. In fact, it would take MORE faith to believe I’d float up in the air!

Therefore my objection to what you said is not about the assertion that faith (in the non-religious sense) is necessary in a materialistic worldview, but that you place it in the same category of faith needed to believe in a god. It’s not even close.

radar said...

Yes, I could use quotes by men like Einstein and Bacon to oppose your position, Lori. Einstein actually was a Deist and did not believe in a personal God.

The Bacon quote is somewhat out of context, as he was actually a believer. One of his oft-paraphrased famous quotes from Essays - “A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion.”

Also, Darwin asserted there WAS a God early in his career in order to give his books enough respectability to be read -

“The question of whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the Universe has been answered in the affirmative by some of the highest intellects that have ever existed.”

We have a copy of the original work,On the Origin of Species 6th Edition, published after 1878 but before 1900 (I loaned it to a bibliophile friend so I cannot check the date). The above quote is from that book. So if you only took that quote and ran with it, Darwin believed in the Creator God. In fact, in his later years he admitted he did not, but nonetheless fretted that perhaps he was wrong and lived his last years in depression and doubt.

Whether Bacon or Darwin or Einstein or you or me, the beginning of any worldview is faith. You begin with a set of suppositions with which you view the world. You see, I have a very strong faith after years of experiencing the change that God living within me has accomplished and the changes in the lives of others.

Perhaps you, Lori Lyons, live a life that would not be too far from the moral standard of Christianity because our eroding moral code is still based on it and there is a lot of discomfort in throwing it off entirely. I will write what I believe would happen if the world did, indeed, decide to become a world of atheists. As a former non-Christian who did live a life that was out on the edges I do have some insight into the concept.

In any event, I would never delete you for your point of view. I hope that, when I write my thesis on Atheism, you will come comment on that post? This one is very old and no one has addressed my recent assertions lately. Silence is tacit agreement or a lack of ammunition to refute it would seem?

Lori Lyons said...

Yes I know this one's old. I just came back here because this is where I talked to you before. Of course I'm interested in reading your thesis. I'll look for it and will probably have something to say about it. Have a good weekend. :-)

radar said...

Now I have two posts I have promised to make - the Atheist post of course but also the piece of paper and I need to do that one first as they fit together. Have a great weekend!

Brad maddox said...

Trading is the Best Business Ever in the World.. All News updates about Forex Business, Latest Currency news updates, latest forex trading business updates, trading updates, forex trading latest news, forex brokers directory, forex brokers list, Dollars news affairs, Stock Markets, stock market news, stock market analysis, technology news, international forex markets, international forex business news and all updates about Forex Trading
ForexAffairs.Com

hammad sohail said...

https://www.facebook.com/pages/I-Hate-Study-but-I-Love-Student-Life/145249185623516

Brad maddox said...

Genuines Works of Data Entry, Copy Pasting, Add Posting, Clicking, Web Surfing, Website Visiting, Article Sharing, Data Sharing, Google Business Plan and Much More Business Plans
www.jobzcorner.com

hasnain raza said...

All News updates about Forex Business, Latest Currency news updates, latest forex trading business updates, trading updates, forex trading latest news, forex brokers directory, forex brokers list, Dollars news affairs, Stock Markets, stock market news, stock market analysis, technology news, international forex markets, international forex business news and all updates about Forex Trading
ForexAffairs.Com

hammad sohail said...

Super Cars Latest Mazda Models, Racing Cars, International Sport Cars, Concept Cars, PS-Pod, Strange Vehicles, Nissan, Royce Corniche, Ford Concept Cars, Strange Vehicles, Mercedes and More Sport Cars and Vehicles with Pictures and Info
SuperCars.Com

Anonymous said...

Top Ten Classified Website List, Pakistani Classified Sites, USA Classifieds, Indian Classifieds, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and every thing you want...
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

sameer waseem said...

Top Ten Classified Website List, Pakistani Classified Sites, USA Classifieds, Indian Classifieds, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and every thing you want...
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

hasnain raza said...

All News updates about Forex Business, Latest Currency news updates, latest forex trading business updates, trading updates, forex trading latest news, forex brokers directory, forex brokers list, Dollars news affairs, Stock Markets, stock market news, stock market analysis, technology news, international forex markets, international forex business news and all updates about Forex Trading
ForexAffairs.Com

muhammad asim said...

Top Ten Classified Website List, Pakistani Classified Sites, USA Classifieds, Indian Classifieds, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and every thing you want...
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

rashid omer said...

All Latest and Current Affairs, News updates about Forex Business. Latest Currency news updates, latest forex trading business updates, trading updates, forex trading latest news, forex brokers directory, forex brokers list, Dollars news affairs, Stock Markets, stock market news, stock market analysis, technology news, international forex markets, international forex business news and all updates about Forex Trading
ForexAffairs.Com

fariya khan said...

Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited. The Best Lol n Troll Network with the Name of Lols Gag... Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures.
LoLsGag.Coma

Brad maddox said...

The Best Lol n Troll Network with the Name of Lols Gag... Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
LolsGag.Com

zubair saleem said...

Classified Sites, Pakistani Classified Sites, USA Classifieds, Indian Classifieds, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and Much More Fun Only on 1 Current Affairs Network
hotcurrentaffairs.com

fariya khan said...

Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited. The Best Lol n Troll Network with the Name of Lols Gag... Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures.
LoLsGag.Coma

nida khan said...

Make Money Online is very easy now, In Internet system we have now best earning system without any work, Just Invest some Money into your Business and Make Perfect Life time Earnings with this Business.
Join Now for Make Perfect Business and Earn Money online from home.
www.hotfxearnings.com

tahir shoukat said...

Best Business Plan without any work from Home
Daily Earning 40 Dollars and Monthly earning 1200 Dollars Guaranteed with Payment Proofs
Plan 1, You can Invest as low as 1 Dollar to 100 Dollars and Get Daily profit of 2.50% for 90 Days.
www.hotfxearnings.com

moosa asim said...

Make Money Online is very easy now, In Internet system we have now best earning system without any work, Just Invest some Money into your Business and Make Perfect Life time Earnings with this Business.
Join Now for Make Perfect Business and Earn Money online from home.
www.hotfxearnings.com

ryan james said...

Make Money Online is very easy now, In Internet system we have now best earning system without any work, Just Invest some Money into your Business and Make Perfect Life time Earnings with this Business.
Join Now for Make Perfect Business and Earn Money online from home.
www.hotfxearnings.com

moosa asim said...

Make Money Online is very easy now, In Internet system we have now best earning system without any work, Just Invest some Money into your Business and Make Perfect Life time Earnings with this Business.
Join Now for Make Perfect Business and Earn Money online from home.
www.hotfxearnings.com

abdullah asim said...

Latest cars and vehicles, Latest Mazda Models, Racing Cars, International Sport Cars, Concept Cars, PS-Pod, Strange Vehicles, Nissan, Royce Corniche, Ford Concept Cars, Strange Vehicles, Mercedes and More Sport Cars and Vehicles with Pictures and Info
WorldLatestVehicles.blogspot.com

muhammad asim said...

Photoshop Fail Peoples in this Network... Fail Prank Peoples, Fail Videos, Fail Pictures, Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
lolsgag.com

zubair saleem said...

Now 1st time ever in Internet World, Facebook Earning program has been Launch, Now you Car earn money online with Just use Facebook and earn unlimited. Post a Picture on Facebook and Get $0.5 Dollar per Post, Unlimited Postings and Unlimited Earning.
Share a Picture on Your Friends wall and Get Unlimited Income from home
www.JobzCorner.com

muhammad asim said...

Photoshop Fail Peoples in this Network... Fail Prank Peoples, Fail Videos, Fail Pictures, Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
lolsgag.com

samad abbas said...

Top Ten Classified Website List, Pakistani Classified Sites, USA Classifieds, Indian Classifieds, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and every thing you want...
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

brad maddox said...

All Latest Hot Current Affairs, All Entertainment News updates, Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Entertainment Videos, Funny Pictures, Fail Pictures, Troll Comics, Troll Images, lol Pictures, Mp3 Tunes and every thing you want...
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

tahir shoukat said...

Funny Entertainment or Lol Pictures with full of Fun... Entertainment Articles, Entertainment News, Entertainment Pictures, Bollywood, Hollywood and Lollywood Pictures and Videos, Entertainment Latest updates, Hot Entertainment News and Pictures Funny Entertainment Pictures, lol Pictures, Funny Pictures and Much More Fun Only on 1 Current Affairs Network
hotcurrentaffairs.com

Uhu work said...

Make Money Online Without any work, You can Invest as low as 1$ Dollar to 100$ Dollars and Get Daily profit of 2.50% for 90 Days.
Minimum Withdraw 1 and Instant Payout with PayPal, EgoPay and Perfect Money
Join Now
http://www.hotfxearnings.com/

anam ilyas said...

Want to Earn Money on Facebook...?? Now 1st time ever in Internet World, Facebook Sharing Program has been Launch, Just Post a Picture on Facebook and Get $0.07 per Post, Unlimited Postings and Unlimited Earning.
www.JobzCorner.com

anam ilyas said...

Want to Earn Money on Facebook...?? Now 1st time ever in Internet World, Facebook Sharing Program has been Launch, Just Post a Picture on Facebook and Get $0.07 per Post, Unlimited Postings and Unlimited Earning.
www.JobzCorner.com

tahir shoukat said...

Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

nida khan said...

Funny Facts on this Website, Every thing will be funny Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

samad abbas said...

Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

nida khan said...

Funny Facts on this Website, Every thing will be funny Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

zubair saleem said...

Funny picture, funny videos and Gif Images in Lols Gag Website Now... Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

Hassan Asim said...

Genuines Works of Data Entry, Copy Pasting, Facebook Posting, Add Posting, Link Posting, Clicking, Web Surfing, Website Visiting, Article Sharing, Data Sharing, Google Business Plan and Much More Business Plans.
www.onlinecornerz.ocm

Hassan Asim said...

Genuines Works of Data Entry, Copy Pasting, Facebook Posting, Add Posting, Link Posting, Clicking, Web Surfing, Website Visiting, Article Sharing, Data Sharing, Google Business Plan and Much More Business Plans.
www.onlinecornerz.ocm

tahir shoukat said...

for Lol Pictures and Videos...
LolsGag

Hassan Asim said...

Funny Facts on this Website, Every thing will be funny Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

adnan khan said...

Lols Gag is the the Best Lol Network Ever, where you can every thing is lol and Funny, Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags, Lol Pictures, Funny Pictures, Lol is the Laugh out of Laugh where you can Fun Unlimited and Laughing Unlimited.
lolsgag.com

tahir shoukat said...

for More Hot Current Affairs with Pictures and Videos...
HotCurrentAffairs

samad abbas said...

Genuines Works of Data Entry, Copy Pasting, Facebook Posting, Add Posting, Link Posting, Clicking, Web Surfing, Website Visiting, Article Sharing, Data Sharing, Google Business Plan and Much More Business Plans.
www.onlinecornerz.com

hasnain raza said...

Best Business Plans without any work, Get your investment double in 30 Days
EarningsClub.com

muhammad asim said...

For More Super Cars
TopAmazingCars.blogspot.com

hasnain raza said...

World's Most Popular Amazing Cars.
TopAmazingCars.blogspot.com

hasnain raza said...

Searching for some new Facebook Covers Online...??? Here is the best for Fb Covers, All type of Covers, Ramadan, Eid, Festivals, Exhibitation, Celebrities and Much More
UniqueFbCovers.Com

Faheem Zia said...

Find Online Jobs ever in the World
JobzCorner.com

Jason Clark said...

For All Latest Hot Current Affairs
www.hotcurrentaffairs.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Online Jobs, work from home, part time online jobs, just join any where in the world
Fb.com/JobzCornerz
JobzCorner.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Top Expensive Cars, top speedy cars, top most popular cars in the world
TopAmazingCars.BlogSpot.Com

Ahsan Afsar said...

World Most Popular and Top Amazing Speedy Cars
TopAmazingCars.BlogSpot.Com

hasnain raza said...

Power of an Investment is Dollar Invest, Now you can invest as low as $5 and get double profit within a week
Dollar-inv.co

hasnain raza said...

All Time Profit is best platform for best profit online on internet, earn 1.50% hourly for 200 hours, total 300% profit within a week
AllTimeProfit.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Earn Money with PayPal, Now you can earn 300% profit of your investment on every week, Join Now
AllTimeProfit.com

Ahsan Afsar said...

http://radaractive.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-ubiquitous-lie-of-chance-human.html

hasnain raza said...

Find best online jobs from home
JobzCorner

najma love said...

Join for Best Online Home based Jobs
JobzCorner

hasnain raza said...

Online Jobs on Blogs, Just Post a Comment on any blog site and earn $0.06 per Link, Just Like this, Visit and Click on Link Relation
JobzCorner.com

Anwar Fazil said...

All Funny and Lols Gag Photos and Videos, funny facts, funny cartoons all Funny planet on lols and Gags
LolsGag.com

Jason Clark said...

For Lol and Funny Pictures online, download any picture any time just for laugh lols
www.lolsgag.com

Syed Kazim Ali said...

Online Business with hourly profit, Just Invest and Rest
AllTimeProfit.com

najma love said...

Earn with Best Business Plans ever where you can make money online from home without any work, just invest with PayPal and get Double profit within a week
AllTimeProfit.com

hasnain raza said...

Online Corner is the best Platform to earn money online from internet, Just Join Now and start earnings
OnlineCornerz.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Most Popular Latest Hot Current Affairs on this Network, News updates, hot updates, hot news
HotCurrentAffairs.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Online Business as low as $1, Join Now and Get Best Business from Home without any work
AllTimeProfit.com

hasnain raza said...

Get your website on google top 10 Results, Best Search Engine Optimization Company in Pakistan
Contact Now
Skype : Jobz.Corner
www.jobzcorner.com

najma love said...

Get More News about Politicians of Pakistan, visit our this page for more details, President Pasban Pakistan Altaf Shakoor Official
AltafShakoorOfficial

Rehan Ahmed said...

Funny and Lol Pictures only on this online network in the world, online gags
LolsGag.com

hasnain raza said...

Business at home...??? want to join the best business without any work, just invest and rest
www.earningsclub.com

najma love said...

Want to Make Website or Software...? Any Type of Website and Software and Desktop and Web Based Applications.
Want to Make Now, Just Contact us at Skype
Skype : Jobz.Corner

Anwar Fazil said...

Get Facebook Likes on your fb page, likes on your facebook pictures, followers on your facebook id, shares of your facebook posts, every thing is available here, visit for more details
www.jobzcorner.com

Syed Kazim Ali said...

Best Business Club of Earnings, Hourly Stable Plans Like 1% Hourly for 120 Hours, Total 120% Profit within 5 Days
EarningsClub.com

hasnain raza said...

Online Jobs, Just Post a Comment on any blog site and earn $0.06 per Link, Just Like this post, Visit and Click on Link Relation
JobzCorner.com

Ahsan Afsar said...

Find best business plan from home without any work, just invest $1 and get 120% Total Profit within a week
EarningsClub.Com

Danish Here said...

Earning is on the way for you, any time get income, best hourly stable plans
EarningsClub.com

Anwar Fazil said...

PayPal Business Website, Join Now and earn with PayPal, Just Invest As Low As $1 and Get 120% Total Profit within 5 Days.
earningsclub.com

hasnain raza said...

Play Games and Earn Money online from home, best add clicking website in the world
PaidVerts.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Best Gaming and Add Clicking Website where you can make $100 per Day, Join now
PaidVerts.com

ahmedraza moon said...

Get Facebook Likes on your fb page, likes on your facebook pictures, followers on your facebook id, shares of your facebook posts, every thing is available here, visit for more details
www.jobzcorner.com

Danish Here said...

Want Likes on your Facebook Profile Pictures, Comments or Shares on your photos and fb status, just click on this link and contact us now
www.jobzcorner.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Earn Money Online without any investment, latest Paid to Click Site with Many types of earnings, Add Clicking, Games and Referrals.
AdsClickEarning.com

hasnain raza said...

Best Clicking Job in Pakistan, Join the best Clicking and Add Clicking job, Visit for more details
JobzCorner.com

Anwar Fazil said...

Easy Earning, Playing Games, Earn Money by Just Viewed Some Ads, 10% Referral Commission with Payza, Perfect Money and EgoPay
AdsClickEarning.com

Danish Here said...

Advertise your business now online, just click on Advertise in our Website and choose which Space you will be spacified for your business or website
ACE.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Best and Top Ten PTC Site in the World, join best program with 7 best upradable plans, Earn upto $35 Daily
AdsClickEarning.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Earn Money without any work, just invest and rest from home, invest as low as $5 and get double profit within a month, withdraw your principal at any time, Join now
HotProfitOnline

ahmedraza moon said...

Earning is only for you, just spend 1 hour daily and earn upto $35 Daily with just clicking job, Join Now
adsclickearning.com

ahmedraza moon said...

Instant Payment without any Risk, Just Invest and Rest of your home, Just Invest as low as $5 and Get Instant Profit, Join Fast
HotProfitOnline.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Now you can Earn Money Every Hour, Join this best website and earn hourly, just invest and rest with Hot Profit Online
HotProfitOnline.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Investment Website where you can with Hourly, Daily and hourly stable plans, just invest as low as $10 and earn within 24 hours
InvestOrganization.com

Danish Here said...

Now Online Business is very easy for all internet users, just spend few dollars on internet and get double profit within 10 days, investment start as low as $10, join now
InvestOrganization.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Hot Forex Investments where you can earn profit without any work, just invest on forex and get profit daily upto 12%, Join Now
HotFxInvest.com

Rehan Ahmed said...

Home based business is now easy for you, just join this website and earn daily upto $35 and get withdraw within 5 days, 1 hour working daily only
AdsClickEarning.com

Danish Here said...

Hot Forex Investments where you can earn profit without any work, just invest on forex and get profit daily upto 12%, Join Now
HotFxInvest.com

Danish Here said...

Best and Latest Investment Plans ever where you can earn money without any work, just invest some money and rest at your home, earn upto 8% Daily Profit with instant payouts, Join Now
GlobalFxOrganization.com

Saqib Khan said...

Find best online jobs ever where you can earn monthly earning without any risk, part time data entry copy pasting and facebook jobs, Join now
RapidIncomeCorner.com

Ahmed Hassan said...

Hot Forex Investments where you can earn profit without any work, just invest on forex and get profit daily upto 12%, Join Now
HotFxInvest.com

Saqib Khan said...

Find best online jobs ever where you can earn monthly earning without any risk, part time data entry copy pasting and facebook jobs, Join now
RapidIncomeCorner.com

Bilal Shah said...

Online Jobs is easy now for you, just spend few hours on internet and get unlimited income with Data entry copy pasting facebook and clicking jobs
JobzCorner.com

Ahmed Hassan said...

Hot Forex Investments where you can earn profit without any work, just invest on forex and get profit daily upto 12%, Join Now
HotFxInvest.com

Bilal Shah said...

Online Jobs is easy now for you, just spend few hours on internet and get unlimited income with Data entry copy pasting facebook and clicking jobs
JobzCorner.com

Danish Here said...

Best Earnings on add clicking job, just spend 1 to 2 hours daily and earn upto $90 per day and cashout within 5 days with perfect money, egopay or bitcoin, totally safe and secure payments, join now
AdsMoneyEarning.com