I had fun with this guy, but at parts I really did feel bad for him. At least I made a good example out of the guy. Here’s me trouncing all over “LoverOfGod,” a Christian who responded to my “Hell” blog (the blog that proves Hell is impossible and thus the entire Christian religion is as well).

NOTE: My responces are in bold.

- - - -

“Ya know, I was gonna go through and disprove each of your arguments, but half way through, I stopped to pray, and the Holy Spirit reminded me that arguing is pointless. So lets cut to the heeart of the issue. Why are you so angry at God? Do you feel abandoned, neglected? Do you think that He does'nt care about you? Let me asure you that He does very much. There will never be a satisfactory answer for all your questions, because you are not willing to hear the truth. If you are so sure that there is no God, rite where you are, lift up your hands and ask Him to come into your heart. Ask sincerely, and openly, ready to accept Him. I won't argue with you about fact vs fiction, but if you'd like to learn more about the beliefe system that you so eagerly tried to trash, check out www.icr.org there's alot of scienctific and historical data there for you to munch on.

If you are truly seeking after truth, and not just trying really hard to block God out of your life, then, you'll take my advice, after all, if He isn't real nothing will happen rite? I choose to put my faith in His power, not in heated arguments, and trash talking. The Bible says that the things of the Spirit are not revealed to the carnal man. If you allow your anger to block out reason and sound logic, you'll never know the truth. Don't let it happen to you. God bless.

Brian”

“When you talk to God, its prayer. When God talks to you, its schizophrenia.
Using the Bible to prove the Bible is true is a logical fallacy called circular logic. It doesn't make sense, and niether does your religion. That means it isn't true. THAT'S the truth.
Obviously you can't refute any of my arguments. You say it's pointless to argue because you can't. Get some help. When you feel like thinking rationally, come back and read some more of my blogs.”

“I said, I won't argue, that doesn't mean I can't. I never attempted to use the Bible to prove tha Bible. Why are you so angry? If you were fully confident in what you believe, then all of us morons, and schizophrenics, would just be laughable to you, you would never devote so much time and energy to proving us wrong. If I had to make a quick observation, I'd say you're having a crisis of "faith". I'm speaking to you out of a selfless motive, because I actually care about you. But you obviously have a much different motive, seeing as how you're so filled with anger and hate towards us. I happen to know for a fact that evoluytionary theory is false, and has been provably falsified over the years, and that the Creation account in the Bible is scientifically and historically acurate. If you are so very sure to the contrary, take my advice.

So you don't understand everything about God, a five year old kid doesn't understand everything about gravity, but he can't deny the fact that it exists. You say people that believe in God are irrational, but the fact is that it's those of us that believe that all of life, beuty, love,....all of existance is merely a fluke, just a coincidence. Did you know that the Human brain is the most complex system in the entire universe, or that the Earth is set on such a precise axis that, the slightest tilt or turn would terminate all of life. The Human eye computes more information in one second, than the fastest super computer on Earth can compute in 100 years. All of that, and much much more an accident, a coincidence?? Thats irrational.

I refuse to let this become an argument, so I won't be posting anything else. I've got nothing to prove to you, I already know the Truth, and He lives in me.

So I'll make one last plee, if you are seeking the truth, and not just trying to escape reality, take my advice. If not, continue on your merry way.

May God richly bless you, with all Wisdom and understanding. May He fill your heart with love, and comfort.

Much love

Bri”

- - - -

Here’s where I really kick in the good stuff. I had had it up to my neck with this guy already, so I tried to shut him up.

- - - -

"I said, I won't argue, that doesn't mean I can't."

I never said that's what you said. I was merely stating the truth: you can't.

"I never attempted to use the Bible to prove tha Bible."

That's what your entire religion is based off of: You believe in the bible because it tells you to.

"Why are you so angry?"

Who said I was angry? I'm just stating the facts.

"If you were fully confident in what you believe, then all of us morons, and schizophrenics, would just be laughable to you, you would never devote so much time and energy to proving us wrong. If I had to make a quick observation, I'd say you're having a crisis of "faith"."

You make two very big and very wrong assumptions here. I fight religion because it impedes peoples rights and freedoms and safety and happiness. I devote my time to it because I care for humanity. Crisis of faith? Right. Sure. Well, I did just PROVE the Bible to be utterly wrong, so I guess that's a crisis for your faith. I however, do not have faith in impossible, irrational things.

"I'm speaking to you out of a selfless motive, because I actually care about you. But you obviously have a much different motive, seeing as how you're so filled with anger and hate towards us."

I never doubted you are coming to me out of selfless motive, but that doesn't make you any less wrong. I hate Christianity and the Bible, but not Christians. Those are the people I'm trying to help.

Wow. You sure like to assume things and jump to conclusions, don't you?

"I happen to know for a fact that evoluytionary theory is false, and has been provably falsified over the years, and that the Creation account in the Bible is scientifically and historically acurate."

You 'happen' to be painfully ignorant and misinformed. Evolution has been proven right over and over. Creation has no evidence, and is in fact a load of crap that makes no sense.

"So you don't understand everything about God, a five year old kid doesn't understand everything about gravity, but he can't deny the fact that it exists. You say people that believe in God are irrational, but the fact is that it's those of us that believe that all of life, beuty, love,....all of existance is merely a fluke, just a coincidence."

Thank you for proving my point about you being ignorant to evolution.

If you knew the first thing about evolution (which you obviously don't, you just like to jump to conclusions and make bald assertions without logic or evidence) you would know that nothing is coincidence. Evolution took millions upon millions of years, using a very selective process. There is nothing random about it, regardless of what nut-jobs like Ray Comfort might have you believe.

And, I do understand your God. He's fictional.

"I refuse to let this become an argument, so I won't be posting anything else. I've got nothing to prove to you, I already know the Truth, and He lives in me."

You refuse to let this become an argument because you have nothing to back up any of the bullshit you've spouted.

Contradictory fairy tales are the furthest thing from truth, and no, an invisible man does not live inside you. Stop being insane. Get some help.

"So I'll make one last plee, if you are seeking the truth, and not just trying to escape reality, take my advice."

Why? Can you prove anything you're saying?

Oh wait... you can't. looks like you're full of it, buddy.

"May God richly bless you, with all Wisdom and understanding. May He fill your heart with love, and comfort."

And may Zeus bless you with his magic thunder. Praise Osiris!

- - - -

Brian then proceeded to plagiarize Christian propaganda against evolution, going back on his word about not posting anything else.

- - - -

“Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise

Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection

While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely...

Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis

Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

Just one quick google search, and this is the first selection. Apparently, I'm not the one who didn't do his homework.”

- - - -

Sadly for Brian, I did in fact do my homework... At least enough to blow him and his lies out of the water completely.

- - - -

Oh, so you want to argue now?

”The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex.”

Unless it evolved from an inferior thing that didn’t need all those parts.

http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html

”Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level.”

All of which evolved, slowly. MORE evidence that Evolution is real.

“And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day.”

So, you like to post other peoples work? Okay. How about this?

“When evolution skeptics want to attack Darwin's theory, they often point to the human eye. How could something so complex, they argue, have developed through random mutations and natural selection, even over millions of years?
If evolution occurs through gradations, the critics say, how could it have created the separate parts of the eye -- the lens, the retina, the pupil, and so forth -- since none of these structures by themselves would make vision possible? In other words, what good is five percent of an eye?

Darwin acknowledged from the start that the eye would be a difficult case for his new theory to explain. Difficult, but not impossible. Scientists have come up with scenarios through which the first eye-like structure, a light-sensitive pigmented spot on the skin, could have gone through changes and complexities to form the human eye, with its many parts and astounding abilities.

Through natural selection, different types of eyes have emerged in evolutionary history -- and the human eye isn't even the best one, from some standpoints. Because blood vessels run across the surface of the retina instead of beneath it, it's easy for the vessels to proliferate or leak and impair vision. So, the evolution theorists say, the anti-evolution argument that life was created by an "intelligent designer" doesn't hold water: If God or some other omnipotent force was responsible for the human eye, it was something of a botched design.

Biologists use the range of less complex light sensitive structures that exist in living species today to hypothesize the various evolutionary stages eyes may have gone through.

Here's how some scientists think some eyes may have evolved: The simple light-sensitive spot on the skin of some ancestral creature gave it some tiny survival advantage, perhaps allowing it to evade a predator. Random changes then created a depression in the light-sensitive patch, a deepening pit that made "vision" a little sharper. At the same time, the pit's opening gradually narrowed, so light entered through a small aperture, like a pinhole camera.

Every change had to confer a survival advantage, no matter how slight. Eventually, the light-sensitive spot evolved into a retina, the layer of cells and pigment at the back of the human eye. Over time a lens formed at the front of the eye. It could have arisen as a double-layered transparent tissue containing increasing amounts of liquid that gave it the convex curvature of the human eye.

In fact, eyes corresponding to every stage in this sequence have been found in existing living species. The existence of this range of less complex light-sensitive structures supports scientists' hypotheses about how complex eyes like ours could evolve. The first animals with anything resembling an eye lived about 550 million years ago. And, according to one scientist's calculations, only 364,000 years would have been needed for a camera-like eye to evolve from a light-sensitive patch.”

http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Catalano/ridley_eyes.gif

Your half-baked, shallow-minded, ignorant response proved many things:

1. You cannot argue with my blog, so you argue something else. That has nothing to do with my blog (the thing you said you COULD refute) but didn’t do anyway (because you can’t).

2. You are dishonest, by saying you didn’t want to argue, then doing it anyway. You are also dishonest with yourself and others by saying you can refute things which you cannot, in an attempt to make yourself feel better about your own irrationality.

3. You obviously know nothing about evolution, and yet you try to argue against it by parroting others works. With another quick Google search any person could find a refutation to that bunk. You, however, used selective reasoning in your refutation, further proving you to be close-minded and brainwashed.

Open your eyes. Try actually reading my blog for once. Stop being prejudice and shallow.

Oh, and by the way, I want no more off-topic posts on this blog. Either make comments with references to the blog, or please shut up.

- - - -

After a good old fashioned scientific schooling, I didn’t think Brian would return. He did, however, come back for one last rant.

- - - -

“O.K. well apparently you're too consumed with hatred to speak peaceably and respectfully. So with this I'll exit the scene. I never claimed to be a scientist. I only claimed to be a logical thinking person. And I am not arguing, just trying to enlighten you. You are arguing. I won't post ALL of the science reports that refute evolution, there's not enough time in the day, however I will ONCE AGAIN, give you a link to one of the many a wbsites. This might help clarify a few things for you, here it is www.icr.org. To me, the fact that you are so exteremely hostile towards my belief system shows your fear of it. And I hope you don't, again, try to say that your not hostile, I think it's rather obvious, by all of your childish name calling, and sarcasm, that you are.

Fear breeds hatred, anger, and hostility. Confidence breeds calmness. Don't you agree?

I won't be conversing with you anymore. I refuse to be in contact with someone that can't show respect. If in the future, you should decide to act respectfully, I would enjoy the continuance of this conversation. No hard feelings.

Later

Brian”

- - - -

I knew this time he was gone for good, but I decided to take the time and make an example out of the prick anyway (not like it’s hard to do).

- - - -

“O.K. well apparently you're too consumed with hatred to speak peaceably and respectfully. So with this I'll exit the scene.”

Ah, more assumptions. And more hypocrisy. You are upset because I proved you wrong, so you name-call and run away.

”I never claimed to be a scientist. I only claimed to be a logical thinking person. And I am not arguing, just trying to enlighten you.”

Sayin' it don't make it so. You claim to be a logical thinking person, yet you can’t think logically at all. You can’t even argue, you simply make bald assertions with no evidence or logic to back any of it up. You’re a liar, because you claim you know something is true when it obviously isn’t.

”You are arguing.”

Yes, I was. We both were. You lost. Terribly.

”I won't post ALL of the science reports that refute evolution, there's not enough time in the day, however I will ONCE AGAIN, give you a link to one of the many a wbsites. This might help clarify a few things for you, here it is www.icr.org. To me, the fact that you are so exteremely hostile towards my belief system shows your fear of it.”

I would refute and prove wrong all of that websites bullshit; however there is not enough time in the day so I won’t. I will however ONCE AGAIN suggest you actually try reading my blog for once, rather than passing it off as untrue without even understanding what you’re talking about. To me, you’re cowardice and dishonesty shows your fear and hatred for truth and logic.

”And I hope you don't, again, try to say that your not hostile, I think it's rather obvious, by all of your childish name calling, and sarcasm, that you are.”

Childish name calling? Like what? I can logically prove and back up everything I’ve said. You, however, cannot. So, that makes you a hypocrite. See? I just proved it!

”Fear breeds hatred, anger, and hostility. Confidence breeds calmness. Don't you agree?”

Yep. One of the reasons I fight the mind-virus of faith. Also why I've been calm this whole time.

”I won't be conversing with you anymore. I refuse to be in contact with someone that can't show respect. If in the future, you should decide to act respectfully, I would enjoy the continuance of this conversation. No hard feelings.”

I would love to, yet sadly I fear it is you who can’t show respect. I have remained calm and logical throughout our conversations, yet you make assumption, name call, and ignore facts. Can’t get more disrespectful than you.

I hope one day you can see the light of reason, and I hope you can learn to have an open mind, respect truth and weed out your dishonesty.

Nick Poling

- - - -

Served.