Questions for the Atheists

[yanong_banikanhon]

---

kuyawa noh? ang nonbeliever pa ron ang moprovide ug ebidensya. brad, whatever proof you have about the existence of god, dili convinced ang atheist about it. ana ra kasimple.

At least naa mi proof sa among pagtuo. Kamo naa mo proof nga WALAY DIOS? Kun wala, SAMOT nga dili mi convinced sa inyong patuo-tuo. Ana ra kasimple.

[yanong_banikanhon]

Who said I'm relying on faith? All I'm doing is waiting for an answer from those working on the problem

The exact definition of blind faith, I would say. Wala na'y kalainan kun moingon ka nga: Kinsay nag-ingon nga kinahanglan nako ang sun? All I need is the closest star to earth. Hehehe...Gets nimo?

Naa ka ba'y ebidensya nga ang balas sa daplin sa baybay gikan sa mga bato sa bukid?

Non sequitur. Unsa man tawon kalabutan sa bato nga nahimong balas sa abiogenesis, bay? Naa diay kinabuhi kanang mga balas sa dagat?

Atheists believe in an extraordinary claim: that a lifeless chemical compound (amino acid) can transform into a living organism through a RANDOM BUT NATURAL process WITHOUT the aid of ANY INTELLIGENCE.

Extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. Kun dili na nimo mapakitaan og evidence kanang maong claim, usa ra ang logical conclusion: nagpatoo-too lang mo. Wala'y basis ang inyong claim.

Bisan ang science (nga inyong gipaka-Dios) wala man gani makahatag og ebidensya nga ang amino acid mahimong usa ka living cell through a RANDOM BUT NATURAL process WITHOUT the aid of ANY INTELLIGENCE.

Hangtud karon wala pa man gani maka-produce ang mga scientist og usa ka life-form gikan sa amino acid. Bisan pag labihan sila ka intelligent. Unsa na kaha kun wala'y intelligent unya ang tanan pulos lang random?

[rodsky]

The exact definition of blind faith, I would say. Wala na'y kalainan kun moingon ka nga: Kinsay nag-ingon nga kinahanglan nako ang sun? All I need is the closest start to earth. Hehehe...Gets nimo?

It could be considered blind faith if when the data arrives and I don't try to digest it properly and take it as is, but I do digest.

Non sequitur. Unsa man tawon kalabutan sa bato nga nahimong balas sa abiogenesis, bay? Naa diay kinabuhi kanang mga balas sa dagat?

Atheists believe in an extraordinary claim: that a lifeless chemical compound (amino) acid can transform into a living organism through a RANDOM BUT NATURAL process WITHOUT the aid of ANY INTELLIGENCE.

Extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. Kun dili na nimo mapakitaan og evidence kanang maong claim, usa ra ang logical conclusion: nagpatoo-too lang mo. Wala'y basis ang inyong claim.

Bisan ang science (nga inyong gipaka-Dios) wala man gani makahatag og ebidensya nga ang amino acid mahimong usa ka living cell through a RANDOM BUT NATURAL process WITHOUT the aid of ANY INTELLIGENCE.

Hangtud karon wala pa man gani maka-produce ang mga scientist og usa ka life-form gikan sa amino acid. Bisan pag labihan sila ka intelligent. Unsa na kaha kun wala'y intelligent unya ang tanan pulos lang random?

You're twisting my response in a direction that veers away from my point, and my point was about TIME and the TIME it takes for results to appear. You are an impatient person, and I understand that, so no argument there, because I am not impatient.

-RODION

[vipvip68]

Intelligent Design requires an Intelligent Designer. Dumb Chemicals cannot produce Intelligent life. logical sa? haha.

now prove it that there is no God ayaw og toyok toyok.

You need to read a few stephen hawking books para makasabot ka how things evolved from the big bang.

I suggest the ff: books to start...

- Brief History of Time
- The Grand Design

please take time to read then let's talk after...

[yanong_banikanhon]

It could be considered blind faith if when the data arrives and I don't try to digest it properly and take it as is, but I do digest.

It IS blind faith because even if science cannot provide justifiable evidence that amino acid can become a living organism through a random process without the aid of any intelligence, you are still 100% confident it is going to happen.

[rodsky]

It IS blind faith because even if science cannot provide justifiable evidence that amino acid can become a living organism through a random process without the aid of any intelligence, you are still 100% confident it is going to happen.

I never said I was confident it was going to happen 100%. Please point out to me that I said such a thing. A good analogy is I can take a weather prediction made by PAGASA, but I only take it as data that I can analyze to help me make my OWN conclusions, and not BLINDLY take the prediction as the truth, because (as most of us are well aware of) PAGASA can still be wrong (in fact I make my own weather predictions by analyzing SSEC/GOES/MTSAT images, rather than rely on PAGASA).

-RODION

[yanong_banikanhon]

PAGASA can still be wrong (in fact I make my own weather predictions by analyzing SSEC/GOES/MTSAT images, rather than rely on PAGASA).

Are you implying the possibility that the first living cell may come from an intelligent source (dili gikan sa random process) ?

[rodsky]

Are you implying the possibility that the first living cell may come from an intelligent source (dili gikan sa random process) ?

And where did you make that connection?

-RODION

[yanong_banikanhon]

From your post:

I never said I was confident it was going to happen 100%.

[rodsky]

From your post:

But why would you automatically conclude that I'd naturally assume an intelligent creator? I do not, and only because the current data tells me so--if the dataset changes in my lifetime, and my mental faculties allow me to understand and conclude that these new findings point towards a new conclusion, then so be it. But until then, my dataset tells me tells me there is no intelligent creator/designer.

-RODION