8th January 2010

“The Roman Catholic Church is about as greedy and materialistic as it gets. Always has been. Have you seen the Vatican?”


49 Responses to “8th January 2010”

  1. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    Today in the Religion of Peace –

    “Seven dead in Afghanistan bombing
    (UKPA) – 56 minutes ago
    A suicide bomber killed seven people at a busy bazaar in eastern Afghanistan, and a bomb hidden outside a provincial governor’s compound slightly wounded the official, authorities said.”

    I’d rewrite it to “True Believer Commits Islamicide – Seven Dead”

  2. solomon Says:

    An ardent news collector & a silly unemployed propaganda mediator.

  3. Oxymoronic Christhinker Says:

    The pope has a nice hat and a pretty dress. Not my thing, but hey, there ain’t no accountin’ for taste. Maybe he just likes to feel special? Hey Solomon: Ya think the pope does it doggy-style?

  4. solomon Says:

    Dear Oxymoronic Christhinker,
    For a honest comment I should get tech’s permission first.

  5. tech Says:

    I agree that the Catholic Church is the richest organization in the world.Still I feel no need to make fun of the Pope. Oh i’m not a Catholic either.

  6. MagicAintReal Says:

    Solomon. Give it up. Aside from your butchering of the English language (what does “decredit” mean anyway?), your dishonesty is really annoying. We get it. You’re posting obviously ridiculous ideas to see how seriously people will take you. You find amusement in this. I find amusement in asking a question which real believers CANNOT answer seriously.
    Believers in god as a creator of humans please respond to my questions:

    Knowing about human chromosome 2, isn’t it more accurate to say that apes created man rather than saying that god created man OR did god create apes and then fuse two ape chromosomes to make man?

    If you choose the latter, why did god make apes first and then fuse two ape chromosomes? Why not just make man out of all HUMAN chromosomes?
    Here is what reasonable people like to call evidence:
    Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. Our ancestors being APES! Not god.

  7. PEB Says:

    From “The Vatican Billions” by Avro Manhattan (http://www.cephasministry.com/catholic_vaticans_billions_1.html)
    “Jesus, the founder of Christianity, was the poorest of the poor. Roman Catholicism, which claims to be His church, is the richest of the rich, the wealthiest institution on earth.”

    Religion is all about power and making money.

  8. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    Having been raised Catholic, it’s an embarrassment now that I ever added money to their collection plates. I understand they now pass the plate twice during the service.

  9. tech Says:

    Magicaintreal are you for real?

  10. The Heretic Says:

    2010.01.07 (Yala, Thailand) – A man is ripped in two by a Religion of Peace nail bomb.

    2010.01.07 (Heet, Iraq) – Women and children are among the dead when Mujahideen detonate planted bombs around the bedrooms of four homes.

    2010.01.07 (Nangarhar, Afghanistan) – Four children are among nine Afghans murdered by Islamic bombers in two attacks.

    2010.01.07 (Nag Hamadi, Egypt) – Six worshippers and one guard are gunned down by Muslim radicals as they leave mass at a Christian church. A 14-year-old is among the dead.

    Enough said.

    As to the Vatican – or any religious institution for that matter. Take a look around your town / city. See where the churches are (and how many.) They usually occupy the most choice and valuable real estate (and a lot of it) in the town. Tax ’em all, I say.

  11. tech Says:

    “Religion is all about power and making money.” A very broad statement.May be some truth to that just the same.Christainity however does a lot of good in the world.Not all Religions practise christainity.

  12. tech Says:

    Heretic, do you really think that a true Christain person would commit the acts you mentioned in your last statement?They are far from being” Christ like” in my mind.

  13. PEB Says:

    The good that christianity does pales into insignificance when compared to the lives it ruins and the lies it spreads.

    Solomon – are todays headlines also “propaganda”?
    Do you believe the people who committed these crimes in the name of Islam and atheists deserve to be eternally punished by God equally?

  14. MagicAintReal Says:

    Hey Tech, the bible says that Jesus was a disgrace so why would anyone want to be “Christ like?”
    Now you could actually answer my question or you could dodge yet another one of my questions by asking me if I am for real.
    Corinthians 11-14 proves that Jesus was a disgrace.

  15. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    Would a true Christian commit atrocities? Inquisition.

  16. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    PEB – don’t you know that Atheism is a FAR worse crime than murder in the minds of fundamentalists? God, being imaginary, has no opinion on the matter.

  17. tech Says:

    You macicaintreal are like most people who the holy book.you pick parts of it and play on words ,no research.Continue on in that chapter.You will find what Paul meant in his letter to the Corinthians.

  18. tech Says:

    Isn’t captianzero 1969 imaginary? That I do believe.

  19. Greg Says:

    tech, do you think your bible is the direct, literal word of God (as if God himself wrote it)?

  20. MagicAintReal Says:

    Why should I have to read on in the chapter when EVERY word of the bible is true? The bible says nature teaches you that long hair on a man is a disgrace. Do you think that Jesus is a disgrace or do you think that this one passage might be…uh oh…wrong?
    Seriously Tech. Write any kind of response to Corinthians 11-14.
    Either Jesus was a disgrace OR some of the words of the bible are wrong and thus I need to “continue on in that chapter.” So that “[I] will find what Paul meant in his letter to the Corinthians.”?

  21. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    Tech – you think a person you’ve had written correspondence with is imaginary but a God you’ve never seen or heard is real? Interesting. Maybe clinically so.

  22. tech Says:

    Yes he was speaking to the corinthians and if don’t want to read it all then don’t. Oh I don,t think Jesus was a disgrace. He wasn’t talking about Jesus,he was talking to the church in Corinth.

  23. Oxymoronic Christhinker Says:

    Interesting piece on death and and funeral of an atheist you (pl.) may be interested in: http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/2143/the_death_of_a_secularist

  24. Oxymoronic Christhinker Says:

    Crap! tech and Solomon’s writing inabilities may be rubbing off on me!!!

  25. tech Says:

    Is there anyone here without Faith?

  26. tech Says:

    Is there anyone that knocks GOOD?

  27. tech Says:

    Anyone here people who do good deeds?

  28. tech Says:

    Thats knock people who do good deeds.

  29. Tony Provenzano Says:

    That is why I and many others I know are advocates of ‘no religions.’ A large part of the religious right are committing these hate crimes.
    I have just as many good ethics and morals as any religion can promote. I’ve acquired them through education, culture, and the laws in place from our society.
    Religious folk on the other hand, claim they have a monopoly on these morals, yet all they have to do is follow their “good book” to the letter and soon they are killing in the name of their God.

    Isn’t it sort of weird?
    I promote science. Let me define: Science-continually attempting to supply the best explanation for how everything in the universe works. The more science everyone understands, the smarter the populace becomes and the world benefits. Look around you and see where science has taken us the past 2000 yrs. Longer, more fulfilling living results.

    The religious teachings are guided by hope (everlasting life) and fear (everlasting hell). Their books are full of contradictions that are easily and continually misinterpreted.
    These ‘holy books’ spread fear, irrationality, and prejudice.
    They are the opposite of progress.

    All because mommy told you to believe.
    ‘Thinking’ will always trump ‘believing.’

  30. Greg Says:

    tech, still waiting for a response……

  31. Tony Provenzano Says:

    Faith, tech, is one of the most ridiculous teachings religion uses to societies detrement.

    I believe (I have a strong aversion to using the pathetically overused term ‘faith’) that my car will start because there is EVIDENCE that it has started hundreds of times before. Advancements in technology through rigorous testing has developed a very capable combustion engine, a starter, a battery, and gas we take from the stored sunlight.

    Because science works, I believe my car will start.
    If we had no evidence for the car, or all the parts and fuel needed, I would be skeptical to believe that contraption would run.

    Religion spews ‘faith’ without any evidence (other than the masses who say “believe”, “have faith”, etc.).

    You can though prove it to me that supernatural hogwash does exist by praying a penny into my hand right now.
    While you’re at it, tell God to send one to the rest of my friends on this site;because I’m sure they’ll have sense enough to know that Tony has lost his mind if I start making extraordinary claims without any evidence.

  32. solomon Says:

    Hi everybody, here I come again,
    So due to my brief absence you all think all your views could fool viewers?
    Trying to use language as a yardstick on ones ability to state their views or points? You are pretending you could not understand the points that I have raised. You try to make it look as if ones less verse of a language has a direct connection on ones ability to present their views & as tool to scare them away from this site. All of your tactics are out of date.
    And on what point you labelled me as dishonest? And cite one of my rediculous ideas that all your lots have purposely been ignoring & could not even answer or deny it? Don’t just make wild accusations to make it look as if were don’t have credibility.
    For your Lousy question regarding chromosome I have a simple answer.

  33. tony cynic Says:

    Sorry sol but we aint buyin’ what you are selling.

  34. tony cynic Says:

    Tech and Sol.
    Time and again we see suffering caused by ‘true believers’ and hear the usual reply of
    ‘They are not true followers of our holy book of choice’.
    If your magic book has all the answers and is the word of your all powerful god how come the vast majority of your people get it so wrong.
    It is not as if it is just one or two people misreading a small bit of it.
    History is filled with millions of devoutly religious people killing each other while screaming about how great their gods are.
    As almost all people (99%+) are not being true to your gods word maybe he is not such a great communicator, or maybe he does not exist.
    You know how we feel about this, have you got any real answers for us this time?
    I doubt it.

  35. solomon Says:

    Dear MagicAintReal,
    I don’t have to answer the first part of your questions coz it sounds nonsense. For the second part you say;
    “Here is what reasonable people like to call evidence:
    Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. Our ancestors being APES! Not god.”

    You use the word “widely accepted”. By whom? It will always be by the Atheist lots & their fool followers. Don’t simply say “widely accepted” before it is challenged. Read the following so that viewers would not be mislead by the fabrications of scientific research brought up by the Atheists:

    Drawing up the human gene map within the framework of the Human Genome project was a major scientific development. However, evolutionist publications have distorted a number of the project’s results. It is claimed that the genes of chimpanzees and humans bear a 98% similarity and assumed that this shows their closeness, which is used as evidence for the theory of evolution.

    However, this is in fact a false proof that evolutionists exploit by making use of society’s lack of information on the subject.

    First of all, the concept so frequently touted by evolutionists—that 98% similarity between human and chimpanzee DNA—is a deceptive one. In order to claim that the genetic structures of human beings and chimpanzees bear a 98% similarity, the entire chimpanzee genetic code would have to be mapped, in the way the human one has. Then the two would have to be compared, to obtain the results. Yet no such results are yet available: While the human genetic map has been completed, the chimpanzee equivalent has not.

    In fact, the “98% similarity between human and ape genes” slogan was deliberately produced for propaganda purposes many years ago. This “similarity” is a highly exaggerated generalization, based on a similarity in the amino acid sequences in between 30 and 40 of the basic proteins present in man and ape.

    Sequence analysis of the DNA strings corresponding to these proteins was performed using a method known as “DNA hybridization.” and only these limited proteins were compared.

    Yet there are around 30,000 genes in human beings and these genes encode some 200,000 proteins. There is thus no scientific justification for claiming, on the basis of a similarity in 40 proteins out of 200,000, any 98% resemblance between human and ape genetics.

    The DNA comparison of those 40 proteins is also questionable. Two biologists named Charles Sibley and Jon Edward Ahlquist carried out the comparison in 1987 and published the results in the Journal of Molecular Evolution. However, another scientist by the name of Sarich examined their data and concluded that they’d used a method of questionable reliability and had exaggeratedly interpreted the data.
    Another example used by evolutionists with regard to the so-called “genetic similarity between man and ape” is that there are 46 chromosomes in human beings and 48 in gorillas. Evolutionists assume that chromosome numbers are an indication of an evolutionary relationship. But in fact, if this logic employed by evolutionists were valid, then man would have a much closer relative than the POTATO! Yes, the potato that you fried and eat. This is hilarious.Both human beings and potatoes have exactly the same number of chromosomes.
    These examples demonstrate that the concept of genetic similarity constitutes no evidence for the theory of evolution. Not only are the genetic similarities incompatible with the evolutionary family tree proposed, but they actually provide totally conflicting results.

    In addition, the similarities discovered are actually evidence for creation rather than for evolution. It is perfectly natural for the bodies of humans and other living things to exhibit molecular similarities, because all living things are made up of the same molecules, use the same water and atmosphere, and consume foods made up of the same molecules. Naturally, their metabolisms—and thus, their genetic structures—will tend to resemble one another. However, this is no evidence that they evolved from a common ancestor.

    Another example will help elucidate this: All the buildings in the world are constructed from similar materials—bricks, iron, cement, and so forth. But this does not imply that these buildings evolved from one another. They were built independently, using common materials. The same principle applies to living things.
    Yet the huge gulf between human beings and apes is too vast to be bridged with evolutionist claims and myths. Apes are animals and, in terms of consciousness, are no different to horses or dogs. Human beings, on the other hand, are conscious, possess free will and are capable of thought, speech, reasoning, decision-making and judgment. All these attributes are processes of the soul they possess. It is this soul that gives rise to the major difference between human beings and animals. Man is the only entity in nature to possess a soul. No physical similarity can bridge this widest gulf between humans and other living things.
    That’s about it.

  36. solomon Says:

    Dear Atheists,
    All the while you are crying for evidence on gods existence. What more or kind of evidence are your thoughts looking for? You want to see god? I’ve said earlier, God is comparable to Nothing! Even if god sits in front of you & touches your nose, you won’t be able to recognize him. That is why he made human to recognize him by his words & by his creations.

  37. CaptainZero1969 Says:


  38. Greg Says:

    Sol, when you blatantly plagiarize verbatim from another source (or sources) you should at least give the citation….

  39. Greg Says:

    “God is comparable to Nothing”

    I agree. Nothing.

  40. solomon Says:

    Dear Greg,

    If you agree than don’t again cry for evidence or proof.

  41. solomon Says:

    Dear Greg,
    Plagiarize verbatim or Citation whats the fuss. The important thing the message is delivered.

  42. Greg Says:

    Dear Plagiarizer….er….Solomon

    The “fuss” is that it’s proper etiquette to cite sources when you EXTENSIVELY quote from them. This allows others to ensure that the information is correct, reliable and not taken out of context.

    Besides, not doing so can also be construed as “stealing”.

    So, are you a thief or can you provide the source?

  43. Greg Says:

    tech….funny that you should respond to that post but have avoided responding to my previous two posts.

    Hiding from something?

  44. solomon Says:

    Dear Tony Provenzano,

    You are using science & you also made it look as if science have all the answers to all the fabricated lies your Atheists try to twist viewers. Your lots take it as if science is some sort of your property & the sole tool for you lies propaganda. Science is not new. Science is just a minute few of the unlimited gods knowledge. You see the birds flying around swiftly maneuvering & somersaulting at ease in narrow places & airbourne without a runway. Is that science? The past 2000 years you cited is a very short time. Yes the birds have known how to fly billions of years ago without undergoing flight school & pilot training. Who pour the thoughts of how to fly? Now man just know the theory of flight since Leonardo Da’ Vinci & just begin to fly in the 2th century, suddenly this group of Atheist boastfully claim as if science could solely provide all the answers to their questions or doubt.

    Believers does not reject science at all. Most of the scholars that promote or made science discoveries are muslims like Avicenna & others, but they uses science for mens benefit & to strengthtened their faith in god, likewise the Atheist uses it to defy god. Science is something thought by god in terms of thoughts & observations & discoveries whether by accident, by chance or by research. And god won’t give all or everything straight away what he knew in one shot. He gave them gradually bits by bits so that the hypocrites(Atheist) have no chance of misusing or fabricating it. Can you see most of the Atheist fabrications in science are finally found to be misleading when god reveals the truth thru the believers?

  45. solomon Says:

    Dear all,
    Sorry for the typing error on my previous comment.

    “fabricated lies your Atheists” should be “fabricated lies you Atheists”
    and “just begin to fly in the 2th century” should be “just begin to fly in the 20th century”

  46. solomon Says:

    Dear CaptainZero1969,
    Is that all you can sigh……HUH?
    Surely thats all you can…
    What a pity….

  47. Greg Says:

    Regardless of all the sheep feeling the need to come on this site and bleat, I like the quote of the day.

  48. Tony Provenzano Says:

    @ Solomon,
    Thank you for your reply,

    Science CAN make the claim that it will TRY to answer all. That is the quest that spurs on progress. It doesn’t claim it will be perfect, it keeps changing because the facts keep changing.
    That makes sense. It isn’t stating lies, the facts can be checked and duplicated by all.
    I make no claim that science is “ours” or that “we” started it.
    Personally, I will say it was my understanding of science that mostly made me the proud atheist I am today. Science works and makes sense to me, philosophy and morals change like leaves in the wind and are much harder to make sense of. I march on cautiously with what I think works best, Science. I’m much more hesitant to make claims that I know when philosophical issues arise.

    There is a big difference with religion(s) though.

    Religions claim to already have the proper answers contained in there books. They (most) will not change with the latest scientific claims unless they agree with everything in their ‘holy books.’ I believe this causes undo strife which can result in years, even decades of lost progress. Many examples through history show this, Copernicus, Galileo, many others and of course Darwin goes on today 150 years later! I’m not saying science needs no checks and balances.
    But other rigorous scientific debate (by unbiased scientists with their own beliefs) does continually go on and they are in the know, and present Evidence not Dogma (although it is only recently we’ve almost obliterated dogma usage in the west).

    I see religions as an errored rule book to address philosophical issues using outdated data.
    History shows religion can only survive if they can save face while changing with the new facts science presents.
    Stubborn peoples who don’t want to change with the science use power and greed to start a war rather than change.

    It is amazing to me that this persists to this day with all that we now know. Brain someday must win over braun.
    Spirited debate is the way and is what we here do.

    May the best idea win.

  49. solomon Says:

    Dear Tony Provenzano,

    The problem is that you are into the belief that science alone could provide all your doubts. Science alone cannot do that. Science is only a weak instrument like any other tool. Example a hammer, it can drive a nail but not a car…God limits the power of science to some extent. And how you come to be alive for example. Science cannot explain. It can only explain the physical evidence of it like as a result of chemical reaction inside the body but it cannot explain who supplied the battery or power to drive that. It cannot explain why a dead body or substance like our skin, flesh and bones suddenly came to life & kickin’.
    If not god told us how we came to be alive, no amount of research or time spent can find the answer.

    And the holy book is not utter nonsence. Theres a lot of verse that contain answers that science cannot grasp. The sperm for example, it is explain in the Qoran 1400 years ago. How man came about from sperm. That is science & that is also a fact. But the evolutionists did’nt even mention this fact for the hope that it is not publicised or better off nobody knows about it. The Qoran also explains about astronomy, the beginning of the universe & many others. Why are all these not mention in the evolutionist debate. The reason is that they fear that this old book brought by Mohammad which reveals the truth (since science don’t lie)will strip bare their fabricated lies or views.
    How could you quote “I see religions as an errored rule book to address philosophical issues using outdated data.” it seems that you are ignorant regarding this matter. First read the correct book. Read and analyse the Quran.