User Name:


FAQ Donate Join

Atheist Community of Austin

do u need eye? foot hand finger etc..............

for what? to live in this world

and u have eye foot finger etc...

di u want to have these/those?

no u did not want to have these/those

who gave these/those to you?


Absurdity is its own message (or text message.) I don't know if you will be able to read, let alone answer. Those who make claims should be able to back them up; otherwise you really don't know what you are talking about. There are scientific explanations for the origin of the Universe, and the origin of life in that Universe, and the origin of new types of varying life forms. Most people who don't believe in the theory of "evolution" don't actually know what it is. They wouldn't understand a scientific theory if it were painstakingly explained to them. The subject of where did it all come from is answered for them with the "god did it" theory because it's so easy. Fortunately, a few people on this planet decided that the bible didn't answer anything, and they started looking for real answers with scientific explanations.

Scientists do not have all the answer to all the questions but they continue to work at finding them (god did it) is not an answer. They would never be allowed to just make something up. They are required to keep looking for answers that can be tested and proved or disproved. Science deals with fact not myths.

Intelligent Design was created to circumvent the scientific method in order to resolve questions about the origin of the universe and the origin of humans. But it is not science and there is no theory. If evolution is happening, Intelligent Design suggests that evolution is guided by a supernatural intelligence (that is not a theory) and it's not new. They have no evidence of this. A 'theory' is not credible unless it can be tested. You have to be able to prove or disprove something for it to be a real theory. How do you test something with no palpable evidence?

The apologists should be spending some time learning the latest scientific conclusions instead of lying to the world about the accuracy of the bible. Scientists try to answer questions about how things came to be the way they are, but apologists never really do (god was always there and he did it all.) Everything is either matter or energy. If something can't come from nothing: what is god made of, how did he create everything, and what did he make it from? I say they would have to prove that a complex 'god' that came from nothing existed.

According to the theory of evolution, the Universe is self-contained. Everything in our Universe has come into being through mechanistic processes without any kind of supernatural intervention. The origin and development of the Universe and all of its complex systems living and non-living organisms can be explained on the basis of continuing natural processes, innate in the very structure of matter and energy

A "theory" is not accepted without exhaustive testing. If anything is not what should be expected you start over. As soon a new theory is presented other scientists start trying to disprove it. If they can't only then does it become a theory.

Darwin's theory of speciation is an example of how a theory is developed through observation and scientific experimentation to finally become a theory. When new species arise from existing species, you have speciation. Here's how it works: Two different populations of the same species evolve in different ways. They become progressively more different until they are so different that they are no longer able to interbreed. Through the existence of ring species, scientists can say with certainty that small differences can accumulate in nature to the point that two populations of the same species can become reproductively isolated. They can actually go out and see it.

The Theory of Negentropy did propose a crucial point that is that however "mysterious" Life may seem, we are still physically composed of nothing more than the same molecules also found in non-living matter. Just as with everything else, these molecules must comply with the laws of the Universe.

Apologists try to prove scientists wrong because scientific findings have proven that creation as described in Genesis is impossible, and that the universe and all life was not created within six days, 6 to 10 thousand years ago.

The fundamentalist credibility depends on disproving Evolution or the Big Bang theory or any (scientific theory.) Scientists know that nobody can prove anything about god, they were never trying to do that. They just find answers to questions that are real for very good reasons. This has lead to many amazing things like DNA, gene therapy and the discoveries of things that have assisted us in the exploration of space. These discoveries have made substantial difference in our lives.

When the ruins were found in 1923 of Ugarit this answered the question of where both religions Jew and Christian ultimately came from. The Ugaritic alphabet is among the oldest that has been discovered; the transliteration (the practice of transcribing a word or text) has proven that the culture and religion of Israel in its earliest period come from Ugarit. Texts, which were discovered at Ugarit, were written in one of four languages: Sumerian, Akkadian, Hurritic and Ugaritic. The Sumero-Akkadian story of the creation of the World found its way to Palestine long before the Israelites' advent there, and Israelites learned of them from the Canaanites. The style of writing discovered at Ugarit is known as alphabetic cuneiform. This is a unique blending of an alphabetic script and cuneiform (a unique blending of two styles of writing.) Cuneiform was passing from the scene and alphabetic scripts were coming in. Ugaritic is a bridge from one to the other. It is also a bridge from one religion to another. Study it if you can and all the mysteries will just fade away.

Ebubekir said, "do u need eye? foot hand finger etc…." I personally do not have a "foot hand finger", but I would think it was pretty cool if I did. Now THAT would prove there's a GAWD.

To: All

About the name - ebubekir - Today's Moslems are mainly divided into 2 types: Sunni and Shia. Sunnis acknowledge the first four Caliphs (Ebubekir, Omer, Osman, Ali) as rightful successors of Mohammed. Shias believe in Ali and the Imams as the right successors of Mohammed. More than two thirds of the Turkish population are Sunnis.

The Koran records that Mohammed was the Seal of the Prophets, the last of a line of God's messengers that began with Adam and included Abraham, Noah, Moses and Jesus. The Koran is said to be the perfection of all previous revelations.

So, if this is where they think it all came from they are wrong. THIS IS WHERE ALL RELIGION CAME FROM UGARIT: The first Ugaritic texts were discovered in the excavation of Ras Shamra (on the Syrian coast) in the late 1920s. Ugaritic appears to be an early form of Canaanite. It was spoken and written in and -- to an unknown extent -- near the ancient city of Ugarit on the eastern Mediterranean, the northern coast of Phoenicia in the 14th and 13th centuries BC, before the city was sacked. The Israelites' learned from the Canaanites the Sumero-Akkadian story of the creation. The style of writing discovered at Ugarit is known as alphabetic cuneiform. This is a unique blending of an alphabetic script and cuneiform (a unique blending of two styles of writing.)

Deities worshipped at Ugarit were El Shaddai, El (the chief god) Elyon, and El Berith. The Hebrew writers apply all of these names to Yahweh. What this means is that the Hebrew theologians adopted the titles of the Phoenician gods and attributed them to Yahweh in an effort to eliminate them. If Yahweh is all of these there is no need for the Phoenician gods to exist. This process is known as assimilation. Besides the chief god at Ugarit there were also lesser gods, demons, and goddesses. The most important of these lesser gods were Baal, Asherah, Yam and Mot. In Hebrew Asherah is called the wife of Baal; but she is also known as the consort of Yahweh! Baal (a lesser deity) is described as the "rider on the clouds" interestingly enough, this description is also used of Yahweh in Psalm 68:5. One Ugaritic text testifies that among the inhabitants of Ugarit, Yahweh was viewed as another son of El ( sm . bny . yw . ilt ) "The name of the son of god, Yahweh." This text showing that Yahweh was known at Ugarit, though not as the Lord but as one of the many sons of El.

Among the other gods worshipped at Ugarit there are Dagon, Tirosch, Horon, Nahar, Resheph, Kotar Hosis, Shachar (who is the equivalent of Satan), and Shalem. One of the most famous of the lesser deities at Ugarit was Dan'il. There is little doubt that this figure corresponds to the Biblical Daniel (while predating him by several centuries.) Most scholars agree that the Canonical prophet was the Ugarit Dan'il. Another creature is Leviathan. Hebrew text Isaiah 27:1 and Ugarit texts describe this beast. In Ugarit, as in Israel, the cult played a central role in the lives of the people. Ugaritic myths - story of Baal's enthronement as king. Baal is killed by Mot (in the Fall of the year) and he remains dead until the Spring of the year. His victory over death was celebrated as his enthronement over the other gods. (Sound familiar?) The Hebrew text also celebrates the enthronement of Yahweh. As in the Ugaritic myth, the purpose of Yahweh's enthronement is to re-enact creation. Another interesting parallel between Israel and Ugarit is the yearly ritual known as the sending out of the "scapegoats" one for god and one for a demon.

The Prophet Joseph Smith (Mormon) began a revision of the Old Testament in June 1830 to restore and clarify vital points of history and doctrine missing from the Bible. Unfortunately he did not have the text from Ugarit since they were not found until about 1923 and were interpreted later on by a man who was an expert in ancient languages and decoding. We understand the literature itself much better now, and we are now able to clarify difficult words due to their Ugaritic homogeneity. What all of this means is that it all comes out of ancient myths/superstitions! Abelard Reuchlin's 'The True Authorship of the New Testament' is very similar work. In this work Reuchlin illustrates how he discovered that a Jewish historian Flavius Josephus is in fact Arius Calpurnius Piso, pen name Flavius Josephus, a Roman.) This leaflet was written around (1979) to show how and why the Roman Piso Family wrote the New Testament.

Luigi Cascioli is a historical researcher who presents his discovery about all the concepts and the historical falsities that proves Christianity is a fabrication. He does show that the Jesus of the Bible was made up out of cheesecloth for a purpose. He has extensive knowledge of the Holy Scriptures challenged the powerful Catholic Church. 'The Fable of Christ' contains all the necessary elements, permitting the author to bring an action against the Catholic Church for abuse of popular credulity and personating (art. 661 and 494 of the Italian penal code).

You were born from your mother and developed inside her womb. You have a belly button as evidence of this. Each of us developed from a single fertilized egg. God was not involved during this development, nor is there any magic in the fertilized egg. With enough time, understanding, and technology, it's conceivable that we could eventually create one from raw chemicals.

The complexity and diversity of life on this planet is amazing. The theory of evolution explains a process by which that diversity and complexity can arise. The beginning of life itself, some 3.5 billion years ago is still being worked out, but nobody doing serious work in this area has any reason to think something supernatural was involved. Biological evolution is a fascinating and wonderful subject. It's too bad that people prefer to throw all of that understanding away in favor of a god for which they have no evidence.

You asked "WHO?". Why are you assuming a creator? Why not ask, "What dog created the universe?" Why would I presume it was created by a dog? Your question and my question are equally silly in that they assume an answer. The proper question is, "how did the universe come to be the way it is?". Some people assume there was nothing before the universe. I think this assumption is not backed up by evidence, either.

Does your god have any complex parts? If not, then how did your god create anything? If so, who created those parts and assembled them? You then need a god's god, which then also has to be explained. Assuming a god exists in the first place is a mistake. There needs to be evidence.

Origins questions are big and important questions. For some of them, the answer is "we don't know". For most, we have a pretty good idea of why things are they way they are. If you'd like to honestly explore these questions is a good place to do so. If you're really curious about biology, cosmology, geology, or particle physics, there are whole fields of study in these areas where people are working to really answer these sorts of questions instead of making things up that fill a collection plate on Sunday.

How many airplanes has your church designed? Smallpox and polio have been cured by science. What has religion ever done except control people and create holy wars?

I'll make you a deal. I'll live a lifetime without religion if you'll live a month without reason, science, or technology (the fruit of science). Are you game?


Who gave us cancer then?

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup