Hi. I'm SHIN

[invisibleandpink]

Hi.

Thought I'd come here, share a few things... 8-)

I'm a non-denominational commandment keeping christian. "Messianic Jew" for some... Same thing.

Eager to see what kind of people populate this forum.

Blessings

* touches * .....

I suppose you're alright. For now. But! I shall be watching. From over there! * gestures toward corner *

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

Also 'evolution is as dogmatic as any religion' just screams 'I like to copy and paste from apologist websites'.

[stonecutter]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

If you or anyone else want to see shin's worth as a poster, see what he wrote at the Atheist Think Tank or at Why Won't god Heal Amuptees? forums.

[NitzWalsh]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

Also 'evolution is as dogmatic as any religion' just screams 'I like to copy and paste from apologist websites'.

Evolutionary theory and religion both make predictions. Religion calls them prophecies, and try to be as vague as possible, if they fail they make up excuses or say they haven't come true yet and they're waiting. Scientists make predictions that are detailed and well thought out, not vague in the least, when the predictions come to pass they retest and retest and retest to make sure they're right, then they add it into the pile of accepted science and keep retesting. If the science fails, they don't say they need to have faith that it'll one day happen, they just keep retesting it if it deserves retesting.

Oh wait, they're nothing alike.

[Plu]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

If you or anyone else want to see shin's worth as a poster, see what he wrote at the Atheist Think Tank or at Why Won't god Heal Amuptees? forums.

You have linkies? Saves a lot of searching. (Or summaries, if it's not worth actually looking into :P)

[Jason78]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

If you think about it, it's not that retarded a question for someone that's never been exposed to the science of optics.  

I can only guess that physics isn't something they teach in schools in France.

[SGOS]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

If you think about it, it's not that retarded a question for someone that's never been exposed to the science of optics.

It's a typical theist troll question.  'Why rainbows?' demands to know purpose, not cause.  It's a cheap question begging fallacy that is worded to solicit a desired response to an absurd question: Specifically, to explain the event through the actions of a god.  It cares not a fig about the scientific cause.  It's purpose is to celebrate a superstitious world view that embraces the absurd, a world that hungers for absurd questions and happily accommodates them with absurd answers.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I call troll. 'Why rainbows?' Is such a retarded question I just can't see what value this chap will as to the forum.

Also 'evolution is as dogmatic as any religion' just screams 'I like to copy and paste from apologist websites'.

Evolutionary theory and religion both make predictions. Religion calls them prophecies, and try to be as vague as possible, if they fail they make up excuses or say they haven't come true yet and they're waiting. Scientists make predictions that are detailed and well thought out, not vague in the least, when the predictions come to pass they retest and retest and retest to make sure they're right, then they add it into the pile of accepted science and keep retesting. If the science fails, they don't say they need to have faith that it'll one day happen, they just keep retesting it if it deserves retesting.

Oh wait, they're nothing alike.

Exactly. Religious faith attempts to find ways that it is right, whereas science, and the scientific method, attempts to find ways that it is wrong.

[Davka]

I'm not sure "troll" is the correct description. "Missionary" is probably more accurate.

As to the questions he asked, you'll find all of these and more being posed rhetorically from pulpits around the world as "proof" that atheists just don't want to acknowledge god. Yes, they're stupid questions - but the average Christian is not particularly well-educated.

[SGOS]

I'm not sure "troll" is the correct description. "Missionary" is probably more accurate.

"Missionary" is a set.  Troll could be either a subset or an intersecting set.  He could also be dull, which also could be a subset of missionary or may intersect with both the troll set and/or missionary set.  Or dull could be a set with subsets, intersecting or not, of troll and/or missionary.   It's very complicated. :-D

[SHIN KAIRI]

Well I don't think there is a difference between "raised atheist" and "raised without religion". But hey, if you some of you think there is, then... go at it :-D

To put it in a nutshell, I was raised to not care. It's not that I was an atheist or religious, I was neither. I just, didn't care.

I can relate. I remember clearly asking my dad about god when I was around 10. His answer? "I don't know, I don't think anybody knows, but it seems pretty doubtful." The only church we ever went to was the Unitarian church, which my parents took us to for a couple of years because of the free childcare.

My dad has always subscribed to magazines like New Scientist, Skeptic, and Nat Geo, which I also read. I regarded religion as suspect at best, but I really didn't care much.

I feel ya man.

[SHIN KAIRI]

To put it in a nutshell, I was raised to not care. It's not that I was an atheist or religious, I was neither. I just, didn't care.

I ain't buying it. Oh it's possible that your parents were complete morons, ignorant of all science, literature and common sense and thus you were raised to not "know" anything and then at some time some lovely girl (or boy) caught your eye and invited you to church where you, devoid of knowledge had your head filled with gobblygook that you thought was quite possible such as in "he rolled the sky up like a scroll"...makes perfect sense if the stars are little twinkly things just out of bow and arrow reach. Or that "one third of the stars fell to the earth" again possible if the stars are little spots just over the clouds. or that the moon is a light, possible if you have the education of a 1st grader. Or of course my favorite that within the bowels of a 7900 diameter planet is a flying lizard capable of gathering one third of all the stars of the heavens in it's tail and flinging them to earth...why jesus that MUST be possible and makes perfect sense ........if yer a retard.

It's also possible that you are every bit as ignorant of the various permutations of non-theistic upbringings as you rather arrogantly assume such parents must be, just as you appear to be abysmally ignorant of what most theists actually believe. Hint: poetic language.

:rollin:

[SHIN KAIRI]

I'm not sure "troll" is the correct description. "Missionary" is probably more accurate.

Indeed. Are you the only smart one in this forum?

As to the questions he asked, you'll find all of these and more being posed rhetorically from pulpits around the world as "proof" that atheists just don't want to acknowledge god. Yes, they're stupid questions - but the average Christian is not particularly well-educated.

I was educated in the French system Lycées français which are ranked amongst the most rigorous and intellectual systems in all the world.

Btw guys... they are also renowned for their outright support of neo darwinism, so basically in my "science" books I was being fed the evolutionist/cave-man/4.5 billions of years old earth crap theories.

I am so uneducated...

Talk about a logical next step : Raised atheist to the full » becomes a christian through study and use of rationality.

[WitchSabrina]

I'm not sure "troll" is the correct description. "Missionary" is probably more accurate.

Indeed. Are you the only smart one in this forum?

As to the questions he asked, you'll find all of these and more being posed rhetorically from pulpits around the world as "proof" that atheists just don't want to acknowledge god. Yes, they're stupid questions - but the average Christian is not particularly well-educated.

I was educated in the French system Lycées français which are ranked amongst the most rigorous and intellectual systems in all the world.

Btw guys... they are also renowned for their outright support of neo darwinism, so basically in my "science" books I was being fed the evolutionist/cave-man/4.5 billions of years old earth crap theories.

I am so uneducated...

Talk about a logical next step : Raised atheist to the full » becomes a christian through study and use of rationality.

[Davka]

I'm not sure "troll" is the correct description. "Missionary" is probably more accurate.

"Missionary" is a set.  Troll could be either a subset or an intersecting set.  He could also be dull, which also could be a subset of missionary or may intersect with both the troll set and/or missionary set.  Or dull could be a set with subsets, intersecting or not, of troll and/or missionary.   It's very complicated. :-D

I expect a Venn diagram, complete with footnotes and linked statistics.