I think there is a difference between challenging a belief system and mocking it. Some of the language here does cross the line, which is why I usually don't even botherto respond. Mocking people's believes and actions - religious or atheist - isn't an effective way to change anyone's mind.

Mocking people's believes and actions - religious or atheist - ...

I'm not sure it is technically possible to "mock" at atheists.

I think there is a difference between challenging a belief system and mocking it.As Tom_Joad pointed out, Hugh and the moderators are very prompt and efficient to correct such behavior. As a Christian my self, I have to honestly say that most Christians are on the defensive and are very prompt to feel attacked. As thrue Christians we should be able to accept people that do not share the same beliefs. We have to be able to take some ridicule also otherwise, if we can not take the heat, as I previously said we shouldn't read/get involved in those threads! Think about it, Christ told his thruth, never imposed anything to anyone, he simply walk away if people didn't agree with his thruth. Worse thing one can do, is debate and get mad during religion talks. Agree to disagree and be a spiritual being ratter than a religious being. Big difference between the two! Many wars have been done in the name of religion while spiritual beings are well respected and this even by non believer or atheists!

kgeorge78: I guess the 5 billion non athiest people walking this earth are wrong.Well seeing how 3+ billion of those people are not followers of Christianity, alot of people must be wrong according to your beliefs I guess, so there are more people "wrong" than "right" which puts you in the minority, and depending which Christian religion you follow you also be "wrong" again for not following the right "Christian" faith (RC, Ang, UC, SA, SDA, JW, Baptist, Pentacostal (United or Zion)etc. etc, etc.)
So if you were born in India (and raised as a Hindu) I would guess you would be wrong too. But because of chance you were born in Canada (I presume) where Hinduism is not as popular and follow your particular "Christian" faith you must be right. :rolleyes:

I never said that. Don't assume.
When I say believe, I mean believe in anything, not the unproven "big bang"

can we stack up the proof for the big bang and the proof for god side by side some time and use that for the weighting of validity in this debate?:rolleyes:


And If the Big bang does turn out to be wrong all of the skeptic thinkers here will adapt to the facts.


Can we expect the same courtesy from the theists?

The last I've heard from the theists is that whether the Big Bang happened or not is immaterial, it's still all God's work.
My theory is that he must have been very bored by an eternity of being infinitely wise, perfect and almighty without getting any acknowledgment for that (the downside of being the only entity in the Universe and not having to go through growing up and education). And he decided to try a new approach by creating a material world (something he's always known how to, of course, but never got to trying before). The rest, as they say, is history.

wow, thats just terrible. I will forever stay away from anything related to religion or non-religion topics on this forum.

Now if only theologians would do the same for the science classes of schools...

Yeah, only if........ Now a story from a school in the States.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369549,00.html

thank goodness we have religion to teach us morality.

Not only have these changes been documented in nature (see: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...evolution.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html) ), but they have been replicated in the lab with microorganisms and insects. And scientists find all kinds of organisms with physical characteristics that are common to other species. It took me 5 minutes to find a discovery of fossils on the dinosaur to bird lineage: (See: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806...ered.dinosaur/ (http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/23/feathered.dinosaur/) ) You can draw the same linage through all the proto human species: Australopithecine, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthalis and Homo Sapiens. I would be surprised if we didn't continue to evolve (if we don't kill ourselves off).

First link, lizards evolving into lizards, second link prehistoric birds evolving into prehistoric birds, apeman theory, human evolving into human. Nothing more than adaptation and natural selection. Variations of the same kind of lifeforms. Based on evolution theories, we came from the sea, if the first air breathing amphibians just showed up by accident, how many species of air breathing creatures first walked the earth? There had to be a first at some point. If that's the case then there has to be transition from a single amphibian to an eventual metamorphisis to a variety of birds, reptiles and mammals. What about insects? When did they turn from amoeba or whatever aquatic life form they were to the millions of varieties of bugs we now have? How come all kinds of "evidence" exists to prove the evolution of man and yet there is no proto primates outside the human evolutionary scale? I can't find any info on how modern chimpanzees, orangutangs, baboons, monkeys or gorillas evolved.

From one of the links...
http://www.cnn.com/images/1998/05/homepage/white.gif
One scientist casts doubt

Alan Feduccia, an evolutionary biologist at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, said the discoveries are "very interesting," but he said they do not provide immediate and final proof that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
He said the new fossils are dated after those of the first bird, suggesting that the fossils could be either feathered dinosaurs or primitive birds that happened to resemble dinosaurs.