This is just bs. If you want to be good looking, work out, it is the only way. Healthy is attractive. And girls don't get big muscles, so don't worry about that. Jogging is a really good way to stay slim and healthy, and you get more energy if you are in good shape. You can try and fake it by taking a diet, but trust me, it does not look as good as if you were working out instead.
Since when do glamour models work out? If you want to look "worthy" you can work out and you might impress other women, if that is what you want to do. If you want to look attractive to red-blooded heterosexual men you need to be born attractive. Sorry. Life's like that.
Haha, if you like them out of shape then you are not like most people. Sure you do not like everyone even if they are in good shape and takes care of themselves, but we do not have the same taste so that evens out. Almost none like them fat. Models fake the slim body of a girl who is working out, and makeup fakes the color of the skin that a health person would have. A girl looks better if she is working out instead of taking a diet.
People? I'm talking about men, from the perspective of being a man.
Men do not drool at women who work out, they drool over women who have
a naturally attractive shape. Neither catwalk nor glamour models work
out. Those women have it anyway, without effort. The women who put a
lot of effort into looking good rarely succeed, but nobody has the balls
to tell them they are wasting their time sweating away to look like
butch lesbians.
Why would a man want a woman who sweats to look good?
If a girl was good looking and gained too many pounds, she is not good looking anymore. I have seen a girl with eating disorder, and she looked sick. If you advocate starving vs. work out, then you are immoral in that aspect. What men are attracted to is health indicators, if you do not believe in evolution I can see that you don't understand that. And there are ways to work out where you don't get more masculine, like dancing or other things that needs stamina. I don't like your nihilistic view
What men are attracted to is GENETIC health indicators. A body that
has been sculpted by an intense workout is no more naturally attractive
than one which has been shaped by a surgeon. Really attractive women
do not workout! Remember all those Marilyn Monroe pumping iron movies?
What about Audrey Hepburn in Jogging Down to Tiffany's?
A workout will not make an unattractive woman attractive. Neither will starvation.
Face it girls, if you were meant to be beautiful you would be, regardless.
For weeks before and during shooting, it is part of the job to work out, often for several hours every day. Actresses are in fact paid to lose weight or keep in good physical condition, and while this is certainly no guarantee of weight loss, it is certainly a strong motivating factor that only a few careers (such as professional sports) share
When was the last time an unattractive woman became attractive by working
out? Names and dates please.
Actresses who got their careers because they were, when young, naturally attractive
maintain other people's investment in that career, prolonging it, by keeping
unnaturally thin. This does not tell real women anything of any value.
What I am trying to say is that a girl can not fake beauty by starving. The attraction comes from having a healthy body, not from being slim. And by staving they become unhealthy (pale, disproportional and bad skin). Ofc you will only be attracted to some girls with certain genes but if she's not healthy you will not find her as attractive. I start to wounder if you are denying this to defend your own ego.
Of course starvation simply makes unattractive women skinny, uglier,
infertile and unhealthy. But unattractive women can't become attractive
by exercising either.
I am wondering whether you are promoting exercise because you run classes.
(I am arguing because I enjoy it.)
Oki, I'm sry, my last comment was uncalled for. I guess it was my frustration from you not agreeing. No, I do not have any classes, I just like to promote the healthy and natural way to look better, there might be some insecure girl here that thinks about loosing weight, and I just want to tell her that starving only makes them look worse, while working out helps. Plus they become happier, get more energy and all that too.
To get those well defined cheekbones they must be in good shape. If some girl is heavy and starves, the last thing she will loose are those round check bones. Just look at those girl in the video, skinny, but fore some reason they do not have a healthy face like that model. The model can't get there by just being slim, she must be active to some degree to, to keep her body fat ratio down. Sure some don't have to work for it, but they have just the right amount of activity.
Actually, Marilyn Monroe did lift weights.
When? I assume not BEFORE she was a glamour model, not a precondition to allow her to be seen as attractive in the first place, perhaps in her thirties to try to prolong her career, or were you referring to the weights on her chest?
What are you talking about? What pre-conditions? I simply read it in a biography of her years ago that she lifted weights to tone her muscles. I've also heard the same thing in one or two documentaries I've seen about her.
It was a simple question. When did she lift weights? She was a glamour model in her teens, I assume she wasn't lifting weights then. I assume any weight training came long after she had risen to the top of her career and faced the prospect of the inevitable decline. Feel free to correct me IF I'm wrong.
I agree with your assumption that she probably didn't lift weights early in her career but did when she got older. I do know she did lift weights regularly at some point in her life, but I don't know when.
Lifting weights or jogging is a way for an attractive woman to stay
attractive longer, if it is not overdone. Somebody in Madonna's camp
should have the balls to tell her that she's gone way too far (and she
wasn't that hot past her mid twenties in any case). It is not the way
for an ugly duckling to turn into a swan.
Neither is catastrophic weight loss.
Face facts girls: if you haven't got it, you haven't got it. Accept it.
true true but the biggest lie in history is the holocaust ^^
How can u say that??? i want you to come to France and tell my grandfather that what he went through during the Holocaust wasn't real and was a lie. I want you to say it to his face when he shows you his tattoo of his numbers... Tell my family it was a lie, and tell him that his parents were not murdered just because they were Jews...
A lie in what way? Are you suggesting that it didn't happen at all or are you arguing that the numbers were inflated? Millions of Jews were killed. In excess of five million. I agree that the six million figure is probably inflated (more than 5 million has become at least 6 million for political reasons) but it is less inflated than the statistics for the incidence of homosexuality and much less distorted than statistics used in debates about guns or racial differences.
I am TIRED of hearing how American soldiers died in
WWII. It wasn't ONLY American soldiers, there were soldiers from all
over the world fighting against the Nazis and their allies.
Pisses me off!
American loses in both world wars were relatively small compared to
those of any European nation involved in the fighting. Losses of 0.307%
of the population for WWII. That doesn't stack up against the 10-15%
of the population lost by the USSR. Of course the point of war is to
win not to bleed but it's the bleeding sacrifice that they keep bleeding
going on about. Americans, please accept your 1/300 millionth of the
thanks my country owes to your forebears.
The money and interest we paid back.
What's all this about Judaism? There is hardly any difference between Islam and Judaism, neither is tolerant, open, freedom-loving, secular, democratic or humanist. Both give support to slavery, stoning adulteresses and so on. Judaism gives more support for genocide than does Islam. Some Jews have hung secular humanism over the ugly bones of the tyrant Yahweh but that is nothing to do with Judaism and everything to do with modern progressive secular humanist values. Yahweh is Allah. Get over it.
Religious Jews living in Europe more than 2000 years,
Jews in Europe murdered nearly every year, but Jews never Perform even
one terrorist attack!!
So apparently there is a difference between Judaism and Islam ... you need
to learn my friend.
That shows that Judaism is not as corrosive and violent as Islam, which
is not the same thing as Judaism being the basis of European civilization
and liberalism, which it is not.
Jews have been terrorists, Menachem Begin was a terrorist. The reason there
are no Jewish terrorist organizations today is very similar to the reason that
people like George Washington are no longer in armed rebellion. It's not that
they wouldn't kill to further their political ends, they have a state to do
it for them.
If Judaism is the basis of Christianity, Christianity
is a European base, then Judaism is also the basis of European culture.
If not, Europe was still pagan. You can find the influence of Judaism
on humane thinking if you wanted. Law and morals. And much more.
Not all Jews are actually called Judaism. There's a difference. Judaism is
anti - missionary, unlike Christianity and Islam. So is religion that does
not lead to religious war
Christianity developed out of Judaism. Christianity is NOT the basis of western civilization. Democracy, liberalism, tolerance, pluralism, freedom, equality - none of these derive from any religion. They developed despite religion, not because of it. Judaism is no more fundamentally liberal than Islam, the difference is that only a tiny minority of Jews nowadays are illiberal religious maniacs (as their scriptures command them to be) whilst Muslims have plenty of such people in their ranks.
When was the last time someone was stoned to death under
Jewish law?
What are the levels of slavery in Israel over the last 60 years?
Did you know that over 25% of the population of Israel are atheist?
Did you know that Israel is one of the few true democracies in the Middle East?
You are ill informed and your bias is evident, get over it.
What has any of that got to do with my point? My point is that Geert
Wilders is entirely wrong to say that European civilization is built
upon Judaic values. It is 180 degrees to that: modern Jews support western
secular values! We don't follow them, they follow us!
This gives us hope, because Yahweh is no more liberal and modern than Allah,
they are almost identical in core values, yet Jews have got with the 21st century
so there is hope for Islam to reform, if we can all survive long enough.
I was replying to your last comment - the judeo christian
values include enough tolerance to allow western civilization to develop
to the stage it has reached today.
Who follows who is irrelevant - it is called "judeo-christian" because
of its origins, not because one follows another.
"almost identical core values" - the important word is "almost" -
islam obviously includes essential components that have prevented or at least
restricted its progress and reform from 7th century tribalism
Judaism, despite being authoritarian, misogynistic, totalitarian, xenophobic and reactionary has allowed people to embrace secular liberal values. That is the fact of the matter. That does not make European civilization reliant on Judaic values. Which values? Where in the Torah is democracy saluted? Where does Moses say that tolerating homosexuality and not tolerating slavery is the mark of a decent society? European civilization is not based on Judaism, if it was we'd be like the Taliban.
I agree that European civilization is not reliant upon
Judaic values.
I only disagreed with your assumption that there was hardly any difference
between the religions of islam and Judeo-Christianity.
The difference is that Muslims go by their book, Jews don't. Most Jews
are civilized and try to ensure that the voices of Jewish nutters do
not predominate. But they do that because they as individuals living
in a modern state are civilized, not because the fundamental values
of Judaism are civilized and democratic, they are not.
Do you have details about which ways Islam is less civilized than the Judaism
of the Torah?
Yes that is a fundamental and huge difference.
Why would I "have details about which ways Islam is less civilized than
the Judaism of the Torah"? - it may well be, but I did not claim that
it was.
So you agree then? Judaism is at its heart very similar to Islam and therefore it is not the basis of European liberalism or civilization. If Jews have been good European liberals it is because they have NOT been following Judaism very closely.
Agree with what?
I have already stated what I agreed and disagreed with.
ever heard of liberal judaism? The Pittsburgh Platform
etc? They have come a long way since Moses...
And even ultra-orthodox Jews today don´t tend to choose "suicide
bomber" as their lifetime job.
You wrote: "most Jews are civilized and ty to ensure that ... Jewish nutters
do not predominate"
Can you explain why muslems don´t?
And European civilazition definitel is Jewish; most things Jesus preached you
can read in Torah.
European civilization is not based upon recent reforms in modern Judaism. It is not even based particularly strongly on anything preached by Jesus. Europe was a law-based society with leaders, a ruling class and monogamy before Constantine imposed a thin veneer of Christianity over it. Existing laws and virtues and festivals were repackaged as if they were Christian. The major contribution of Christianity was ending free enquiry and triggering the Dark Ages.
Thanks for posting these videos. The information you posted with this is fantastic, a literal gold mine of information about islam!
Literal still means exactly as the words say, even if you delete my comments you can't stifle the truth. This video is not a literal gold mine, it's literally a video.
I only need 1 question. You can NOT convert a christian to be an atheist, But you can do the opposite. Why is that?:P
I can and I have.
I doubt it;)
You know what's funny? Scientist say we very well may have been microbes on a comet (or asteroid) and when that asteroid (or comet) hit the earth, the "seeds of life were sown" then they also of course believe in evolution, us coming from monkeys then turning into human and all. So picture this, us as little microbes grew like a flower then we turned into monkeys, then after a few million/billion years we slowly became humans... very silly, right...
Not at all. You grew from a single cell yourself in nine months.
The reality of the universe is so many orders of magnitude more vast and amazing than any prophet has ever hinted at that religion is an insult to the universe.
Atheist usually doesnt know either of the subjects. They just hate something they dont know, And trust something they really dont know. Thanks for making a prime example.
There are several distinct questions to be asked about God.
1] Do any gods exist?
2] Is there any evidence for the existence of gods?
3] If a god existed would there be any good reason why a god would merit worship?
4] If a god existed would there be any consequences?
5] Would a god existing be a good thing or a bad thing?
6] Is there any good reason to believe in the tribal god of a tribe you are
not a member of?
7] Can stories about gods be explained without gods existing?
Why did you stop talking about science?:P
Oh thats right... You're 46 years old and you dont know a single fact about
science.
I'm trying to work out whether being 46 makes me too old or too young to understand science. Do you want to explain which one it is and why? Or better yet don't. You have shown no hint of understanding science and merely claim that you know more than me with no evidence that you understand any of it at all.
Thats wasnt my point, The point is you SHOULD know some scientifical facts. Its about time you read some books by now. What is the difference between a superwave and a plastmawave?
PlasmaWave is a brand of air purifier and Superwave is a virtual analogue synthesizer. What exactly that has got to do with anything I don't know. There are lots of sciences out there and I do not pretend to know everything. I'm not religious, I don't need to pretend to know everything, I am allowed to say that I don't know without feeling that my dick has shrunk. This stuff hardly compares with your profound ignorance of critically important aspects of biology.
Im not religious either:P
Neither do I pretend to know everything.
Im just TRYING to understand atleast SOMETHING.
Understanding the universe is ignorant?
It doesnt involve biology?
Then tell me what hell you watch this Vid for.
And what crtical important aspect of biology did I miss?
I watched this video because it is fascinating, and also proof of more planets makes the likelihood of other biological systems existing much stronger. Your ignorance of our status as apes is unforgivable. Not to know is one thing, to assert from ignorance the opposite of the truth demonstrates arrogance that I took to be evidence of religion. However it seems you just are rude and ignorant, and not worth my time.
"Ignorance, Ignorance, Ignorance"
Michael Jackson, You there?:P
That we origin from apes is a theory, Not a fact.
Alot of well knowns biologists discard this part of Darwins theory, Read about
it, Look for yourself.
Look up on the subject and do some research before opening your uninformed,
uneducated mouth. Btw, beeing rude is something you started with first of all.
Second, Dont expect me to be polite when you act like a 16 year old.
We ARE apes. Just look it up. We are apes, 100% fact, ask any biologist,
look in any reputable encyclopaedia. There is no controversy over this,
more historians deny the holocaust than biologists deny that man is
an ape.
Alot is not a word.
You have demonstrated that you are unworthy of my attention. (_!_)
I HAVE looked it up, You should too.
Its still a THEORY not a fact, Learn about science.
MANY biologists deny that man is an ape.
There IS controversy over this, Do you need some links again? Ignorance, How
ironic. lol
It is a fact. There is no way it could ever be demonstrated to the satisfaction of people who would rather kill than accept it but it is still a fact. Nobody can understand biology and not accept this. Evolution is a theory in the same way that gravity is just a theory. The fact of evolution is explained by the theory of evolution by natural selection. It is no more controversial than the theory of the round Earth. I am well aware of people denying this fact but truth does not require unanimity.
Denying?
The "proofs" of evolution has been proven to be a hoax. You really
havent been reading your homework here, Try to "demonstrate" it for
me and I can show you the evidence so you see it for yourself. While your at
it, Tell me what you know about Ice core sampling, Carbondating and the facts
about the Neaderthal man (all of this is very relevant). And I can tell (or
show you) something you didn't know. I challenge you, Bring facts.
You are wandering off into conspiracy theory land here. I have better
things to do with my time than join you.
There are millions of proofs of evolution, without any fossils at all evolution
would be proven to the satisfaction of anybody with an understanding of science.
A handful of misidentified fossils and a couple of deliberate hoaxes cannot
disprove it. Evolution could be easily disproved by real evidence, it is falsifiable,
it simply has not been falsified because it is true.
Not conspiracy, Actual facts.
There is not millions of proofs, Not even one.
You can even ask Richard Dawkins, Evolutionist and atheist, He will say there
is not ONE single evidence of evolution.
No proofs at all.
An understanding of science, Yes thats what you need. You really need to study
this subject, Read about the "evidence of evolution" and you will
soon see what I mean. Knowledge is power, Know before you speak. No offence.
The claimed proofs of evolution:
The prehistoric man (ALL of them hoaxes, Or proved to be misidentified)
Animal fossils, Carbondated (No signs of mutilation between species. Carbondating has proven to be higly inaccurate aswell, Not even halfways trustworthy)
Ice core sampling (Not trustworthy either, Many scientists claim that one dark and one light line in the ice equals a year. This has proven to be wrong, Several lines is formed every week. The eskimos who live there can tell you exactly the same thing).
Think its a conspiracy?
Check this out for youself, Thats better than me telling you the facts.
Besides, Claiming evolution theory is true, Is to claim
that we came from a rock.
Anyone with a true scientifical mind would raise questions about this.
When people stop debating with you it does not mean you've won. It means you've lost it.
No it doesnt, It means you dont have one single argument
left, So you have no choice than to stop debating. If I lost I would
have heard facts that could prove im wrong, But you have not found any
facts at all. Thats really disappointing of you, Considering that this
is something you really stand for.
MartinJWillet:
The man who answered before he even heard about it.
I am not wasting my time with you. You have not come up with any novel arguments that I have not come across before in the last ten years of online debates neither have you demonstrated any knowledge or understanding, just an appetite to consume conspiracy theories and spew them out as if they were facts. As none of your arguments is novel, they have all been refuted before and you show no sign of ever accepting any new information or responding to arguments I am leaving you in your ignorance.
You dont have any information at all.
The facts I told you can and have been scientifically proved. Yea be ignorant,
I dont really care, Its just that you seem highly uninformed thats all. I
know im right, And its not a conspiracy at all, Ask a biologist. Have a good
one. Peace
Every one of your lame arguments has been addressed numerous times. Addressing each one now in turn, again, will simply take up too much of my time. Search yourself for the refutations, they are out there. What has casting doubt on ice core dating got to do with evolution? It would take me at least three or four comments this size to handle that debate but you haven't even shown why it would need to be debated.
Well you still havent shown me a single argument against
it. lol
The ice core sampling? Its extremely relevant, You dont know that? If you knew
you wouldn't come with false facts and rubbish like you have. Stay informed,
You have proven the opposite. I wont take up more of your "precious time".
Take care, Bye bye.
You have not made a case for why it is relevant. Of course I have come
across these arguments before and seen them refuted, but why should
I refute a case that
1] You haven't made
2] You don't understand
3] Has been systematically refuted
4] Cannot be refuted again (unnecessarily, see 1, 2 and 3) in less than five
messages this size.
If you want to debate this the minimum you should do is make a case showing that you understand what you are arguing. You haven't done that yet.
Oh so you really understand what you are arguing about?:P Too bad you have showed me the opposite.
1) Case: Evolution has no scientifical proofs
2) I understand it way more than you do
3) Becouse you denied it of being true (Read more science)
4) I did, Tried to do it in a way that a person like you could understand it
You have not shown to understand it even slightly. Why is that? Oh thats right, You simply dont.
Evolution has more proof then you know of, you've just
been too ignorant to see it.
If you understood it more then this guy you'd see the effects of chromosomes,
lmfao.
Give me just one example of mutilation/link between species and you will correct that. Becouse thats what you claimed in the first place, Havent heard any actual facts yet. Only repeated jibberish about you being all-knowing.
@smokkapi
I've been reading your comments here and you really are coming across as an
arrogant prick. People far more intelligent than you have devoted a lot of
time and effort to the study of cosmology, abiogenesis and evolution. You
claim to be very intelligent and knowledgeable yourself, but you can't even
spell properly.
If you really want an answer to your question, type "Observed Instances
of Speciation" into a search engine.
If your god exists, I'm afraid he gave you a very small brain
I dont claim to be very knowledgeable, I just tell what
I know instead of saying "Im knowledgeable, Believe it". Im
not religious either.
My "engrish" is understandable anyway.
I did, And it didnt answer my question at all.
Oh the theories, It amuses me how people twist them over to be proven facts.
OK, just one. Bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) is an allohexaploid
(with six sets of chromosomes, two sets from each of three different
species). Because of this chromosome pattern it cannot back-hybridize
with any of the species out of which it formed, thousands of years ago.
You are not looking for facts to accept, you are looking for evidence to support
your absurd "evolution is a religion" contention.
I don't know very much, except when compared to you, and then I'm a fucking
genius.
Bread wheat? Yea thats genious, Maybe someone mated with a plant. Chromosomes doesnt prove anything, It only shows that we are more related to tobacco than bananas. Bizarre
Congratulations. You are now officially too dumb to teach. Stew in your own ignorance.
By the way, I havent shown why it needs to be debated?
Read comments below.
l
l
l
v
Btw gravity is not a theory, You have totally lost it:P lol
Dont get me wrong, I used to believe in the evolution theory. But some research on the subject proved I was wrong. I dont discuss this becouse im religious, I simply do it becouse Evolution is religion, Not SCIENCE. If you are confused about this, Search for the word Science on wikipedia. PROVING a theory IS science, Getting FACTS. Thats what scientists do.
Evolution is the most proven and sound theory in the history of science.
Biology without evolution is meaningless, as scientifically vigorous
as stamp collecting.
In another thousand years it will still be the germ theory of disease and the
theory of evolution. In science a theory is superior to a fact or a law because
it explains and predicts, whereas laws just describe. There is nothing a theory
can be promoted into even after a millennium of proof!
Actually, you can never prove a theory, only provide supporting evidence for it. And wikipedia is not an academic source of information, try looking in academic journals on the subject :) They're scientific and peer reviewed, much more helpful :)
If academic journals say otherwise Wikipedia will be changed. It is
only on information about minor celebrities that Wikipedia is not especially
reliable, at least little more reliable than ordinary
gossip.
If you see an error in it, change it. I would, if I found one, but I haven't
found one that was glaring enough to bother yet.
We are apes. Chimpanzees are apes and they are more closely related to us than
they are to gorillas or gibbons. We don't fit in any other group do we?
Are we related to tobacco then?:P
Riiiight...
Word!;)
Same goes with humans having 47 cromosomes, and apes have 46.
So what?, Tobacco also has 46 cromosomes:P
Humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs) and other apes have 48 (24 pairs).
Tobacco has 48 chromosomes. Of course what genes are on the chromosomes
are very different. The similarity between the genes of tobacco and
chimpanzee is much smaller than the similarity of the genes between
man and chimpanzee, which is closer than the similarity between chimpanzee
and gorilla. The chimpanzee's closest relative is man, not the gorilla.
Or tobacco.
Ape chromosomes 12 & 13 fused to form human chromosome 2.
There is a possibility that there are many atheists
in the world.
There is not a possibility that there are many atheists in the world.
Would you say that that sentence is about 99 % the same? But they both are
saying completely opposite things.
No. 92% of the words are the same. However, despite the use of analogies to words and books often used in genetics genes are not words. They make proteins, not messages. If 94% of the substance is the same the result will be very similar. If you follow a recipe and use 94% the same ingredients as a lemon and lime cheesecake you are not going to end up with French onion soup, are you?
i like how all the religous comments have thumbs down, apparently its a trend to hate on religion. go get lives if you dont believe in it then dont pay attention to it or at the very least dont be an ignorant dick.
If the religious want their views respected and unchallenged they can stay in church. When they step out of church their ideas are subject to scrutiny the same as any other ideas. If they can't stand the heat they should stay out of the kitchen.
Who has been an ignorant dick? I merely pointed out that the religious
have a protected space to air their views, and it is not YouTube. Is
that being ignorant?
Who gave you the impression that I had seen any point that you had made? I
did not respond to your point, there are 149 posts here, that was your first,
complaining about my response to you. WTF? Keep your sock puppets in order
please.
sorry, i replied to you on the wrong account, my apologies. i was only speaking in general of how people make ignorant claims about religion or try to bash it in an innapropriate way.
When people keep their religious superstitions private and they have no impact on public policy then you will find that only arseholes care to be public about their atheism. That is not the world we live in. Atheism is not a religion, but it is for many a political stance because religion has been made political. Atheists will not treat the religious as if they were actually wearing the invisible Teflon® Armour of Righteousness, we can see right through it to the puny and ugly form underneath.
well said
The Darwin theory says man evolved from apes. But a
link between the 2 has never been found.
Even though we can find fossils that are 500 million years old. So the Darwin
theory still havent been proven, And never will. It is still just a scientific
theory, not a scientific fact. The 2 shouldnt be mixed up, alot of theories
are proven to be wrong. And religions, Does it really matters if you read the
bible or the coran? Its just god anyways.
Link? We ARE apes. There is no missing link.
There are dozens of links between other apes and man. Ardipithecus and Australopithecus
form clear links in the fossil record. Ardipithecus dates from the time we
know from DNA evidence that we last shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees
and the fossils show an intermediate which is far more impressive than any
crocaduck. Evolution by natural selection is the central plank of biology,
without it nothing in biology makes any sense at all.
No you are wrong, Look it up;)
We ARE apes? Yea Bigfoot maybe:P
We dont share their dna.
You are completely wrong.
"The Hominidae (anglicized Hominids, also known as great apes) form a taxonomic
family, including four extant genera: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans."
We share at least 94% of our DNA with chimpanzees.
Before spouting bollocks please check the facts. Your credibility is now nil.
You are a fool, smokkapi, for commenting that humans don't share their DNA with the other great apes.
Ummm....Well, They DONT!
Google this before humiliating yourself any furter.
Let me ask you this smokkapi: Are you a geneticist? Well I AM. You must be so pathetic to rely only on googling your information about genetics. Please have your sources checked because the last time I looked, it has been proven that humans do share most of their genetic make-up with the great apes. REALLY SMOKAPPI, YOUR COMMENTS ARE SO BIASED EVEN GOD CANNOT HELP YOU WITH YOUR STUPIDITY AND FOOLISHNESS.
I feel free to comment with or without your permission. I'm not in
your church.
Your idea is a pathetic attempt to make your faith position (Hebrew religious
myth is not myth but as reliable and factual as a Fox News broadcast) consistent
with direct observations of reality. Nobody who developed those myths ever
considered the possibility that people would come to regard them as being literally
true in every detail, they were far more sophisticated than you, who look at
myth like a child of ten.
People do not worship the same god. Some people worship many gods, some people worship no gods and regard worship as a disreputable habit. Even among those people who worship the only god they acknowledge exists they are not worshipping the same god, even if they use the same name. God has been re-imagined more times than Dracula or Robin Hood and heaven has been re-imagined more times than Atlantis.
Theories need to have explanatory power and to explain and account for all known relevant data. "A big magic man did it when nobody was looking for reasons you are not allowed to ask questions about" is not a scientific theory.
Hey DUBIOUS ATHEIST: You're wrong. Jack Ruby shot alleged,
lone gunman, Oswald dead. He did this because he wanted to appease the
grieving Jackie Kennedy.
Five years later, another lone nut basket, Sirhan Sirhan stood in FRONT of
RFK when he was murdered in that Los Angeles Hotel, but somehow shot him in
the BACK of the head.
Yeah right. Its always ONE guy who does the handy work.
You're making the atheists' thread look really stupid.
What gives you the impression that lone nuts don't do such thing? The assassins of democratic heads of state have always been lone loonies. Only proper tyrants (Archduke Ferdinand, Hitler) or leaders of nations full of religious idiots (e.g. India and Pakistan) get shot or bombed as part of a conspiracy. People who shot at the Pope, Reagan, Ford, Queen Victoria etc. were all lone loonies. Genuine political grievance is the exception not the rule.
Point taken.
I just don't believe in the lone lunatic angle of the JFK, RFK or MLK murders.
All 3 were iconic and I believe that more than just Oswald, Sirhan and JE
Ray wanted them dead.
How many sinister vested interests and lone lunatics do you think want
Obama dead?
You were born in 1966, of course you see the prematurely dead and lauded leaders
of that era as iconic.
The most attractive thing a woman can wear is a spotlight and the most flattering
garment a man, especially a relatively young man, can ever wear is a shroud.
"It's funny how most people love the dead, once you're dead you're made
for life." - Jimi Hendrix.
If you show a scientist he or she is wrong, they will
say: Thank you.
If you show a believer he or she is wrong, they will say: Fuck you.
Or they will have you tortured to death, for your own good.
I have yet to come across a "true atheist" who becomes a
Christian, by that I mean a person who is able to understand the arguments
for atheism and who puts them across and has gone out of their way to
do so who later becomes a complete Christian ditto-head. Lots of people
who are atheists for effect or for reasons of rebellion, people who
become atheists at the age of 15 - 20 will relapse into the religion
of their parents, or a closely related denomination.
But if you are an atheist at 12, and still an atheist at 28 and you have debated
the issues and defended your stance and that stance is not down to the blind
acceptance of Marxist ideas you will not become a Christian later unless your
powers of reasoning are destroyed by drugs, trauma or brainwashing. You may
become, like Antony Flew, a deist or a non-specific theist, but you will not
embrace a religion.
Correct me if I'm wrong. With evidence.
I've yet to come across atheists who understood the arguments for atheism and became christian — but I have to concede that while they didn't believe in gods, they were nevertheless atheist. As I say in the video, being atheist doesn't in itself say anything about the person's reasoning skills, etc.. — merely the non-belief.
I don't have any argument with that, but there are a lot of atheists who don't really have a very coherent set of ideas, who could not convince anybody with their arguments, which they don't make, and whose atheism is tissue-paper-thin. If these people subsequently go on to write books about their conversions to Christianity, such as Lee Strobel or Josh McDowell why is anybody impressed? In ten years of running an atheist website I have come across precisely ZERO atheist to Christian converts.
I think the conversions to christianity from unexamined atheism only really impress those whose concepts of atheism are equally unexamined — for some it seems to be so much a numbers game that the substance of the arguments, which should be central, seems almost a peripheral issue.
Islam is a religion of love and peace
Name a loving peaceful Islamic country.
No such country is peaceful and loving. And besides how will a country be peaceful if someone has military in their nation? USA's military in Iraq.
Ask the South Koreans and the Germans, they managed to be peaceful without the locals attacking the intolerable foreign invaders. That is probably because no religious bigots were stirring up trouble all the time in the name of God.
What love is there in Islam? Criminals are attacked and butchered,
women are beaten down, the poor are used as a means to the end of the
rich getting into paradise.
Islamic countries do not know peace, they are always at war, with ever more
militant extremists fighting holy war against people who think they are doing
Islam right already. There has never been an Islamic nation at peace with itself
and its neighbours.
Texas is a shitty place too, because it's full of religious people.
what kind of holy war u mean?
the iraq and afghan was attacked because they declared holy war?
there are only 3 countries which in problems of war and critical
1. palestine
2. afghan
3. iraq
all of the invading !
act of defending is actually different from invading
what lead to invade to afghan
the 9/11, after years, obviously was an inside job
iraq? nuclear? then what usa found? nothing
palestine? hmm i dont want to talk about that
that already lost 80% percent of their land
fight with stone!
There is violence throughout the Muslim world with terrorists and insurgents
fighting against the government, often with both sides claiming they
are doing it for Allah. Afghanistan was been at war for thirty years.
Most of the violence in Iraq is Iraqi against Iraqi, in the name of
God. Pakistan is also erupting into violence. Somalia and Yemen are
violent, poor and nasty. Little wars and disputes rage across the whole
of Muslim Africa.
Muslims seem to love violence.
Don't you dare say I have a bible. I am no filthy ignorant savage superstitious barbarian. I don't believe in magic or the nasty misogynist sky-tyrant you and the Christians stole from the Jews.
Conversion via loneliness and fasting. That really says a lot about
the truth-claims of Islam, doesn't it?
No mysticism in the Qur'an, of course not, the Arabs were not smart or cultured
enough to be engaged in any sophisticated philosophy. They were a desert people
on the fringes. Civilization and sophistication was was just something that
happened to other people and Muhammad was not well read because he couldn't
read at all. That is why Islam is simple. It was invented by an uneducated
man.
idioooooooooooooooooooot , man has no religion i bet. if your an atheist FOLLOW THE QURAN NAMAN. BIG BANG IN THE QURAN, WATER CYCLE, EMBRYOLOGY, EVAPORATION, EMYOLOGICAL STAGES ALL IN THE QURAN BEFORE YOUR SCIENCE COULD REVEAL TRUTHS TO PROVE ISLAM!!!!!!!!!!!! BRAAP BRAAP |
 |
Where in the Qur'an does it say how big the sun is? The Qur'an insults the universe with its tiny horizons and terribly human imagination. The Qur'an contains garbled accounts of Greek science because Muhammad traded goods with Greeks. There is nothing "scientific" in the Qur'an which isn't either over-interpreted guesswork or brief sketches of Greek knowledge. A real god would have managed much better than that.
noob why do you watch these vids if your going to ripp on em?
If you want nothing but agreement stay in your mosque. In the real world you have to defend your beliefs with arguments, not threats and violence.
America's Sovereignty Will End December 2009!
Has this happened yet or not? Or will it merely be delayed? The End
of Civilization as We Know It is always just around the corner, even
before the internet allowed there to be dozens of different ends just
around dozens of corners.
I was once taught a very interesting lesson in student economics "If you
owe the bank fifty quid you haven't got you've got a problem. If you owe them
five grand you haven't got, THEY'VE got a problem." America's debt is
far too big to be America's problem!
- Jan 2010
There's just one minor problem with this conspiracy. The USA has more
and better weapons than the rest of the world put together. So who is
going to enforce this?
America has never been obliged to comply with inconvenient treaties before
what will be any different now? Just who exactly will do the obliging? The
US government will continue to do what it wants to do, if it wants to comply
with the treaty it will, if it does not it will not. That has always been the
American way.
What you're saying is only true, if there is either
an uprising of the people, or a military coup [arrest and depose those
involved] .
Only those two actions can stop it if those in government try to engage is
such a treasonous act.
Pieces of paper can't fight. People are only held to account by pieces
of paper if they decide to be. If your government decides to be held
accountable by a treaty it will be, by its own free consent. If it or
its successors decides not to held to it then it will not be held to
it.
How hard is this to understand? If you have more guns than the sheriff and
all his posse you come quietly if you choose to, if you don't, you don't come
at all.
What the F is with all the rambling on???
What you've said could have been summed up in THREE WORDS:
YOU'RE RIGHT QUAFFER22
Stop the drawn-out, endless sentences & argumentive behavior.
You're wrong and ignorant quaffer22. If you can't understand what I have written please don't blame your lack of comprehension on me. Sometimes ideas cannot be explained to everybody because they will never grasp them no matter how they are explained. I am sure this isn't the first time you have read something you don't understand. Please learn the appropriate lesson from this: sometimes ideas are too complicated for you to grasp.
Yes but remember if You have more guns than the Sheriff & Posse, but not a man for each gun the Sheriff will win! One house hold, with 4 gun operators living there, and 100 guns stockpiled in the corner, just will not beat the sheriff. Each gun needs a man to use it.
Sigh.
Analogies break down when you push them, or when you can't recognize that they are analogies.
I thought you might grasp an analogy that used guns and "heroic resistance" (because of course all Americans immediately assume the sheriff is evil and the outlaw is really the good guy in the absence of any evidence to the contrary).
Yet again I overestimated the intelligence of American conspiracy theorists. Why do I keep doing that?
It is fast growing because Muslims are breeding faster than non-Muslims. Almost every Muslim country in the world has a higher than average fertility rate and people are living longer too, an effect which is boosting the numbers of Muslims several decades after it boosted the numbers of Christians. Muslim growth is mostly accounted for by demographic trends rather than conversion. Also for some strange reason people are not very keen to admit that they are no longer Muslims.
Islam is conducive to terrorism and violent xenophobic extremism in
a way that Jainism, Buddhism and Methodism are not.
Islam has never systematically repudiated its violent side, never said that
Jihad is not a duty for the modern world or that slavery isn't acceptable any
longer despite what it says in the Qur'an.
No ideology or movement is proven to be peaceful and well-intentioned just
because it is found to be based upon faith in ignorant superstition and therefore
qualifies as a religion.
1. No it's not because frankly if it was it wouldn't
be the worlds fastest growing religion, worlds second largest, and wouldn't
have survived for 1400+ years
2. I doubt you know the meaning of the word Jihad
3. And what exactly does it say in the Quran that makes you use the word "despite" ?
Well guess what, Islam is not :)
Islam is growing fast because of its hideous retention methods and huge breeding. If you encourage breeding and you punish apostates by shunning them and kicking them out of the family (and saying you're being lenient not to kill them like you should) then it is inevitable that you will have a rapidly growing religion. Truth is not proven by such scare tactics and outrageous abuse of familial love and loyalty.
Really yet none of its fast growing is due to converts
huh?
Well if people "shun and kick apostates out of thier family" dont
you think thats more of a family decision?
Ancient barbaric past of what, and yes the Quran does encourage Jihad but seeing
as you made it used as a random statement it proves you really dont know what
it means.
Most of its fast growth is due to breeding, and reaping the rewards
of longer lifespans that western technology and healthcare have made
possible. In the west the conversion rate out of Islam is higher than
the conversion rate in, but for dead obvious reasons* people don't make
a big song and dance about apostasy.
* because they don't want to be dead, obviously.
Yet again shunning the fact that the word converts exist
but alright we can play your game.
I see no reason why you said western technology tbh, and the conversion rate
is higher out than in? lmao, and wheres your proof of that exactly because
facts beg to differ.
And who says they would be dead?
Read and digest what you have just written please. All the great scientific
work done in the Islamic world was history 200 years ago. Since then
the Arabic speaking world has been left behind.
200 years ago Europe stopped using even translations of Arabic texts because
the west knew better. There were NO 19th century Muslim scientists of note,
just Europeans and Americans, including quite a lot of Jews. You had your time
in the sun. It is long gone now and it is not coming back.
Did you not read my response?
And did you somehow ignore what i said about history and its switches too?
Tell me the name of any country which used to be great and became even greater later. Your revival model of history is deeply flawed.
It is not a coincidence that the lands which are the most Muslim have high populations, low literacy, low economic activity, high infant mortality and no universities of note.
The Islamic world has been backward and lagging further behind for at least two hundred years.
How many immigrants do Afghanistan and Pakistan get looking for a better life?
Try to re-read what i said until you understand it,
because frankly i dont think you understand that in history power in
the world shifts and changes or better yet all your statements are pointless.
Actually why are we on this topic- it has nothing to do with Islam itself!
"How many immigrants do Afghanistan and Pakistan get looking for a better
life?"
That question doesnt make any sense.
MartinJWillett, the Islamic world isn't at its most
advanced stage compared to the rest of the world yes.
Most Muslim countries have high population,low literacy, low economic activity
etc is not true though. Other than Indonesia and POOR countries no Muslim country
fits this description. This is what you forget, not all countries are wealthy.
Next i suppose you will bring down Africans by saying African nations have
low literacy levels not understanding Africas economic status.
Islamic countries have emigrants, not immigrants. Rats leave the sinking ship. Why would anybody want to go to an Islamic country seeking a better life? The countries which are drawing in immigrants are European countries, America and Australia. They offer a better life of freedom, even for those who despise freedom because freedom breeds wealth and opportunity. In contrast Islam stifles freedom, and people, and opportunities and whole communities and tribes.
Islam doesn't "stifle" freedom. Actions by
governments should not represent religion.
And well there are immigrants from plenty of places around the world who go
to these countries because they offer good jobs and all the top universities
are there. For pitys sake the first American colonists WERE immigrants seeking
more wealth.
Many of America's immigrants left Europe because religion was stifling
them and their economy back home. America was a land of freedom from
religious persecution and religious oppression.
No Islamic country has ever been a beacon of hope for freedom to immigrants.
Ever. Not one.
Immigrants have flocked to America, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Denmark,
the Netherlands and Israel. They have flocked off out of Pakistan, Algeria,
Turkey, Iraq and Afghanistan. Think about that.
Despite? The Qur'an encourages Jihad but then Judaism endorses slavery, genocide, polygamy and animal sacrifices but despite that Jews don't indulge in such practices today. Also Christianity endorses living in poverty but despite that Christians, including church leaders, live in luxury. These days modern Jews are living far more moral lives than their scriptures describe because they have not allowed their morality to be fossilized in the ancient barbaric past, unlike Islam.
We in the west know the meanings of lots of Arabic words. It's funny
but for the last three hundred years the only Arabic words the west
has had any dealings with have been about religion, holy war, unbelievers,
oppression, extortion and corruption. We don't know the Arabic for freedom,
democracy, feminism, tolerance, secularism, progress, morality or ethics.
And the last Arabic loan word into English of a scientific nature was
alcohol.
Islam: world leaders in backwardness.
It is the fact that ethnic divisions are the same as religious divisions which makes this conflict incendiary. When different ethnic groups have the same religion the divisions melt away and become trivial: the Angles, Saxons, Celts and Vikings all mixed to become English because they shared the same religion. In contrast the more closely related Irish and Scots-Irish remain at daggers-drawn because there is a sectarian divide along with the ethnic divide keeping that division open and bitter.
If we shouldn't judge ancient cultures by our modern standards why should we judge our modern world by Muhammad's standards?
There is moral progress in our species. We make more stringent rules as time goes on. We no longer accept the marriage of children. We no longer call homosexuals evil simply because they are different. We no longer accept wars of conquest, colonialism, genocide and slavery as being acceptable.
Morality moves on and it does so without any new prophets. Islam is backward.
500 Characters Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7
Atheism
Politics
Life
Feedback
Forum
Home