Discuss Bob Suffolk's answer to: Creationalism vs. Evolution.

Here’s challenge. I’ll make a list of all the natural phenomena that were originally thought to be caused by gods, demons or other supernatural forces, but were later determined to have natural ...

Atheist games of course are utterly silly but that is what we have all come to expect of them.  To wit: 

Here’s {the} challenge. I’ll make a list of all the natural phenomena that were originally thought to be caused by gods, demons or other supernatural forces, but were later determined to have natural causes. [1]

While I do that, you make a list of all the natural phenomena that had natural explanations that were later determined to have supernatural or divine causes. [2]. 

Then we’ll compare and see which is more effective at explaining how things work: science or the supernatural. [3].

Ready? Go!


1.  Atheists are apparenty incapable of correct grammar and correct reasoning.  Chris failed to make his "list" hence he asks nothing and is disqualified from debate.  Point awarded to the opposition.

2.  Intelligent Design disproved all atheist dogma without reservation, rendering the entire cult utterly dogmatic and unscientific.  Even so, the point was posed dishonestly and unintelligently.  It is therefore moot.  Point awarded to the opposition.

3.  Atheists preach that there is a choice between science and religion.  We find that Physicalist's third point is preposterous as there are innumerable cases in point to disprove.  One is Albert Einstein, a Jew who fled the atheist regime of Hitler, because atheists are violent and consumed with hate: proof, the burning of the books.  Another is J. Robert Oppenheimer, whose family fled the same atheist persecution of the Wehrmacht.  Both are Jews and repeat Nobel Laureates, with advanced degrees in physics.

Faith and science go very well together, but neither support the contentions of the atheist cult.  Point awarded to the opposition.

The question is answered in full.  The question therefore finds for the opposition per se.

More importantly, the Institute for Creation Research has posted clear and convincing scientific proof that creation took place exactly as recorded in Genesis, fielded by the finest doctoratesand postdoctorates with earned degrees in Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy, and Arts majors who have doctorate and postdoctorate degrees in Philosophy, Religion, and History. 

The case clearly goes to Creation Science, as there is absolutely no proof for any atheist belief whatsoever.


The more pertinent question is, "Should we allow a discredited cult such as atheism to supplant science and education with their disproved beliefs any longer, considering their violent behavior and criminal past?




Obama's program is not working. That is why you aren't, either, or soon won't be.
Liked this answer? Tell your friends about it

20 Comments About This Answer

Add your comment

#1...Most cultures used to think eclipses were the result of God's anger.

#2 Stars are pinholes in the sky.

#3. the Earth is the center of the galaxy, universe.

#4 The Earth is flat

#5 Lightning is the result of Zeus thunder bolts from Mt. Olympus

#6 People can fly without machines, walk on water, turn water into wine, heal by touch, cheat death

#7 Jesus will shortly return to earth (Not a single generation hasn't believed it would happen in their lifetime)


Bob Suffolk

As the question has already been answered in full and found the atheist cult in discredit, then your addendum is both improper and extremely biased.  Further, it is entirely unsubstantiated as there is no proof for any of your contentions.  As you have failed to adhere to procedure, and as your case is completely ridiculous, then there is no point pursuing it.


There is absolutely no proof for atheism.  The scientific case disproved atheism, the rational case discredited atheism, and the historical case exposed the inherent violence of atheism.


Until you learn to debate, please listen to better educated persons than your cult will allow.

Anonymous Comment

Bob, get used to it.  Atheist whack jobs are always going to be stupid and bitter.  That is why they always want us to hate them and will stop at nothing to force it on themselves.


That is why atheists all live on bigoted lies.


I don't hate atheists.  There is a difference between hate and pity.

John McCann

See what I mean, Chris? You cannot engage the brain dead in debate, ask them questions, or even get plain sense out of them.

Bob Suffolk

Patience, Anonymous. 


Atheists are clearly incorrect in all that they believe but so are all other fanatics.  The difference between a Christian fanatic and an atheist fanatic is that the Christian fanatic at least has the truth, regardless that he may not understand it fully.


Atheists understand nothing correctly, hence they are the least rational fanatics of all, and clearly the least to be believed.

John McCann

Automatic posts from the ideologues computer generated nonsense. 

Bob Suffolk

McCann, as you are so unethical in debate that you post as 200+ screen names, and espouse atheism, then it is very clear that you are terrified of your cult's humiliating and repetitive discredits. 


Hitler shared your doctrine and paranoia point for point, as all atheists fear the next inevitable round of humiliating discredit.  It is inevitable: when you espouse a didactic and unenlightened cult, you will share its humiliation and that is why people pity atheists.


That is why you are down to games, because there is absolutely not one scrap of evidence to support atheism and all the violence that is properly associated with it.


In any case, the question has been fully and accurately answered: all points go to God and all points go against atheism.

John McCann

As usual, a straight lie from the ideologue. This is my name, Can you say the same? We know you can't.

Serenity Thinks this answer is Helpful:

It does not seem a stretch to understand science and faith are one study, rich with inspiration and gifts of grace.  Denials prove nothing and only disprove themselves.


I am a philosopher, not a scientist.  I could go through over 100,000 fully confirmed Ontologies that rationally settle the case that God Is, and I could go through reams of historical data that prove Christ's claims true. 


Were it not so, then the Ancient Mystical Order, Rosae Crucis, could never function.  Yet we function brilliantly, and have resolved all the differences between actual religious faiths by calm reason.


There is neither proof of the claims of atheism, nor is there a rational case for atheism, nor is there any need for atheism. 


If astronomy debunks the myths of atheism, as does biology, philosophy, and mathematics, then what could make atheism valid?



Serenity. We are only asking for one. Not a 100k.

Add Your Comment (or add your own answer)