Has nature ever created a code?

1352 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sheldon's picture
We've seen this lie enough

We've seen this lie enough times now, same old tactic. They breeze in here and make grandiose claims they have evidence for a deity, when asked for it they offer nothing, after a long time wasted on endless repetitions of their claim they cite a woeful first cause argument or maybe a creationist propaganda lie they've hoovered up from one of their sites. Everyone laughs and points out it is nonsense and not remotely evidence, they offer no credible response, then when enough time has passed they start to pretend they have evidenced a deity, and that you either missed it or are denying the "evidence". I've been encountering apologists who use this tactic for years, and still have no idea what they think they will achieve.

Look AJ777, when I asked him for his best piece of evidence for a deity he lied about me and claimed I had no interest in evidence, talk about a poisoning the well fallacy. Then after pages of others making the same request the best he could produce was the risible first cause or Kalam cosmological argument, it's not even an argument for a deity, but for a first cause, and the clue is in the fucking name. You have to laugh really, I mean they wouldn't accept such nonsense as evidence for any other deity, and I have seen both christians and muslims use it on here and elsewhere, hilarious, but all very sad really.

arakish's picture
@ Sheldon

@ Sheldon

Agree with everything you wrote. I also have been seeing these same tactics for over half a century. Damn you know you are old when you refer to things in "centuries." Damn!

Damn how did I word it? Religious Absolutists are full of hope but empty of promise? Hmm... Seems close but anybody can see what that means.

And I do love how they will spiel on and on and on use that, "I already said that tactic."

The absolute idiocy and stupidity of Religious Absolutists and Apologists still amazes me to this day. And what really knocks me flat LMAO, is that, even with the WWW, they still refuse to avail themselves of any knowledge that torpedoes their beliefs. And that is the true EVIL of religion. [You reading other threads AJ?]

It is truly heartbreaking, to the point I want to literally cry, to see people so brainwashed by the evil of religion... I have no words.

And I always tell Religious Absolutists that if they were to truly read the Bible using critical thinking, then they will see they are actually worshiping the Evil One and not some omnibenevolent entity.


tbowen's picture
Ah so coincidence is just a

Ah so coincidence is just a human concept? Is everything you can think a human concept too?

If I won powerball 8 times in a row would that be just a human concept?
The fact that an owl’s likeness is on the moth, which is exactly what it needs, is just a human concept? What probability are we talking here, a believable one? You obviously want to ignore this because it makes evolution look like it’s getting some grand assistance

Sheldon's picture

1. a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.

You see the word "appearance" in there right? Things appear a certain way to us, but how it appears tells us nothing about the probability of an event.

I have answered repeatedly, so it;s a risible lie to claim anyone has ignored your claim. You simply don't understand species evolution, so it's pointless to keep pointing out you are mating up a lie.

Now you are ignoring all request to evidence and explain how your deity created humans in their current form, instantly using magic and clay?

tbowen's picture
Do what would you say if you

what would you say if you won powerball 8 times in a row ?

It staggers the normal thinking person’s sensibility that you dismiss the fact that a moth has mutated just what it needs, owl artistry in near perfect likeness and chalk it up as simply evolution
You are a dishonest evotard

arakish's picture
J N Vanderbilt III: "what

J N Vanderbilt III: "what would you say if you won powerball 8 times in a row?"

As Rosanna Rosannadanna has said, "It could happen!"

Ultimately, I would ask, "If you won the Powerball 8 times in a row, then why are you sitting at home repeating the same inane and asinine statements on an atheist forum board instead of traveling the world?"

Honestly, if I won the Powerball just once with a net prize of 30M$, I would be traveling the world. I would still stop in occasionally here to say where I am at and how I am doing. But I would not be wasting my time repeating the same inane and asinine statements as you have been doing.


Sheldon's picture
Argument from incredulity

Argument from incredulity fallacy.

The evidence is beyond any reasonable doubt, nothing about your vapid creationist verbiage is normal, or indicates any ability on your part to think or reasons rationally. You're just just blindly attacking a scientific fact because it refutes part of a bronze age superstition's creation myth, that you have been raised to believe has some credence, and are too scared to question with any critical thinking, and that makes unevidenced claims that have no explanatory power at all.

I would abandon evolution instantly if proper scientific evidence falsified it, there is nothing that will make you even question your vapid belief about humans being zapped instantly into existence a few thousand years ago, using magic and clay, and talking snakes.

My disbelief in your vapid religion's claims is because no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for it, and this won't change in the astronomically unlikely event that evolution were somehow falsified.

All this of course is reinforced by the fact that creationists like you and Breezy wouldn't dream of denying any scientific fact, and only deny evolution because you see what it says about vapid creationist superstition.

Evolution is well evidenced a scientific fact as we have.

Creationism is an empty superstition based on blind belief, whose adherents can demonstrate no objective evidence for it.

It's a no brainer for any remotely open minded objective "normal thinking person".

Sheldon's picture
Is evolution not an accepted

Is evolution not an accepted scientific theory like the theory of relativity, germ theory and game theory and Newton's theories on gravity then?

It's laughable every time you describe people who accept scientific fact as dishonest. Do you understand germ theory or the theory of relativity then, or you being dishonest when you accept them as scientific facts?

You do make me laugh.

A human lifetime is just a few decades and they still win powerball, how many times might they win it If they lived for over 3 billion years and every second of that was a chance to win powerball. what are the odds you'd have accumulated just 8 wins at the end? Now if everyone who didn't win it died and only winners survived because a win gave you an advantage by making you more suited to your environment, you would expect to see just winners after enough time and repetition. Just as we with evolution.

Someone would have to be either very dumb, or very dishonest to pretend that all the evidence from 160+ years of scientific scrutiny didn't support this fact, doubly so because they just prefer a creation myth that doesn't have a shred of evidence to support it, nothing, and no explanatory power at all. As we see when you were asked for evidenced explanations of it and sulked with your "I don't have to explain how goddidit" response.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
It staggers the normal

It staggers the normal thinking person

That is quite the stretch.

tbowen's picture
You are guilty of the “with

You are guilty of the “with time anything is possible “ fallacy.
It’s quite dim thinking on your part, and with it you attempt to explain that the perfect foil for a moth’s preditors, an owl, can appear on its body.
Now that is magic!!!!!!

Sheldon's picture
Firstly I never claimed

Firstly I never claimed "anything is possible" so you're lying yet again. Secondly there is no such fallacy, so that's two lies in one sentence. I don't think you're in a position to denigrate anyone's thinking given the moronic verbiage you have posted for over 40 pages here.

How fitting you end with a third lie, as nothing in the theory of evolution claims anything requires the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces, which is the definition of magic, but that of course is precisely what religion and creationism claims, see your recent claim where you said quote " I don't have to explain anything about god" unquote. It is clear can't explain is the truth.

To ram this point home you have yet again ignored my request for you to evidence and explain how your deity created a human in its current form using magic and clay, along with a talking snake.

If you want evidence for evolution it is contained within the accepted scientific theory of evolution, all the evidence amassed in over 160 years of global scientific scrutiny supports it as a scientific fact, and the fact you choose to ignore this is your own fault. Theists make claims they can demonstrate no objective evidence for, as you have shown here, yet again.

xenoview's picture

I apply xenoview's razor to your claims of magic. Provide objective evidence that magic is real.

What objective evidence do you have that your bible's creation stories are real?

tbowen's picture
But if you claim time can

But if you claim time can make a moth wings appear w an owl’s likeness, aka: winning powerball multiple times; then it stands to reason that you subscribe to the fallacy that “with time all things are possible”, you are trying to weasel out of this stigma by claiming you didn’t actually say it when in fact it’s understood that is what your belief is.

Nyarlathotep's picture
J N Vanderbilt III - ...in

J N Vanderbilt III - ...in fact it’s understood that is what your belief is.

Only by you. I won't speculate on why you would continue a strawman, even after your strawman has been explicitly pointed out.

Sheldon's picture
I don't think we need to

I don't think we need to speculate, he's a bare faced liar, but lets face when did you ever speak to a creationists who wasn't when it comes to evolution. I guess if they can lie to themselves it's inevitable to lie to others.

Sheldon's picture
No it doesn't, you and reason

No it doesn't, you and reason are anathema lets face it. You made an analogy which was absurd, and I called you on it, and now you're lying to try and cover up. You can repeat your lie ad infinitum, but everyone who has decent grasp of language, ruling you out, can see it is a lie as I neither claimed, nor implied "all things are possible", but then we already know you are an unabashed liar. The evidence for the evolution of camouflage has been linked for you many times, so another lie form you.

Once again we can all also see that you have evaded my question. Proving yet again your vapid beliefs are based on naught. As you can offer no evidence or explanation of how you claim this imaginary sky fairy you worship magic'd a human into existence using clay and talking snakes.

Tempus fugit, or you will die a liar...

tbowen's picture
Mimicry is a huge problem for

Mimicry is a huge problem for evolution and I find it troubling for you to not recognize that the chances of the owl eyes example is an absurd coincidence

arakish's picture
J N Vanderbilt III: "Mimicry

J N Vanderbilt III: "Mimicry is a huge problem for evolution and I find it troubling for you to not recognize that the chances of the owl eyes example is an absurd coincidence."

And where is your OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to back up this claim?


Sheldon's picture
Your laughable denials of

Your laughable denials of evolution are not a problem for evolution, because it is a scientific facts, evidenced beyond any reasonable or rational doubt.

Unlike your woo woo creationist myth about magic apples and talking snakes, which you can neither evidence nor explain. Or can you? Please do enthral us all, how did your sky fairy zap a human instantly into existence in it's current form, using clay and magic?

You are funny.

tbowen's picture
The only magic you need be

The only magic you need be concerned w is the absurd coincidences of owl eyes forming on insect wings and all other mimicry as well.
Absolutely absurd that these coincidences fit hand in glove as a desired outcome. Totally absurd and you as well for swallowing it

Oh my gullible as a child

Sheldon's picture
Its your vapid superstition

Its your vapid superstition that makes claims for the mysterious and supernatural, not science. That's why you can offer neither evidence nor explanation for your magic apples and talking snakes. Whereas science offers both for the fact of evolution in the theory that both explains and evidences it.

Accepting overwhelming evidence isn't gullible, or absurd, denying it in favour of vapid bronze age superstition is though.

Sheldon's picture
"'God in the Gaps'

"'God in the Gaps'
This is a description that has been given to the practice of claiming that any process or structure that humans do not yet understand was created, or is controlled, by a god. This is not, of course, a logical stance. Furthermore, history is littered with examples of things that were once given a supernatural explanation but which we now understand have their basis in nature."


Sheldon's picture


US judge bans intelligent design from science lessons
· Victory for parents on teaching of evolution
· Theory ruled to be religion by the back door

Oh dear...

Sheldon's picture
"In an article on intelligent

"In an article on intelligent design I once wrote for The New Republic, I quoted a statement by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a brave preacher and theologian who was executed by the Nazis for plotting against Hitler. He was decrying the tendency of religious people to impute mysterious natural phenomena to God, and made one of the earliest theological cases against “God-of-the-gaps” arguments:

“If in fact the frontiers of knowledge are being pushed farther and farther back (and that is bound to be the case), then God is being pushed back with them, and is therefore continually in retreat.” (Letters and papers from Prison, 1997, p. 311)

Bonhoeffer, it seems, was smarter than a lot of modern theologians"


Oopsy...even clever theologians disagree with creatards who deny scientific facts....quelle surprise.

tbowen's picture
I did postulate that for sake

I did postulate that for sake of argument let’s pretend that god doesn’t exist.
Your gullibility is a brainwashed festering defect on display.
Only In your evotard beliefs can you overcome the Absurd coincidences that make for a mathematical circus of follies, Aka beating the odds and having owl eyes where needed as if some artist drew it

HA HA HA , common sense out the window

arakish's picture
And you think this is not

And you think this is not magic?

Genesis 2:6 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Sounds like magic to me. Your Sky Faerie takes a lump of dirt, gives it a blow job, and it becomes a human.

And what have been saying about magic?


Sheldon's picture
"I did postulate that for

"I did postulate that for sake of argument let’s pretend that god doesn’t exist."

Why would we need to pretend?

"Your gullibility is a brainwashed festering defect on display."

That's a mirror champ.

"Only In your evotard beliefs can you overcome the Absurd coincidences that make for a mathematical circus of follies, "

It's not my belief, if you have a problem with it then take it up with science. Science accepts it as a fact.

"HA HA HA , common sense out the window"

You have no common sense, you clearly don't even know what it means, so I'm not sure it can go out of the window.

Now how did your magic sky fairy zap humans into existence in an instant in their current form using magic and clay?

"Australopithecus africanus is an extinct (fossil) species of the australopithecines, the first of an early ape-form species to be classified as hominin (in 1924). Recently it was dated as living between 3.3 and 2.1 million years ago, or in the late Pliocene and early Pleistocene times; it is debated as being a direct ancestor of modern humans."

So did your god magic Australopithecus first then use magic to defy these odds you keep claiming actual events have defied?

tbowen's picture
Oh my more mimicry

Oh my more mimicry
Look at those ants on the wings,
All done by mindless chance, HA HA HA


Attach Image/Video?: 

Sheldon's picture
"The oldest definitive insect

"The oldest definitive insect fossil is the Devonian Rhyniognatha hirsti, estimated at 396-407 million years old. This species already possessed dicondylic mandibles, a feature associated with winged insects, suggesting that wings may already have evolved at this time."

I couldn't find anything on talking snakes or sky fairies producing humans using magic for you.

arakish's picture
Nice Photoshop work. rmfr

Nice Photoshop work.



Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.