Refutations (part2)

Now here is my refutation on the second part.

It is really a misconception that atheists are evil or bad persons. Atheists are not really bad and evil. Atheists are happy people. Well maybe not all atheists are good but there are also evil and bad believers. Are atheists evil because they disagree with you? Are atheists evil because they don't believe what you do? I mean beliefs has got nothing to do with being bad/evil as long as your belief cannot hurt others. I will one by one present my refutations to the points raised of the author.

The items below are the "realities" that atheists avoid according to the author. Below each item is my reply.

1. The reality that there is a Creator of everything that exist;

(ACTS 17:24) God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; (KJV)

Is this your proof that there is a creator of everything? The Bible? Very rational (sarcasm). Is the Bible telling the truth? Why? Is it because it is the word of God(instructed by God)? This argument is called circular argument (which is fallacious). Also if everything has a creator, then who created God? (infinite regress). If God is infinite then your premise fails making your statement illogical.

2. The reality that everything that exists was planned and created for a purpose. (The harmony in the natural and physical universe cannot logically be the product of an accident or a Big Bang)

Did God plan the evil and suffering in this world too? :lol: If it is then he is not worth of worship. If not then again your statement is false that everything is planned. If one will just study clearly and critically the universe one would notice that the universe was not really created for a purpose. No one created the universe. It is always existing. The conservation of mass-energy states that both mass and energy can't be created nor destroyed. Now i ask, what is the purpose of the empty(unlivable) planets in the solar system? What is the purpose of the billions of stars in the universe? Also the Big Bang Theory (theory eh?) is already accepted by many scientists and even theists. Compare this to your Genesis myth which is based on the ancient book. Maybe it is time to update yourself and your group to science.

3. The reality that the Bible speaks of scientific truth even before they were discovered by human science because such declaration came from an existing God.

(ISAIAH 40:22) It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: (KJV)

(JOB 26:7) He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. (KJV)

Well these two verses are not really clear in explaning and describing our earth. Is this all? The earth is so complex and these two is not enough and clear to describe it. Well yes, these two are quite consistent with science but this is not enough. Let us also consider the talking animals, the stick that turned into snake, the man who walks in water, the man who raised from the dead, can these be supported by science? Also the Genesis myth misinterpret the origin of life and of the cosmos. Very scientific eh?

4. The reality that present-day happenings were predicted in the bible thousands and hundreds of years ago before by an existing God.

5. And, the reality of their very existence that the prophecy of the coming of “scoffers” is being fulfilled in their person!

These so called prophecies in the Bible are so vague. These are like Horoscopes. Vague. One can just relate any event or situation to one of these prophecies and claim it was predicted. Notradamus' prophecies are much way more accurate than the Bible.

Whew! Until next time!

Refutations (part1)

While I was surfing the net and blog hopping, I stumbled (again) upon this blog. This really caught my attention because of its false and allegedly rational content and bad(and weak) arguments. Well this post is not really new but I haven't write any refutations yet here in my blog and I think I should have to because I am bored. Now the two part entry of this blog is titled The Claim That There Is No God Is An Escape From All Realities (part 1).

Now let's examine the author's "rational" claims...

In the first part, the author writes that the worst evil was done by those who denied the existence of God. He mentioned (the "Godless") Hitler, Polpot, Joseph Stalin, and other communists. But this author never really thought that these people did not kill because they are atheists. These people killed hundreds to thousands to millions of innocent people not because they were too attached to critical thinking or that they were too attached in finding evidences. They committed atrocities because of some ideology. Not because they reject God. Also, and FYI, Hitler was not Godless. He's a Catholic. He even have connections with the Jesuits during their time. Their(Nazi) oath even mention God. Now how about 9/11 and the Inquisition and the Crusades? Hmm.. In whose name do you think these atrocities were made? Speaking of atrocities, the God they are worshiping also murdered thousands of people and even ordered to kill babies (loving eh?).

All in all, this part 1 is mostly copy and paste of Bible verses, lies, and straw man claiming that atheism is an escape from all realities. It is really funny because they believe that they will live after they die and their proof of this after life is Bible. Very rational indeed (sarcasm). Who is escaping now to the reality that we can only live once?

Lastly, I noticed that the author likes to quote verses in the ancient book. Why should one consider the contents of the Bible as true? Why not other Holy Books like Quran? Well lets leave these questions to them. (I am guessing that they will quote verses to answer them.LOL.)

Fish

Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish. ~Author Unknown

Swine flu: what you need to know

Several hundred people in Mexico and 20 people in the US have come down with a new kind of swine flu. People are concerned because some of those infected in Mexico have died, and because this is the kind of virus that could become a serious worldwide epidemic (see Deadly new flu virus in US and Mexico may go pandemic).

Should I worry about this flu?

That depends on two things: how severe the flu is, and how far it spreads. Its severity is still unknown. Those who died in Mexico were young adults who don't often die of flu, so we know this virus can be serious. But it isn't always bad: the cases picked up in the US were mild. Outbreak investigators are now trying to find out how many people have had the virus, and how many of those were seriously ill, to get an idea of how bad it is.

Will it spread to where I live?

That depends on two things: whether the virus is transported to where you live, and how efficiently it spreads between people. So many people travel globally now that, as long as this virus keeps infecting people, it is unlikely not to get to where you live. Some countries are already using infrared cameras to spot people with fevers on flights from affected areas. But that won't stop it entirely, since five days can pass before an infected person shows symptoms, and the virus can spread before symptoms start.

The question is how efficiently it spreads once it lands. From the number of cases in Mexico and the fact that those infected in the US had not contacted pigs or each other, we know that it can spread from human to human, and has done so for weeks at least. Investigators are testing whether people who contacted known cases were also infected to try to assess how easily it spreads.

Similar swine flu viruses have jumped from pigs to people before and have always petered out without causing a pandemic because they were not good enough at spreading in people. This virus may do the same thing.

Does this virus mean I shouldn't eat pork?

No. This virus is named swine flu because one of its surface proteins is most similar to viruses that usually infect pigs. But we've never seen this particular virus in pigs before. It is spreading in people; that's the problem.

Can I travel to other countries?

Yes. There are no official travel advisories against going to affected regions of Mexico, but cases of this virus are being discovered in other countries in people who recently visited there.

What if it causes a pandemic?

Most countries in the world have pandemic plans, on paper at least. They can respond with vaccines, drugs, and measures called "social distancing", aimed at limiting human contacts that spread flu. Mexico has already done this, by banning public gatherings and closing schools in affected areas. Modelling suggests this can be effective.

The Mexican swine flu virus is susceptible to the most widely stockpiled flu antiviral drugs, Tamiflu and its relatives. But viruses of the same family can readily develop resistance to these drugs, so no one knows how long the drugs will remain effective.

There are no stocks of vaccine to this flu. The US has already created a "seed strain" from it, a virus that can be grown to make vaccines. Because of fears that H5N1 bird flu would go pandemic, vaccine companies and regulators, especially in Europe, have developed procedures over the past few years for rapidly approving and manufacturing pandemic vaccines in factories that normally make regular human flu vaccines.

The question now is whether and when they will switch production to a pandemic vaccine. If they do, the question will be how many doses they can produce, and how fast. Researchers are trying to find ways to stretch vaccine stocks, but there is no commonly agreed approach yet.

They won't be able to make much vaccine for several months. But if there are several waves, each several months apart, as there have been in past pandemics, they might have time to make stocks of the vaccine before the next wave – if there is one.

Why are we worried this virus could go pandemic?

Because it is new. Flu constantly evolves, mostly with small changes to its surface proteins. There are usually enough differences between this year's flu and whatever you had last time to allow the new virus to evade your immune defenses and cause an infection, but its similarities to your last case mean you still have partial immunity to it.

But flu surface proteins come in 16 different families, and viruses interbreed and swap genes. Occasionally a new flu virus that has picked up completely new surface proteins from pig or bird flu viruses circulates in people. Since no humans have been exposed to it before, no one has any immunity. Those viruses cause pandemics.

The Mexican swine flu is like this. It is of the H1N1 family, named for its two main surface proteins. There are other, mild H1N1 viruses circulating in humans as ordinary flu. But pig H1's are somewhat different, and it is not yet clear whether having had human H1N1 gives you much immunity to this swine flu.

The bad 1918 pandemic was an H1N1 virus, and there is evidence that people exposed to earlier human H1 flu had some immunity to it. The 1918 virus was different from this one, however, because its H surface protein was from birds.

What should I do to prepare for a pandemic?

We don't know yet if this will be one – but quiet preparation can't hurt. Cover coughs and sneezes and wash your hands a lot. Don't run down your ability to fight infection – eat well and be sensible. Some scientists recommend going on statins as there is some evidence they reduce death rates from flu in people who tend to die from it in normal years.

Do all the things you might do to prepare for any disaster. Stockpile canned and dried food and water, a little cash, and your family's essential medicines, as disruptions in supply might happen in a bad pandemic, and make sure you have a crank- or battery-operated radio and lights and spare batteries.


Source : New Scientist

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks,
Science For Life!

From Science For Life. Add this group at Facebook for Science updates like this.

People's Tactics

This game is very old school. The graphics is DOS-like and the game play is very simple. This game is like Capture the Flag (anyone knows this DOS game?). BUT this game is surprisingly fun (for me at least). I love the tactics, the long term planning, and the historical maps/campaigns and units. Although I have (and play) Rise of Nations, which has a very similar concept and game play and which is way way more better than People's Tactics but I really love the simplicity of People's Tactics. I'm like playing chess without the long calculations(and memorization) and instead of chess pieces, I have infantry, tanks, bomber planes, and other military vehicles. These pieces are not really real moving tanks/bomber/infantry but they are just representations (like a small icons) which makes it a little boring and outdated.

But all in all, I love this game. It is very simple and fun. Very strategic and tactical.

Pascal's Wager

Pascal's Wager (or Pascal's Gambit) is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal (1623-1663) when he wrote "Pensees" (Thoughts). This argument is commonly used by Christians to non-believers to encourage the non-believers to change their beliefs. This 'wager' is used to non-believers. They say that if you will wage that there is no god but in the end there is, then you will suffer eternal damnation. But when you'll wage that there is a God and in the end there is no God then nothing will happen to you. Draw. If one will see these two options, you will notice that you will lose more if you will wage that there is no God and in the end there is than you will wage that there is a god and in the end there isn't.

So if you will weigh both options it is better to wage that there is a God rather than to wage there is no God right?

Well, not really.

When Blaise Pascal thought of this wager on 17th century, he only considered two options. Catholicism and atheism. But in reality we all know that there are also other options, there are also other religion and gods. This means that we do not know who is the real God. Who should one worship? This is the problem of Pascal's Wager. There are different religion and concept of god in every culture in this world. Each of these religion have their own commandments, teachings, heaven, hell, etc. Almost each of these has a commandment that if one will worship the wrong god, he/she will suffer eternal damnation.

Now what if (you as a Christian), in the end of your life (a few moments after you were killed) you realize that you were wrong all your life. That you worshiped the wrong god. What if the god you worshiped all your life is not the real god. What if the real god is Allah, or Zeus, or Baal, and not Jesus/God? Then you will suffer eternal damnation (eternal hell) right? Remember that in every holy book, there is a commandment that tells you or its believers that once you'll worship other gods, you will be punished. Just like what is written in the Bible/Quran.

All in all, this means that one's beliefs in religion, doctrines, and god is not really an assurance of Heaven and Hell (ofcourse).

Stupid Processions

Our family went to Ozamis City last Friday and returned just yesterday. While we were on our way, I noticed a lot of Processions going on in the highway at dawn. Same procession from one "poblacion" to another. I was not really surprised since it was Good Friday and that the procession is a part of the tradition of Catholics. But the processions we encountered last Friday were really 'over acting', stupid (forgive the word), and very annoying. I mean, majority of these processions were on the national highway where big trucks, buses, and private vehicles pass. The processions really caused a lot of traffic in roads where there should be no traffic (rural highways). I remember 4 processions that really used the two and four lanes of the highway. Vehicles (big and small) can't really make their way. Vehicles should just wait until they pass by. We just waited and wasted precious time for nothing. These processions really delayed our trip and other's trips.

I do not really hate these people and I am not against their beliefs/traditions as long as they would just keep it to themselves. In the case of last Friday, they did not keep it to themselves. They caused a lot of delay and annoyance to others and their processions really caused my and other's head to heat up. They (religious people) should put in mind that not all people in this country have the same beliefs/doctrines/tradition/thinking with them. They should not involve others with their useless and annoying activity. Look what happened to us and others who were dalayed. I am sure they did not know what we and others had to face.

I say they should just keep their faith/beliefs/tradition/stupidity to themselves. Also, I really do not understand what would these people gain in waking up early in the morning, sing sad songs in highways/streets, carry heavy cross, relive their god's sufferings, pray repeatitively, (and delay other people's lives)? Eternal life? Remembrance of the sufferings of their god? The way I see and think of it, they gain nothing.

Baptist Church?!

WTH. LOL

What Happened on Easter?

An Easter Challenge for Christians

What really happened on Easter? Can you answer this? Well I really can't. And I bet you also can't. If you'll going to read the Gospels, all of them seem to contradict (in some parts) with each other. The author of Matthew, for example, was the only one to mention that at the crucifixion dead people emerged from the graves of Jerusalem, walking around showing themselves to everyone*. How come the other authors of the Gospels did not notice this? Or perhaps other historians? Below are some discrepancies among the Resurrection accounts.

What time did the women visit the tomb?

• Matthew: "as it began to dawn" (28:1)
  
• Mark: "very early in the morning . . . at the rising of the sun" (16:2, KJV); "when the sun had risen" (NRSV); "just after sunrise" (NIV)
  
• Luke: "very early in the morning" (24:1, KJV) "at early dawn" (NRSV)
  
• John: "when it was yet dark" (20:1)
  

Who were the women?

• Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:1)
  
• Mark: Mary Magdalene, the mother of James, and Salome (16:1)
  
• Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women (24:10)
  
• John: Mary Magdalene (20:1)
  

What was their purpose?

• Matthew: to see the tomb (28:1)
  
• Mark: had already seen the tomb (15:47), brought spices (16:1)
  
• Luke: had already seen the tomb (23:55), brought spices (24:1)
  
• John: the body had already been spiced before they arrived (19:39,40)
  

Was the tomb open when they arrived?

• Matthew: No (28:2)
  
• Mark: Yes (16:4)
  
• Luke: Yes (24:2)
  
• John: Yes (20:1)
  

Who was at the tomb when they arrived?

• Matthew: One angel (28:2-7)
  
• Mark: One young man (16:5)
  
• Luke: Two men (24:4)
  
• John: Two angels (20:12)
  

Where were these messengers situated?

• Matthew: Angel sitting on the stone (28:2)
  
• Mark: Young man sitting inside, on the right (16:5)
  
• Luke: Two men standing inside (24:4)
  
• John: Two angels sitting on each end of the bed (20:12)
  

What did the messenger(s) say?

• Matthew: "Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead: and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you." (28:5-7)
• Mark: "Be not afrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you." (16:6-7)
• Luke: "Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." (24:5-7)
• John: "Woman, why weepest thou?" (20:13)
  

Did the women tell what happened?

• Matthew: Yes (28:8)
  
• Mark: No. "Neither said they any thing to any man." (16:8)
  
• Luke: Yes. "And they returned from the tomb and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest." (24:9, 22-24)
  
• John: Yes (20:18)
  

When Mary returned from the tomb, did she know Jesus had been resurrected?

• Matthew: Yes (28:7-8)
  
• Mark: Yes (16:10,11)
  
• Luke: Yes (24:6-9,23)
  
• John: No (20:2)
  

When did Mary first see Jesus?

• Matthew: Before she returned to the disciples (28:9)
  
• Mark: Before she returned to the disciples (16:9,10)
  
• John: After she returned to the disciples (20:2,14)
  

Could Jesus be touched after the resurrection?

• Matthew: Yes (28:9)
  
• John: No (20:17), Yes (20:27)
  

After the women, to whom did Jesus first appear?

• Matthew: Eleven disciples (28:16)
  
• Mark: Two disciples in the country, later to eleven (16:12,14)
  
• Luke: Two disciples in Emmaus, later to eleven (24:13,36)
  
• John: Ten disciples (Judas and Thomas were absent) (20:19, 24)
  
• Paul: First to Cephas (Peter), then to the twelve. (Twelve? Judas was dead). (I Corinthians 15:5)
  

Where did Jesus first appear to the disciples?

• Matthew: On a mountain in Galilee (60-100 miles away) (28:16-17)
  
• Mark: To two in the country, to eleven "as they sat at meat" (16:12,14)
  
• Luke: In Emmaus (about seven miles away) at evening, to the rest in a room in Jerusalem later that night. (24:31, 36)
  
• John: In a room, at evening (20:19)
  

Did the disciples believe the two men?

• Mark: No (16:13)
  
• Luke: Yes (24:34--it is the group speaking here, not the two)
  

What happened at the appearance?

• Matthew: Disciples worshipped, some doubted, "Go preach." (28:17-20)
  
• Mark: Jesus reprimanded them, said "Go preach" (16:14-19)
  
• Luke: Christ incognito, vanishing act, materialized out of thin air, reprimand, supper (24:13-51)
  
• John: Passed through solid door, disciples happy, Jesus blesses them, no reprimand (21:19-23)
  

Did Jesus stay on earth for a while?

• Mark: No (16:19) Compare 16:14 with John 20:19 to show that this was all done on Sunday
  
• Luke: No (24:50-52) It all happened on Sunday
  
• John: Yes, at least eight days (20:26, 21:1-22)
  
• Acts: Yes, at least forty days (1:3)
  

Where did the ascension take place?

• Matthew: No ascension. Book ends on mountain in Galilee
  
• Mark: In or near Jerusalem, after supper (16:19)
  
• Luke: In Bethany, very close to Jerusalem, after supper (24:50-51)
  
• John: No ascension
  
• Paul: No ascension
  
• Acts: Ascended from Mount of Olives (1:9-12)

*from the link above

Free Chess Softwares

For chess aficionados out there! Here's some free (and legal I think) chess softwares to improve your game. If you want to improve your game and not spend a cent read on. The short list includes playing softwares, database, and training softwares.

Playing Softwares
1.) Arena 2.0.1
Arena is a graphical user interface. You can organize engine tournament in this software. Most importantly you can play against chess engines (both Winboard and UCI). Arena have the features other commercial softwares have like position set-up, limiting engine strenght, opening books, and others. You can also use this software to analyze games (but make sure you use a strong engine). You can also install engines in this software. I currently have 17 engines in my Areana. This is really a must have (especially if you don't want to spend money like me).

2.) Crafty
Crafty is a chess playing software with its own graphical user interface. But you can still play Crafty in Arena or other shell. The GUI of Crafty is very good looking. And Crafty is (as I have read and heard) one of the strongest engines out there. This software also have some features like you can see on other playing chess softwares. Crafty is good for the serious-type-chess player and club players alike. And you can download this engine for free.

3.) Nagasaki (version 5)
Nagasaki is a chess playing software similar to Crafty. This playing chess software includes basic features seen in the Crafty GUI. The downside of this chess software is that its GUI is not that good looking (for me) and that the engine is not that strong (for analysis and for strong players). But this is very good for club players, novices, and beginners. You can also limit the playing strenght of the engine to meet your level.

4.) Fritz 5.32
This is one of the best free chess softwares out there. Chessbase gave out this version of Fritz for free. This engine is very strong but you can also play in sparring mode/hadicap mode. You can add opening books and this software also includes a lower version of Chessbase database (with no games included). Fritz 5.32 can also open files in Chessbase format. This is also a must have.

Database
5.) Chess DB
Chess DB is a free chess database. Aside from its database use, you can also save your own games in a way where the right game can be quickly found, a very time-efficient method to study, which will give the maximum improvement in the minimum time, and access to statistics about both your own games and of GMs, which would be impractical to collect without a computer based chess database. You can save, annotate, analyze (with strong egines), create tournament crosstables, and play (also) in this software. The only thing I don't like in this software is that it is not really a user friendly software. I had a hard time learning to open and save a database.

6.) Chessbase Light 2007
This is also one of the best free chess softwares out there. Chessbase light is a crippled version of Chessbase 10. This is also a database software wherein you can access to game collections and allow you to manage them with ease. Very user friendly. This is also a must have.

Training
7.) Chess Position Trainer
Chess Position Trainer is a software that focuses on chess opening, training, and reportoire management. This software is very good (although I prefer to study opening the traditional way) and very free. You can use this software to study openings and you can create your opening reportoire in this software. You can also train tactics in this software. You can also download openings in their website for training and study.

8.) Chess Tactic Sever
CTS is not really a software but a website. This website is for tactics training. You can train your tactics in this website. Once you register (ofcourse for free), you'll have your own rating. Your rating will increase as you solve more tactics problems. This is a very good site for training. I train in this website almost everyday and it really helps my tactical vision.

So these are just some of the free chess softwares I can recommend. These are good softwares and they are free for download. And these softwares are all legal copies. BTW, these softwares are good especially for club players or intermediate players. But for the serious-type-chess player (GMs), I think they need the commercial programs because these programs are much way more stronger. Just click the links above and download. There are also other websites on the internet like Zakron Fischer's site. There are lots of softwares in that site.

Memory Remains (Metallica)

Memory Remains (Metallica Live S & M)

Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane
But the memory remains

Heavy rings on fingers wave
Another star denies the grave
See the nowhere crowd
Cry the nowhere cheers of honor

Like twisted vines that grow
Hide and swallow mansions whole
In light of an already
Faded prima donna

Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
But the memory remains

Heavy rings hold cigarettes
Up to lips that time forgets
While the hollywood sun sets
Behind your back

And cant the band play on
Just listen, they play my song
Ash to ash
Dust to dust
Fade to black

Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
Dance little tin goddess

Nananananana nananada nananananana nanananadana
Nananananana nananada nananananana nanananadana

Drift away
Fade away
Little tin goddess

Ash to ash
Dust to dust
Fade to black

Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
Fortune, fame
Mirror vain
Gone insane...
But the memory remains

Ash to ash
Dust to dust
Fade to black...
But the memory remains
Faded prima donna

Dance little tin goddess dance

Discussion w/ a Believer

I recently had a discussion with a believer on the internet (Friendster forums). He is a proud ADD member. We discussed about religion, faith, existence of God, and science. And it was not really a good one because he had a hard time understanding what I was saying and because of this, we were going in cirles. But I had fun. I had fun because of his replies. He is claiming that he and his denomination is rational yet the way he talked and presented his arguments were very fallacious and illogical. He even said that he believe that there's a "Spiritual Force" behind the magic of David Blaine. LOL. Does he even know what rational is? I guess not. He can't even identify magic from illusion.

So here's some part of our discussion.

Kuya Frank:The most rational proof of God's existence can be found in the bible and that is written in Romans 1:20.

(Romans 1:20) Sapagka't ang mga bagay niyang hindi nakikita buhat pa nang lalangin ang sanglibutan ay nakikitang maliwanag, sa pagkatanto sa pamamagitan ng mga bagay na ginawa niya, maging ang walang hanggan niyang kapangyarihan at pagka Dios; upang sila'y walang madahilan:

Hayag na hayag na ang ebidensiya sa tao ng katunayan na merong Dios sa pamamagitan ng mga bagay na ginawa ng Dios. Malawak ang uniberso at sa loob ng unibersong yan ay maraming mga nakapaloob na mga planeta at mga bituin. Paano ba lumitaw ang mga yan? Aksidente lang ba ang napakahusay na balangkas ng mga yan? Sapat na sapat na ang mga bagay ng makikita natin sa langit na maniwala na meron ngang Dios na pinangglingan ng lahat ng bagay.

(Awit 19:1) Ang kalangitan ay nagpapahayag ng kaluwalhatian ng Dios; at ipinakikilala ng kalawakan ang gawa ng kaniyang kamay.

That is written in the bible and that is rational.
Me:How can that be rational????

Ok your argument is like this Frank..
Frank: "God must exist."
Jobo: "How do you know."
Frank: "Because the Bible says so."
Jobo: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Frank: "Because the Bible was written by God."

It does not follow that it was written or that it is said in the Bible that God exist, eh naga exist na si GOd. I mean why should we believe in the Bible? Why should we believe in an ancient book full of errors,absurdities, and contradictions? Is that book based on critical thinking or magic lang? (I'd appreciate if you'll answer these)

You know Frank, your reasoning is fallacious because you just assumed that your conclusion is true. Not because the Bible says so eh, totoo nayan. Simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. Begging the question yan Frank. (I guess hindi mo na intindihan ito so just click the link)

You call your argument rational Frank? Do you even know what is rational? Quoting in a book full of errors, absurdities, contradictions and use that as an argument is irrational.

Balik ka lang dito kung may maganda kang isasagot. Ok? And please dont quote Bible verses again. Use your head and think. You just did what Eli did in his blog about atheism.
------------------------------------------

Frank:Up to now Evolution remains a theory the same with the Big Bang Theory. It simply means that they are not accepted as absolute truth in Science because they don't have strong proof.

[then he gave these links :How Great is God of the Bible (1st Part) and How Great is God of the Bible (2nd Part) saying that these answer what I posted. This do not answer the points i raised. Its like I'm asking a bread and he gave me a shit. ]

Me: You misunderstood "theory" here Frank. As ive said earlier, the word theory there is not used in common usage or in layman's term.
Here's what theory is..
A theory, in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of observations. A theory does two things:

1. it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and
2. makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this class.

The term is often used colloquially to refer to any explanatory thought, even fanciful or speculative ones, but in scholarly use it is reserved for ideas which meet baseline requirements about the kinds of observations made, the methods of classification used, and the consistency of the theory in its application among members of that class. These requirements vary across different fields of knowledge, but in general theories are expected to be functional and parsimonious: i.e. a theory should be the simplest possible tool that can be used to effectively address the given class of phenomena.

Frank:It is not a fact. It is still a theory.

Me:Again Frankie, read what "theory" is. The word theory in layman's term is different in scientific terms. Mag basa ka naman ng dictionary or encyclopedia. Mag research kanaman din.
Also saying na "It is still a theory" is not enough. Prove it.
Tapos, look at your answer. It doesnt answer my questions/arguments. Tsk.

------------
Frank:Through deductive reasoning alone it crumbles down pieces beyond repair. If man evolved from apes under certain circumstances and conditions - at one time or another will evolve to become Homo Sapiens. And thus, will occur continuously and consistently. However, no such things was recorded in history to be happening elsewhere in the world. Not a chimpanzee or baboon from Asia finally succeeded to become a full-pledged human. Not even an orangutan or gorilla from Africa was officially proclaimed as a graduate from the animal ape kingdom, welcomed and promoted to enter man's civilization as a totally new human being.
Me:
Evolution do not happen in a short time Frank. It do not happen overnight. Have you seen the pictures ive posted? That was recorded Frank and it do not happen for a short time. The basis of that are fossils that were found. Its really time to update yourself to science Frank.
Wait for a couple of thousand years and see what'll happen to us.
Frank: How many thousand years more? Man have existed thousands of years already. How come there are no recorded evidence in history that it happened? It still remains a theory and for Christians it is a hoax.
Me:
What do you mean not recorded? Nakita mo ba pictures na pinost ko? Ano pala tawag mo dun? Do you think galing lang yun sa imagination ng author/scientist? Merong physical evidences yan frank. From skulls and bones ng animals and tao.
Also, please do understand what theory is. Hanggang ngayon hindi mo parin alam kung ano ang theory when used in science. Mahina ka ba sa English?
Lastly, Christian Apologists and RCC alike accept the Theory of Evolution as a fact. I mean, Ive saw and heard catholics and christians apologists defend the Theory of Evolution against creationism.
----------
Frank:Why don't you look in the dictionary yourself. Pick a dictionary of your choice and prove to me that it supports your claim that a theory is a fact like what you are doing with the theory of evolution. I challenge you to that and I assure you that you cannot prove it.
Me:Hahay Frank. Did i say na theory is a fact? I said na ang Theory of Evolution is a fact. And the word theory there is not used in common terms but in scientific terms. Mahirap bayang intindihin?? Did you understand my example(the word black)?

the⋅o⋅ry
    [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee]
–noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

So here it is. Do you think number 7 lang ang definition ng theory Frank? Again, it depends on how the word is used. In the case of the Theory of Evolution, it is number 1. Tsk. Update yourself in English Frank. I just prove that you wrong.

Evolution as theory and fact.
-------------------------------
Frank:sn't it a fact that your physical appearance can be copied by a sculptor?
Isn't it a fact that scientist can imitate a cell but they cannot give life to it?
There are no contradictions in the words of God in the bible.
Have you not seen the magic of David Blaine. How could he behead a chicken and then put it back and the chicken is still alive? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fkckEXVYTc That is not an illusion. There is a spiritual force to that. If someone like him can do it, more so with God.

THEN AGNOSTICS, ATHEISTS, AND SKEPTICS LAUGH AT THIS POST. FAIL. EPIC FAIL.

Heck, spiritual force behind David Blaine's magic tricks??? LOL. WTF. Here's the whole discussion. I think this is still going on. As you can see, he can't even identify magic from illusion. He call himself (and his denomination) rational but look how he writes, look at his arguments. He don't even know what 'theory' is when used in science. Maybe he is just using a pocket dictionary.