jehovah's witness's came to my house
and they asked me what my religion was i screamed at them all hail sion and they left
and they asked me what my religion was i screamed at them all hail sion and they left
Praise the Sun. 

Revere in the Moon's light, or die by my crescent blade. 
How about I pander the Sun during the day and the Moon at night?
That should be a fair enough compromise.
The mighty sun is also a Star. 
Sure, let's do the stars as well.
Make it a celestial holy trinity while we're at it.
I am a servant of
.
BTW somebody please tell me I'm not the only person to ever make Teemobile jokes.
Tell me some
It's his favorite cell phone carrier!
Lmfao that's awesome!
: "Do you have a moment...to talk about DEATH?"
do you have a moment to talk about our lord and executioner DRAAAAAAAVEN?!?!
Sithis isn't here now so Hail Malzahar.
Sithis isn't here now so Hail Malzahar.
Sithis is dead. Even Lorkhan :*( Hail Auri-el!
I and a few friends all dressed up in various clothings' after work (Halloween @ midnight) to represent all other religions. One by one and instead of asking for candy we would drop off candy and then inform them of our religion(s). Finally we would ask if they would love to convert to our religion(s). Before we all went home we all quickly gathered together at their front door saying, "Tricker Treat!" Jehovah Witness' Family dude said, "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!" LMAO
Cheers! -Sin
whispers hail hydra...

real ignorant
real ignorant
how?
because it's not fake
Ignorance is bliss, as they say. He has every right to worship
just as you have a right to believe in something that physically doesn't exist.
Ignorance is bliss, as they say. He has every right to worship
just as you have a right to believe in something that physically doesn't exist.
And you have the right to be respectful of people beliefs and not undermine them whether or not you disagree with them else you end up seeming like the douche that you are not.
~~#~~NerfLissandra
He didn't insult his belief though, just stating something that is currently irrefutable fact.
that is false, God falls under the same category as evolution in terms of factuality, there is evidence for both, but because of time tables there isn't enough real hard evidence to prove or disprove either. Ever heard the term, "theory of evolution"? That is a misnomer, as it has only been able to achieve hypothesis status by all definitions. God is similar in the fact that scientifically speaking he is a hypotheses that has been neither proven nor disproven though evidence exists for both. Both are like dark matter, they are placeholders for something we do not yet fully comprehend, there is evidence that they may exist, but not many can claim to have empirically observed either (less so for evolution than God, when a spiritual experience happens there is a proven response in the brain of the subject and many scientists have claimed to have witnessed acts of God. Evolution on the other hand can't be experienced in any form due to the necessary timetable for it to occur.) In other words, making statements like, "just as you have a right to believe in something that physically doesn't exist" is unscientific and a folly as it is no less reputable than evolution (and if you think the spiritual aspect of it is what makes it ridiculous, just look at what the past would think of modern technology. hand a member of the medieval catholic church a cell phone and they will call you an agent of satan for using devil magic. Spirituality is just a reaction humans have to things they don't understand and so they label it 'magic')
Oh wow, okay, I really don't want to start this argument. Honestly, I'm tired of this, but you're so much more misinformed than the average religious theist. Evolution has been proven to the point where it's as real as gravity. Actually, even more, since we know most of the mechanisms of evolution while we don't exactly know why gravity exists, although there are a few explanations.
You seem to forget that there are organisms that don't require 20 years to create a new generation. Scientists have already proven macro evolution amongsts bacterial cultures and salamandar ring groips in the US.
We have reached the point where we can even examine DNA to see how they match. We know which DNA porgrammes the body to create legs during fetal development and we've found that it was present in dolphins and whales but have been deactivated.
Spiritual experiences have been theorized by science as being states of hightened senses due to some form of meditation or rigorous practice and it is simply because of how our body works and not because of some spiritual being.
The theory of evolution doesn't encompass evolution in its entirety. It just maps out the various methods by which evolution occurs, be it natural/artificial selection, mutations or genetic drifting.
Evolution is a fact. It has a theory.
We observe evolution on a daily basis, with viruses becoming stronger and stronger and animals and plants having more and more yields due to artificial selection.
Trying to belittle evolution to a mere hypothesis is the same as saying gravity isn't real and some fool just thought it up.
Hopefully you're mixing it up with the various models of abiogenesis because THOSE are hypothesis, alhough some are very compelling.
Thanks for typing it out for me. Did you know that many fish that is used for sports fishing are harder to catch than a decade ago? They started not eating anything that's tasty.
There's even an epidemic in the fishing industry where-in due to the decades of letting the "little one go" (As in throwing away small fish but eating the big ones), the majority of fish that produce offsprings have the 'tiny trait' which causes all future generations to become small.
So as we continue letting the "little one go", we're reducing the size of all potential fish in the future.
I didn't intend to start an argument whatsoever. A debate would be fun though. What you are referring to as evolution in short periods is merely a case of adaptation. Many like to point to the moths of Manchester, they went from a population of mostly one color to another, human beings can do the same without even needing to change a generation, though for entirely different purposes. Natural selection is proven to occur, genetic mutations occur, ETC. But only insomuch as they pertain to adaptation of species. Species simply become more efficient with traits they already have and adapt to their environment (often actively) while no true evidence for evolution in it's entirety that would put it into theoretical status (a theory is something that must be tested and found to be accurate over and over again, evolution sadly cannot be, and while that doesn't mean it isn't true, it does mean that it is a hypothesis, though being a theory or a hypothesis is semantics and I apologize for using semantics in that scenario) you are referring primarily to elements that could be resulting from evolution and then working backwards to assume B was a result of A, and while that can provide insight it is not the scientific way. It is to test whether X=1, and test that over and over again until it does become an irrefutable fact like gravity. When the apple fell upon newtons head he hypothesized that gravity was the cause, and it wasn't until gravity was able to be scientifically measured that his postulates became fact.
Debates on the internet always tend to end sour, as my experiences with them have told me.
Thing is, adaptation and evolution aren't really different. The only difference is how large of a group it affects. An adaptive trait affects a relatively small group or a single individual. Such as when a hare sheds its white fur for a brown one when the seasons transition from winter to summer.
Evolutionary trait affects an entire populace, an entire species, an entire genus. It is an adaptation that occurs on a larger basis.
Now, I have to ask, do you KNOW what evolution, in its most basic form, is? Because you state that Natural Selection, adaptation, genetic mutation etc. all have been proven to occur yet you state evolution is a hypothesis.
The thing is, that's where the THEORY comes in. You might not agree that some PARTS of evolution occur, but evolution is fact. Natural selection is part of evolution. Genetic mutation is part of evolution. Adaptation is part of evolution. These are all a part of evolution.
You might not agree that genetic drifting or mutation by UV ray could occur, but that doesn't mean you should think evolution as a whole is false.
And, you're assuming that I didn't know what the distinction between a Scientific theory and the literary theory is.
Evolution has been tested multiple times on generations and generations of bacterial cultures, fungal growth, Paramecium and even larger test subjects such as Salamanders and Toads.
I don't want to have to keep repeating what I've said, so just read and research what I've mentioned. Look up the Salamander Ring Colonies, read about them.
Evolution was a theory, in the literary sense, much, MUCH before Darwin's time. We just didn't know how or why it occurred. Darwin was one of the first to hypothesis one of the methods. From there, we've found a bunch of other ways through which organisms evolve adding onto the Scientific Theory of Evolution.
I don't know why you keep saying Evolution is just a hypothesis when you state natural selection and adaptation and such as being proven facts.
Evolution in its most basic form is just the change in inherited traits, features and characteristics in a population over successive generations. This has been observed so many times and has even been used by us humans such as in dog breeding, food production, wool production etc.
How do you think we've maintained some of the oldest species of dogs that should've died out due to mixed breeding?
Im just trying to understand here, so don't get mad. Do you suggest that Creationism and Evolution contradicts each other? Because if so, I once heard a very interesting lecture about that topic, and I would like to share.
Go ahead and share the lecture, but I am not suggesting that. I am merely saying that calling it an irrefutable fact that god doesn't exist is like calling evolution an irrefutable fact. Neither statement is true, both are respectable hypotheses in their own right (though theism could really use less mystification) and with a better understanding of the mechanics of life either or both could some day be found correct or otherwise.
I dont see how there is any tangible evidence for god.
if you have heard the story of lots wife, there are human sized pillars of salt in the area described, the parting of the red sea (actually believed by many to be a referrence to the reed sea) has geological evidence that it occured. There are many many many many many people who have claimed to have seen god or something within close relation (this includes scientists). When someone is having a religious or otherwise spiritual experience there are scientifically observable changes in brain chemistry that occur (they've tested this one pretty extensively last I checked), these among many other things count as evidence, though it is still little more than a hypothesis (primarily due to its untestable nature)
Jehovah's Witnesses are really damn annoying. I don't know if you have some around your neighborhood, but if you don't ignore them or send them running, they'll talk your ear off for hours about stuff you most likely don't care about. It's literally in their religion that they have to go door-to-door and convert people. I've run some off by screaming at them in Aramaic through the door; wish I'd recorded that, it was hilarious.
try claiming mormon missionaries are there. They will often leave because they know that if the person was going to be converted, mormonism would win out over jehovas witness.
Oooor...I could keep acting like I'm possessed and am speaking in tongues. That's had a lot of success so far.
that ones always fun, i also enjoy using a dog to scare them.
At least they give free english courses in my country. Apart from that they are annoying too.
Here's what you do. You smile and welcome them inside. Then once they start talking you excuse yourself to the bathroom and then in the other room you scream "honey, where's the shotgun? Yeah, I got a couple of them over in the parlor" loud enough so they can hear you.
Then watch through the window as they run away.
You could tell them you have a
for them to inspect.
That, or go to the bathroom, feign chronic diarrhea, and tell them the devil has taken possession of your anus.
Why the hell do you have an apostrophe in "witness's"?
isnt it witnesses?