Discussing “Darwinian Evolution’s Occult, Pagan, New Age Roots” with an Atheist, 4 of 6

Continuing a discussion with an Atheist regarding the video Darwinian Evolution’s Occult, Pagan, New Age Roots—when all segments are posted, you will be able to find them all here.

Picking up from where the previous segment left off, Ken Ammi:

Let us get back to the fundamental issue since you have been unable to even take step number one due to your worldview’s failure from the get-go.

How do you go from that nothing caused nothing or an eternal uncaused first cause piece of matter to explode for no reason and made everything without meaning—then throw in a bunch of accidents that result in life, brains, you, your thoughts, etc.—to “magic is not real” so we must reject magic and adhere to what is real (with “real” being accidental, on your worldview—lest you forget—as is your supposed ability to discern reality)?

Likewise, even if “our origins can only honestly be explained in terms of natural processes” which is a faith based “magic” claim, of course, why is accepting that our origins can be thusly explained an imperative?

Likewise, why try to educate an ape?

Likewise, as per your worldview even if I am one of many “fools that insist that magic is a legitimate way to explain anything” then that is a Darwinian survival mechanism since life (which came about accidentally) only care about survival (for some accidental reason) and adhering to reality is not an imperative so why are you purposefully attempting to damage my ability to survive?

Also, consider that there are many levels of, forms of, types of explanations and God did it is a form of, sort of, type of explanation just like you think that natural processes did it is an explanation—time did it, matter did it, chance did it, nothing did it, etc.

And if it is “a useless lie” upon what premise do you condemn lying?

I realize that you believe that “We are animals” which is why you speak as a reactionary animal, you emote, you jump to conclusions by beginning with them and cannot even seem to realize that you are supposed to have premise upon which to come to conclusions—your view seems to be “I feel, therefore I comment.”

Lastly, when you say “Religions try and stop us from thinking” you are painting with an embarrassingly broad broom and that “Science tries to keep us thinking” is not relevant to you since your worldview is not scientific but Atheistic and Atheism has utterly nothing to do with science and science has utterly nothing to do with Atheism.

The scientific method was established upon biblical theology and Atheism is thought restricting.

Gary Walker:

Please mind your manners.

<Then stop spreading your bulls[***] lies. >

Breakdown of your subjective assertions:

“If” thus, there is no absolute standard.

“If somebody is interested” is an appeal to subjective personal preference.

“they should look to science” indeed, such as biology and not a worldview-philosophy-dogma such as evolution—although I know not what you may mean by “evolution” nor to which of the iterations of that worldview-philosophy you adhere.

“they should” so you are claiming an imperative—but only on your own self-appointed (pseudo) authority.

You condemn “ignorance and denial of reality” but never bothered providing a premise for doing so.

You refer to “that reality” but also fail to provide a premise upon which to demand that accidentally and temporarily existing apes “should” adhere to “reality”—reality, that is, as your haphazardly evolved brain with its random bio-chemical neural reactions can manage to discern it, of course. And, of course, on your worldview reality is also accidental and temporary.

<Piss off moron. Science provides evidence base answers to questions that are testable.

YOUR denial of the value of science is based on your preference for creationism not on the lack of evidence for evolution.  Grow up, your magic is not real.>

Ken Ammi:

Please mind your manners. You claim I am “spreading” stuff without evidence nor a premise upon which to condemn it—even if such is what I am doing. Please grasp that this means you are merely emoting to the level of writing “Dear diary, today I feel…”

It is fascinating that when face with the utter collapse of your position, in a point-by-point manner, you appeal to the Atheist 101 play book: you call me names, avoid the issue, take a parting shot and run away gaining nothing but further discrediting yourself.

Do you really not ask yourself why you keep providing evidence of your worldview’s fundamental level collapse. I mean, should you not be able to rely to simple point-by-point points?

You say “Science provides evidence base answers to questions that are testable” 1) as if your worldview have anything to do with science, 2) as it matters if you are right which it would not since there would be no imperative for accidentally and temporarily existing apes to adhere truth since on your worldview truth is accidental as would be our ability to discern it.

You merely assert I exhibit “denial of the value of science” which is embarrassingly je june: the scientific method is based on biblical theology.

Grow up, your evolution is not real.

We will pick it up from there in the next segment.

For more info, see my books about Atheism related issues.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites.