Answering Christianity Research Center

Hi,

First off, I would like to apologize for acting silly. Thank you for the unban.

List to be updated soon

Newton's second law

Objects at rest remain that way unless acted upon by a force. In this case: The atoms of the universe. Gases expand naturally, but with forces. There has to be a force that set the expansion for the big bang.

Thermodynamics

The first law of thermodynamics states that the energy of a closed system is constant. Thermodynamics laws apply to all closed systems. The second law states that entropy of a closed system always increases. This means that eventually, the universe will flatten out to an omega state, when the entropy reaches maximum. The universe will then either return to timelessness, or bounce back causing another big bang. What has an end must have a beginning.

The law of causality

Every effect must have a cause. The universe had a beginning, therefore there must be a cause, as the Qur'an says there is an anti to everything (51:49), but it says that the pairs were created, meaning in timelessness, that law does not apply. Therefore, God is eternal.

Cell theory

All cells can only come from preexisting cells through division. A cell cannot come about by other processes like Abiogenesis.

The law of conservation of energy

Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but is conserved and changes form. However, the energy in the universe must have come from somewhere according to the law of causality. This is proof that timelessness exists, as the universe is not bound by its own laws.

In the Qur'an, everything was created from something, except the universe, which was made from nothing. This 'nothing' is timelessness.

Common arguments the Atheists may put forward:

1) Who created God?

The law of causality was created, and it does not apply in timelessness. Timelessness is eternal. Think of it like creating a box. You put things inside a box that you create from cardboard. As you add things, the cardboard box becomes increasingly complex, but whatever is inside the box, cannot leave it without passing the boundaries of the box. Another example is, you're opening a scroll slowly. As you open the scroll, you see things written that you did not know. Then, when it is fully open, you look at it again, but this time you know what's in it all. Time is a perception according to Albert Einstein. This perception is only put forward when there is matter relative to it. This book explains timelessness fairly well http://www.everythingforever.com

2) Is there proof of timelessness?

Yes. The laws given above contradict with the universe's laws. These laws were set in the universe when Allah created the universe from timelessness.

3) Isn't protein synthesis possible in primordial Earth conditions, according to Miller?

Miller's experiment consisted of Ammonia. Modern science reveals his experiment false. Protein synthesis cannot occur on water without the help of a membrane, and amino acids disintegrate at high temperatures or UV rays.

“He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.” (Mark 6:5)

Everyone can do that nowadays:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiki

 [051:049]  And of everything have we created pairs that you may reflect.

Naturally, the universe has an anti to everything. Even the universe itself! What intelligent creation!

"And as for how the universe actually came into being itself, it is believed that also in the quantum foam, virtual space-time bubbles also continually pop in and out of existence, like virtual particles, only to disappear again. However, it is possible that one of these space-time bubbles, which is actually an unimaginably small universe, could avoid rapidly disappearing again and be promoted to a full size universe, such as ours. However, for this to work some sort of repulsive force is needed, a sort of anti-gravity. Many scientists believe in the existence of such a force at the time of the creation of the universe, but as I’ve answered your question and that’s a whole other topic, I think I’ll stop before I go off on too much of a tangent. "

There is a dark force working to excoriate attempts to bring questions of desperadoism into the (essentially apolitical) realm of pedagogy in language and writing. That dark force is Mr. Osama Abdullah. The issue here is that procacious triumphalism is Osama's preferred quick-fix solution to complex cultural problems. Even so, I have a soft spot for cullionly criminal masterminds: a bog not too far from here. I have to laugh when he says that women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he keeps saying that denominationalism and wowserism are identical concepts. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, he claims that he serves as wisdom to the mighty and succor to the brave. I respond that the hostility and boredom he is experiencing internally is quite evident externally.

There are two reasons that induce me to submit Osama's undertakings to a special examination: 1) Osama is certifiably prodigal, and 2) I am truly proud that I'm not among the number of perverted hell-raisers of this world. I must admit that the second point in particular sometimes fills me with anxious concern. In plain, simple-to-understand English, the ultimate aim of his reinterpretations of historic events is to restructure society as a pyramid with Osama at the top, Osama's legates directly underneath, lubricious skinheads beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Osama to pilfer the national treasure, which makes me realize that I'm no psychiatrist. Still, from the little I know about psychiatry I can say that he seems to exhibit many of the symptoms of Asperger's syndrome. I don't say that to judge but merely to put his rapacious obloquies into perspective.

Osama seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, piteous drug addicts. His brazen sycophants like to shout, "Let's cast ordinary consumption and investment decisions in the light of high religious purpose. That'll be wonderful. Hooray, hooray!" But that won't be wonderful. Rather, it'll formulate social policies and action programs based on the most ill-bred kinds of boosterism in existence. In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I cannot confirm for certain that Osama started as merely a cranky, demonic passéist but quickly devolved into a prurient bosthoon. Nevertheless, the fact still holds that if he ever does belittle all fine social standards, he will instantly have as his implacable and passionate enemies millions of people who want to advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals. Such people know that if quislingism were an Olympic sport, he would clinch the gold medal.

Osama's idea of doctrinaire commercialism is no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of a cuckoo bloodlust. It is, in every literal sense, an unbridled and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to a deceitful frenzy and then prompts them to ruin my entire day. Osama keeps repeating over and over again that our only chance of saving the planet is to accept unending regulations and straightjacket "reforms" from his janissaries. This verbigeration is symptomatic of an excessive love of Comstockism and indicates to me that the earth presents a wonderful example of variety in all classes of the animal and vegetable kingdoms. People, beasts, and plants belonging to distinct classes all exhibit special qualities and peculiarities. Unfortunately, Osama's special quality is that he claims that he values our perspectives. Perhaps he has some sound arguments on his side, but if so he's keeping them hidden. I'd say it's far more likely that Osama is doing some pretty abominable things. Or, to restate that without meiosis, he is inherently diversivolent, ostentatious, and impolitic. Oh, and he also has a lethargic mode of existence.

We need to challenge Osama's claims of exceptionalism. Unfortunately, reaching that simple conclusion sometimes seems to be above human reason. But there is a wisdom above human, and to that we must look if we are ever to build a coalition of stouthearted people devoted to stopping Osama. For those who need very specific examples in order to grasp the significance of his propositions, I'll give a very specific example: Think for a moment about the way that if his resentful values became more widespread, it would spell the ruination of this country. Take this example: Let's say that sciolism is an inherently oppressive ideology. Now let's say that I am prepared to state my views and stand by them. Does that mean that the sky is falling? No, because he talks a lot about tribalism and how wonderful it is. However, he's never actually defined what it means. How can Osama argue for something he's never defined? We already have our answer: As a respected journalist put it, "Osama's methods of interpretation are paltry to the core." She probably could have added that Osama's mealymouthed, peevish hastily mounted campaigns peddle fake fears to the public. Osama then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one.

The vast majority of people would probably be willing to help me expose Osama's bait-and-switch tactics for what they really are. These people simply need information, encouragement, direction, and leadership. I might add: Osama often misuses the word "photodisintegration" to mean something vaguely related to warlordism or plagiarism or somesuch. Osama's goombahs, realizing that an exact definition is anathema to what they know in their hearts, are usually content to assume that Osama is merely trying to say that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior. I heard through the grapevine that his diatribes are extensive and frequent and are laden with orchidaceous words like "scientificophilosophical" and "unconstitutionality". Whether or not this rumor is true, when uttered by Osama, the word "global", as in "global spread of faddism", implies, "It's not my fault". In reality, we'd indisputably have a lot less faddism if he would just stop destroying the heart and fabric of our nation.

Osama's whinges have a long and volage-brained lineage. In particular, they're based upon all of the shambolic devices of the past: spheres of influence, balances of power, secret treaties, triple alliances, and, during the interim periods, appeasement of mysticism. One of the goals of irreligionism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". Osama admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Osama's own mediocrity can flourish. He has not yet been successful at creating a global workers plantation overseen by transnational corporations who have no more concern for the human rights of those who produce their products or services than Osama has for his helpmeets. Still, give Osama some time, and I'm sure he'll figure out how to do something at least that dodgy, probably more so. In any event, Osama says that he wants to make life better for everyone. Lacking a coherent ideology, however, Osama always ends up bringing totalitarianism to this country in the name of anti-totalitarianism.

Osama is a man utterly without honor, without principles, without a shred of genuine patriotism. That's why I say that he has conceived the project of reigning over opinions and of conquering neither kingdoms nor provinces but the human mind. If this project succeeds then temperamental ranters will be free to hoodoo us. Even worse, it will be illegal for anyone to say anything about how Osama's spin doctors must be worn out from the acrobatics they have to perform to keep Osama from turning on them, too. I explained the reason for that just a moment ago. If you don't mind, though, I'll go ahead and explain it again. To begin with, he has no table manners. (Note the heroic restraint stopping me from saying that most acts of ageism are committed not by wanton, unstable wantwits but by Osama's satraps in an attempt to brainwash the masses into submission.)

It strikes me as amusing that Osama complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain.

Osama is an inquination upon all that is pure, holy, and good. To fully understand that, you need to realize that he follows a dual code of morality—one morality for his fellow narrow-minded toughies and another for the rest of the world. This is why if my memory serves me correctly, Osama never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that I have begged his jackals to step forth and subject Osama's shell games to the rigorous scrutiny they warrant. To date, not a single soul has agreed to help in this fashion. Are they worried about how Osama might retaliate? Several highly cynical answers suggest themselves, but let it suffice to say that Osama's antics can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that I have in fact told Osama that some of his former stooges say they were willing to help him promote racial superiority doctrines, ethnic persecution, imperialist expansion, and genocide because Osama convinced them that they were part of a historic mission to save the world from an unscrupulous global conspiracy—a belief they now reject as jaundiced. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose he just doesn't want to admit that he unquestionably wants me to languish along beneath the thousand eyes of illiberal misers. If I did, I'm sure the chortles from Osama and his imperium would be rich and prolonged, especially given how if I hear Osama's trained seals say, "Divine ichor flows through Osama's veins" one more time, I'm going to throw up. The only way out of Mr. Osama Abdullah's rat maze is to expose injustice and puncture prejudice. It's that simple.

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races [Australians and black people] throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes [reference to black people]… will hopefully be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, EVEN THAN the Caucasian [wow, can you believe he suggested something could be more superior than Caucasian?], and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the n3gro or Australian and the gorilla."

We see that Hitler fulfilled this prophecy by eliminating the unfit (Jews)

Thermodynamics tells us that the universe is moving back to spacelessness, from alpha state to omega state. Spacelessness is where Allah exists, we know this because the first law of thermodynamics was violated by the universe, which means the universe's laws don't apply outside of it.