>>15087
What's the point?
Who do you believe?
I personally believe that anyone, who
takes the idea that repeated observation of phenomena,
along with debate about what the observations mean
and scrutiny of the method by which observations were made
Experimentation, theory, peer review, and acceptance, or rejection, has a stronger argument
than anyone who insists on reffering to some invisible omnipotent being with questionable judgement, an appalling sense of morals and ethics, and refuses to show up for any debate, and whose followers have committed the greatest atrocities on earth over the last 4000 years

It is more like that the universe was created because of the complexity of its design.

>>15296
So what's an appropriate set of morals and ethics and what is your proof of it.

Bump

it was fascist and it's still going strong

>>15236
>fascist or more based around the idea of Christian conservatism?
Yes. Both. A winning combo for the ages.

>>15285
>having your morality come from a presupposition of objective truth and first cause creator is hardly faulty logic.
Faith is the belief in something despite nobody being able to properly demonstrate its existence. By definition, it is as far from objectivity as possible, let alone logic.
>We don't have the power to bring back someone who is for example either stabbed, raped or maimed and the surveillance state the west has erected is not helping us prevent planned attacks. Fixing a problem after it happened, no matter how well it's restored, will never make preventing said problem obsolete.
I don't know what you're trying to argue here.
>What? What the fuck are you talking about?
Somebody doesn't know enough about history...

>>15285
>For one, not every religion is christianity with the same moral system.
True, but Abrahamic cults led to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, whose underlying tenets are mostly the same except for differences caused by stupid people running the religion as their personal piggybank for way too fucking long leading to them diverging despite their common root.

Those three sects, combined, account for the majority of religious mouthbreathers on this planet.

Youtube  I don't know OP, what's the importance of experimental philosophical doctrines that mesh how the world is, with how one should act, trying to form a stable gestalt on metaphysical topics that make one's head hurt and make you swoon, overwhelm you and disorient you just thinking about

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Oqf4NfAIk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3l1iUUq_fE

>>15216
Have you considered consensual rape at this point?

Why would they?

>>15239
Yeah what is the explanation for this? I'm having a hard time tracing the line. Isn't ISIS on the terroristic side, messing with people's lives? How do you connect them? Mesopotamia and Rhodesia both had irrigation systems but I don't call them comparable in the first place in conversation. lol
I want to know why you associate them. Were there close amounts of power for these groups? I would think there's a disparity, right? They both don't exist in the same amount on that metric. I can't see why you'd equate them, it's a mystery to me. I've encountered a Herculean task of managing the mystery of this scenario. lol

>>15240
It doesn't have to make sense, it just fits in with a narrative he's being paid to push online. If he doesn't write a post he doesn't get paid.

He doesn't put a lot of thought into each one so you shouldn't either.

>>15174
It's been scientifically proven that ancient Egyptians more closely resemble modern whites than modern africans. So no, they weren't kangs n sheit

>>15226

That they had modern European DNA, which we've always known. Ancient Egyptians were basically mixed of African, European, and Semetic roots.

They, like Phonecians, were heavily semetic, however.

>>15226
They're closest to Arabs and Jews though. And just because they aren't black doesn't mean they aren't African. You did use an epic maymay though so my argument is moot

>>14906
Stupid.
It is a Catholic society; under the influence of organized crime on a cultural level which is being sponsored and propagated through agents of Foreign Powers (America and Allies).
The only other people who give a shit about S. America is China; they might be anti-USA, but they are more anti-theism so I don't see them going into a proxy war against the US in SA through a weak Muslim militia facing heavily armed crusader cartels.
How exactly out Islamic extremist groups going to prosper instead of being executed alive in SA? Better chance of that happening literally anywhere else in the world. Anywhere.
Would not have normally responded to silly paranoia posts, but "anywhere moments" falls on the spectrum of too stupid for me not explain to you that your parents were correct to send you on the short bus you fucking retard.

I urge you to take a look at the list of sources that documentary provides. It's a bit disturbing when a documentary purporting to have the truth, despite having access to a dearth of German primary documents capture after the war, barely references any of them, choosing rather to reference mostly websites and hardly a book.

I recommend you read Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich for a well researched account of the war.

>>14456
>what I'm looking for are people who can confidently denounce the claim that the Holocaust did not happen.

If you're gonna troll at least make a good effort. You could quite easily go down the path of the Jews creating the 'Caust themselves as a result of the 1918-19 Civil war when Jewish Communist tried to overthrow the German government, pushed Hitler into power and by extension made themselves the enemy during the rise of Nationalism.

Blaming them for their own demise is going to generate far more luls. You need to think like Kanye when he said that blacks chose to be slaves...

>>14456
>>15163
OP's post is literally an argument that goes nowhere since you can't prove a negative, but then again I probably put more effort into this shit reply I'm typing than he did in his original post.