Screen Shot 2013-06-20 at 1.38.05 PM

*VIDEO* Doctors inject cells treated with HIV into dying girl… and she smiles.

Posted by Austin Petersen • 20 Jun 2013

Fighting fire with fire!

Doctors injected a young girl with cancer with cells treated with the HIV virus in order to try to fight her leukemia. The HIV virus reprogrammed the cells in order to fight her bad cancer cells.

Emma was given the treatment and in a short time became deathly ill as her body reacted to the newly introduced disease… and then a remarkable thing happened.

Watch below to see:

Fire With Fire | Ross Kauffman from Focus Forward Films on Vimeo.

 

  • Pingback: Deadly Ebola Outbreak Spreading Across West Africa | Revere Radio Network()

  • Pingback: Would You Like A Car That’s Ready For A “Zombie Apocalypse”? (VIDEO) | Revere Radio Network()

  • Sean Maury

    Wow. A story about a dying girl turns into what we all know to be true: Most people are so self-centered that it must always be about THEM! Nice going folks. Amazing how you all lose sight of what is right in front of you. A positive story for a change and POOF…down the toilet……

  • loadingzone

    The first question that came to my mind after seeing the video is “why hasn’t this been front-page news?” followed by “has this treatment been tried on others since then and what were the results?”.

    What is this science vs God nonsense? If you believe in God, then God made man, some men (and woman) became doctors and scientists, and their knowledge/technology has evolved enough to cure this girl’s leukemia using HIV and genetic engineering.

    If you’re an atheist, then man evolved out of the primeval mud to the point that they were able to create an inspired cure for leukemia and perhaps other cancers.

    If you attribute this to God, then He inspired the doctors to discover this cure. If it turns out that this cure only worked this one time, then it was a miracle; with or without the “M” capitalized.

    This brings me back to my first two original questions. Time has passed since the girl was cured and showing the photo of her cancer-free at the very end.

    Why are we only hearing about this now and in such a limited venue? Do we have a cure for cancer or not?

    I’m not interested in discussing how many angels fit on the end of a pin/how much dark matter exists in my living room right now. I want to know if people with cancer now have medical hope for a cure.

    Atheist or God fearing, I think we can all agree that only man is interested in winning the Nobel Prize.

  • Randal Davis

    its great she is doing great. Now the bad thing, she has to live with HIV. I kinda get it, but dont fully get it. They cured one thing with another, and the other thing she now has. that like a double standard or a catch 21 .. kinda If`y . but if the person is happy to be alive, then that is great. but now she has to worrie about a hole other thing. kinda sucks too …

  • NormB

    Fighting fire with fire. Awesome. I wonder if Obamacare will cover this in the future, or will Kathleen Sebelius simply say “some people live, some people die” when she refuses payment? Will President Obeyme simply wave His royal hand and say “Te absolvo,” as she works His will? Gene therapy has been in the works for almost four decades; early attempts to use virii to transvect genes into human marrow in cases of Thalassemia and Sickle Cell were baby steps on the learning curve that got us here. It’s things like this that make me proud to be a doctor and a christian.

  • Miketrt

    If doctors are real, have human emotions, care about people more than they care about their BMW – then yes, I love them. Can’t trust some these days. Junkets, pharma-payoffs, etc. Anything with GE makes me question things. That company is a liberal douch-a-bagery of Obamaness. Used to buy only GE stuff, now won’t. Thanks Imelt, you twit, for ruining a great company.

    • Levi Russell

      Talk about incoherent nonsense. What does any of this have to do with saving a child’s life?

  • Patrick Kilroy

    Okay motherfuckers, start actually READING what happened. This child was not injected with HIV.

  • Heather Schable

    A major breakthrough in destroying cancer has come along, and you idiots are sitting here arguing about “God”. *facepalm*

  • Miketrt

    Ah, sh*t, a GE ad before I saw her… argh…mood killer.

  • Janna

    God bless these poor non-believers………….

  • Guest

    I love how doctors do amazing things and people give God all the credit.

  • karlie

    these comments make me sick a a dying girl is now happy and healthy and you all gotta turn it into a hate speech about god cant you just be happy for her!

    • Levi Russell

      Internet atheists cannot be happy. Mommy made them comb their hair and go to church and now all they have is Richard Dawkins.

      • touche112

        “Internet atheists.” You sound educated.

        • Levi Russell

          Was that a response? It used to be that atheists wanted to 1) be educated and 2) talk to educated people. Alas, Jean-Paul Sartre has been replaced with Richard Dawkins and his kaffee klatsch. :'(

      • Aliel The Heretic

        Aint that the damn truth.

        And just 6 years ago, I use to be one of them!

  • Samantha Michelle Clementi

    I believe God put a huge miracle in this little girls life. Ive seen multiple people suffer from HIV/AIDS. And on top of that, one of them had lymphoma of the brain. Which it put her on her death bed multiple times in the past year. It could have killed her in a matter of days. But God redirected the virus. God bless this little girl. She definitely was put on this earth for something special. <3

    • Robo

      Like living isn’t special enough?

      • Samantha Michelle Clementi

        I never said or meant it that way. I meant its obvious that its not her time to go. God isnt done working through her.

        • Joseph Citarello IV

          i hope she grows up to realize it was mankind that saved her, not some 5000 year old bronze-age skygod.

          • Levi Russell

            lol… taken right from one of Richard Dawkins books no doubt. Do you guys ever bother to read an actual philosopher or do you just take it on faith from a biologist. Sadly for you fedora-wearing m’lady types, more and more people are getting wise to the idea that science is limited only to the natural world and cannot say anything about metaphysics. Science and religion are not and never have been incompatible.

            Aw! Sad!! :'(

            • http://blog.bit15.com/ David Acosta Juan

              Science and religion are indeed incompatible, because science relies in evidence and religion in dogma. Spirituality, on the other hand, is not incompatible with science.

              • Levi Russell

                Wrong again! Your ignorance of religion has come through. Religion is simply a set of practices based around a philosophical perspective. That philosophical perspective is based at least in part on reason. Clearly you’ve never read anything that anyone has written about religion. QQ noob

                • http://blog.bit15.com/ David Acosta Juan

                  Russell, I will never claim to be a theologian, but I have read enough to kick your as$ in whatever subject you may choose. Now, go away and check the definition of both, science and religion, and then come back so we may have a civilized discussion. And while at it, loose your as$ a little so you can take your head out and breath some fresh air.

                  • Joseph Citarello IV

                    Your immediate use of Ad-hominems leads me to believe otherwise.

                  • Levi Russell

                    Aw, how sweet… another fedora-clad Bronie.

                    Wikipedia’s definition of religion (with a citation):
                    “Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence”

                    Sorry you arrogant little puke… you’re wrong! I guess that’s enough for now… go back to reading nothing but Richard Dawkins… you clearly can’t even be bothered to check the easiest source available. Here’s a fun one: check out the list of cleric scientists on Wikipedia.

                    • http://blog.bit15.com/ David Acosta Juan

                      You may be very good at handpicking the definitions that help you the most, but that will not stop me from doing the same. Merriam Webster, which is by the way a much more respected source for encyclopedic material, says that religion is:

                      : the belief in a god or in a group of gods

                      : an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

                      : an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

                      The two first definitions are the ones concerning our subject, “the belief in a god or group of gods…” and the “organized system of beliefs, etc., used to worship a god or gods.”
                      Then, saying that science and religion are incompatible does not mean that a scientist can’t be religious, that would be absurd having in mind how many important scientists in history were deeply religious.
                      Joseph Citarello the fourth, I did not started the ad hominems, so f*** off.

  • Jerry Colon

    wow 2 negatives cancel each other out.
    very cool idea

    • Levi Russell

      Note that none of the fedora-brigade (aka the euphoric m’lady crew) have bothered to say anything positive. A move back to the nihilism of Sartre? Doubtful… Sartre actually read stuff.

      • Miketrt

        Do us all a favor and speak English. Quit trying to be cute and communicate clear ideas, please. It’ll do you and us all some good. You have some good things to say. You sound like a lib when you talk like that.

        • Levi Russell

          What’s so difficult for you to understand? A bunch of internet atheists came onto the page to spam Richard Dawkins quotes (lacking citations of course… they have to look original). Everything they said was either hateful or negative. It sounds like something a nihilist would do (that is, a nihilist who somehow thought it was important for everyone to agree with him… sort of a strange nihilism I suppose) and since the better atheists of a former age were nihilists, it made sense.

          Now, every one of my words in all of my posts were English words. Your ignorance of the “counter-strike” against the bile-filled internet atheists (e.g. mocking them for their obsession with fedoras) is not my problem. (See definitions 2 and 7 of “Richard Dawkins” in the Urban Dictionary)

          Have a nice day!

          • Miketrt

            Chill fool.

            • Levi Russell

              Didn’t think you’d have a response, troll.

  • Joseph Citarello IV

    the difference between God and science, God would have let her die.

    • MattE

      Quite the contrary. Humans are the hands and feet of God.

      • Joseph Citarello IV

        God isnt real, but for the sake of the argument, God is powerless, and men are not his tools. In accordance with free will.

        • Mathis Erickson

          So perhaps God purposefully made itself powerless so that WE HAVE free will free from interruption?

          • Joseph Citarello IV

            then why call it God.

          • Miketrt

            Maybe it’s a test of character to get to the next level? Explain what made gravity a reality and then we can talk.

          • CMJO

            According to the Bible, we don’t have free will in the way you think.

        • Christian Mystic

          The fool has said in his heart there is no God Ps 14:1 and Ps 53:1

        • Mason O’Neill Hunsicker

          I’d like to propose an idea. If God doesn’t exist, explain consciousness. Maybe the idea of God as a spirit, or the ALL, the ALL in everything, as the ultimate mind, ultimate consciousness, will satiate your disbelief? We’d like to think that we know most everything, but the fact that we can think at all is the real noodle baker. If you think about it, your thoughts turn into words, which turn into actions, which in turn started as nothing, and turned into something. God isn’t a person in the sky, it is everything, and we have a mind to know ourselves and the world around us, and to know that is Godly. My 2 cents. Peace.

          • Poople

            Weed..it’s a hell of a drug.

            • joanofark

              It is NOT a drug, it is a plant.. A GOD given plant, taken away by “men”. I wish people would look and see it has a stem, a root, and leaves……. Last I was taught that is a plant. Get an education folks. And a dandelion is also considered a weed and has many beneficial qualities for health… Wow people are so incompetent when it come to the facts…. Boy, have people forgotten history, and common sense. Poople’s brain on the public school’s education :poop:

          • fixitluis

            consciousness is a form of evolution, just like when a baby smiles its an evolutionary form of an infant to indicate gratification to a parent

          • Justin Martin

            What about the times when God didn’t exist?

            How could you possibly know if there is some “ultimate mind” out there?

            You do realize that what your saying is relative don’t you? What you consider good, and ultimate may be Evil and dull to someone like me.

            See I look at thousands of years of recorded human history, and see times before you monotheistic idea of A God, I see lots of other gods, all with traits similar to your young god.

            Especially coming out of the areas surrounding Judea. Its obvious just like Christianity, Judaism is just a plagiarized blood thirsty blood cult.

            When your idea of God is YOUR idea, and everyone else has a different definition how can you think it anything but egotistic to tell other people you know what God is while telling someone “we” like to think we know everything.

            The greatest evidence against any of the Gods that have existed through out time, evolving along with our civilizations is their adherents.

            • Mason O’Neill Hunsicker

              I’m not trying to force my belief, I’m just trying to open up ideas. It really isn’t my belief, just my idea. I also base my idea on many different things I’ve learned, thought about, and contemplated on.

              The times God didn’t exist, God didn’t exist in the minds of men at that time, but the world still existed, the galaxy, the universe, and the many different creations going in and out of existence.

              Read as much into quantum mechanics, string theory, Hermetic philosophy, Descartes, DaVinci, Einstein, Tesla. Research as much as possible. What I learned is that the questions about whether there is a God/god or not are the wrong questions. Just by looking at the world and existence as we know it, and by thinking about the fact that we think, that we have consciousness, that we can experience through meditation, and even hallucinogens, higher forms of consciousness, proves to me that creation wasn’t an accident. Quantum entanglement proves to me that creation wasn’t an accident. The fact that we have science at all, and mathematics. Math wasn’t invented, or made up, it was found. Think about that. The fact that phi is found in nature from the smallest particles to the largest of galaxies shows that there are forces at work larger and more complex than we can comprehend for now. These are things that prove to me that God exists. Not as a person, but something perfect, all encompassing. Something that has been called The ALL for thousands of years. Once you or anyone can lose the sense of materialism and open up to the idea that life is special, and has a purpose bigger than ourselves, then those eyes will open to a better future, and better understanding of why and how things happen and what our place in the world is.

              These are all IDEAS. I’m not being spiteful. I just want to try to help open the idea that if we are all connected, and truly understanding what that means, then reckless hate will be a thing of the past. Peace.

          • Miketrt

            Here’s a more basic question – how did we get the principals of the Universe w/o a creator? Gravity, etc.? Just ‘happened’ you idiots who belive that? You need to quit rebelling against Mommy and let reality come in.

            • mshmsucks

              Here’s another basic question for you, then I will answer yours. If god exists, why, out of the billions of stars and possible planets in the universe did he create ours and place us upon it and then demand that we worship him and “his glory”?

              To answer your question:
              If the “principals of the Universe”, “Gravity, etc,” did not exist, we wouldn’t be here. We are here, so they exist and we exist because they exist. Why does a plant grow from a seed? Because the right conditions exist. Like evolution, a random set of events may have occurred a billion times and then one time it created the universe in which we live. To attribute that to an intelligent being, while possible, is just as probable as a random set of events. To attribute that to a being who not only cares about you, out of the billions of other atoms in the universe, but demands that you worship him is the ultimate in pride and arrogance, imo. Being raised in the a southern baptist church, I was taught, pride and arrogance are sins, ipso facto, believing in a god that demands that I worship him, is a sin and will send me to hell. So I seek other answers.

            • Joseph Citarello IV

              You believe that God “just happened”. We take out the invisible unprovable middle man. (Who is also a total psychopath in his infamous book of hate and genocide)

    • cacadodo666 .

      bzz. wrong numbnuts. God believers believe you go to a different life.

      • Joseph Citarello IV

        Lol the point is a moral highground for those that dont believe.

        • Christopher

          Pfff. God condones the use of science to help the sick and weak, Joseph. At least the God of the Christian faith does.

        • jkendal

          And there it is. I’m so glad to know that you’re better than everyone else based solely on your world view. I’m betting you think you’ll convince many to your way of thinking with that attitude, too. lmao…..

    • Justin L

      Why acknowledge a god you don’t believe in just to troll religious people?

      • Kristin Gladstone Thomas

        Thank You! Why does it matter if you don’t believe? Just go along with your non-belief and let us believers in peace.

        • Nathaniel Brennan

          You are rejecting reason and therefore you are evil.

          • http://gathman.org/vitae CustomDesigned

            Interesting. Worship of Reason? Is Reason ever wrong, or would that be blasphemy?

        • Justin Martin

          Because your books say we should be put to death you simple minded fool.

          Your religions history is nothing but death and repressions, over 1000 years of darkness where doctors and scientists were tortured to death to try to make things right again.

          Where young girls were killed routinely though out time as they still do in Africa where they are brought the Bible, but don’t know the hypocrisy that surrounds the American Christan and actually read then practice it like it says to.

          Even Africans that are just taught to read realize the Bible is supposed to be relevant, even the old stuff.

          • Levi Russell

            Translation: “Someone claimed view X and committed Y act! They must be inextricably linked!!!! OMG!!!!”

            This is called non sequitur. Aw, sad!

          • Miketrt

            Yes, if your eugenicist eutopia was in effect, you would be put to death. You are a mornon.

          • CMJO

            Why so hateful when she wasn’t being rude at all? By the way, have your read the Bible? It doesn’t say you should be but to death. Nice try.

          • USMC

            You are full of alot of hate. I am sorry for you

      • Miketrt

        Fine, it’s just when these retards can’t see a basic truth (i.e., who made up gravity) and act like you didn’t ask a question at all that I get pissed. Otherwise, if it’s authentic intellectual interrogatory, then fine.

    • George

      I don’t think you’re in any position to dictate God’s behavior.

    • Levi Russell

      Typical fedora-style response. I know Jon Stewart is cool and all, but false dichotomies aren’t. Yawn.

    • Adolph Schumer

      Unless it was a baby then all the God-haters would be scrambling to cut it to pieces and label it “choice”

    • chopin44

      You are sadly mistaken. My dad was deathly ill and my mother thanked the Dr for saving his life. The Drs response to my mother was “no, God saved him”. God plays a part in medicine and may other facets of life. We don’t know what God’s will is, but we have to help ourselves by seeking medical treatment. God is the reason we have Dr’s.

      • Joseph Citarello IV

        God is the reason we have doctors? I think youre the sad mistaken one. You must have forgotten the 12 years of incredibly hard work and education that each individual goes through to become a doctor. the hundreds of years of medical advancements due to men that thougt beyond the bible. Its sad how you people can just throw your hands up, relieve yourselves of any critical thinking and just say “god did it”. It is sad, and pathetic and I cant stand it.

        • USMC

          then go away. Why do you put yourself through the torment?

          • Joseph Citarello IV

            Im on a life mission to awaken people to the evil of religion and government. (Particular the evils of militarized police and imperialist military)

            • Levi Russell

              lol

              This is the first time I’ve seen a Dawkins acolyte admit he’s an evangelical atheist. How droll.

        • Levi Russell

          Ah yes, the classic confusion of proximate and ultimate causes. Do internet atheists read anything from their opponents? Certainly Sartre did… but now we are subjected to the willful ignorance of Richard Dawkins and his army of acolytes.

          • Joseph Citarello IV

            Ahh yes indeed, a typical theist capable of only ad-hominems and not a single rebuttal.

            Willful ignorance? All we ask as atheists is evidence of your position. If you have something that I dont know about (other than conjecture or personal experience) please come forth and collect your Nobel Prize. I will gladly conform the moment that clear evidence is available.

            • Levi Russell

              It’s not ad hominem if I don’t use an insult to rebut your position. Learn to logic.

              The problem is, as it is with all internet evangelical atheists, that you fail to understand the scope of scientific inquiry. Thus, you call for evidence when you just implicitly assume your position is correct. Only philosophy can answer the questions of ultimate cause and origins. Scientific inquiry is, by its nature, confined to the physical. No Christian (or any other theist I’m aware of) is arguing in favor of a physical god. Rather, we are arguing in favor of something beyond the physical.

              But, keep clamoring for “evidence.” It’s akin to asking a psychologist to explain string theory. You’re not going to get anywhere.

              • Joseph Citarello IV

                So…. no evidence then…got it.

                • Levi Russell

                  So, no attempt to refute my points. Got it.

                  Keep trolling, evangelist!

                  • Joseph Citarello IV

                    What points? I dont need to prove non-existence. I dont need to explain my non-position. You make the claim, you need the evidence, otherwise, youre no different than a 3000 B.C.E. Egyptian asking Isis for the morning sun.

                    • Levi Russell

                      “What points?”

                      Since you can’t read my earlier post (apparently), I’ll give the run down one more time . Pay attention closely, evangelist:

                      1. You ask for “evidence.”
                      2. Evidence can come in the form of deductive arguments using logic (which we have plenty of… pick up a book not authored by Richard Dawkins once in awhile, evangelist) or scientific observation.
                      3. We are not arguing for something that is in the natural world, thus it cannot be examined using scientific observation.

                      You are asking for scientific evidence of a philosophical question. This is as stupid as asking for sociological evidence of a physics question.

                      Carry on, evangelist.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Okay so as a recap:

                      Your position is you believe in something that cannot be proven by any scientific approach.

                      You are stating there is some sort of non-physical way of existence that somehow lives within the physical universe, and cannot be observed in any way, unless of course I join your 5000 year old cult. (I was already there once, I pulled my head out of my ass and started thinking for myself, since then life has been exponentially more purposeful and meaningful).

                      With this, you must concede that by your standards of evidence, any and all man made deities are indeed possible, and youre just guessing that a particular one is correct

                    • Levi Russell

                      I didn’t think you would actually respond. This is all a bunch of red herring.

                      Materialism is a joke. Does the number 5 exist? If you say yes, then there must be a physical 5 somewhere. Otherwise, things that are not physical exist and your worldview is exposed as idiotic.

                      I’ve stated my position. You haven’t refuted it (incredulity and straw man don’t work for that… sorry, evangelist) but simply evaded it.

                      Have a nice day troll.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      The number 5?

                      Youre comparing the human developement of language to the existence of a god? And youre calling me a troll? LOL language is a human conceptualization with a purpose, just like all gods.

                    • Levi Russell

                      Mathematical concepts are not language. You are clearly not even an amateur philosopher. What a joke.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      You never said anything about mathematics, though they are the result of human language developement, and have been applied in ways to create code language. So.. wrong again… nice red herring by the way. And another ad-hominem. Since no real rebuttal was offered im gonna go ahead and call this one a victory.

                      Recap:
                      no real evidence.
                      Non-physical
                      simultaneously exists with physical.
                      Your standards for evidence are so low that I was able to refute your argument and use it against you.
                      You have a terribly condescending tone while “debating”.
                      You have failed to sway my mind in any way, other than the usual reinforcement that theists are incapable of rational thought.

                      Thank you for sparing what useless time you have on earth to help me understand what your type thinks.

                    • Levi Russell

                      “You never said anything about mathematics”

                      Yes, I did. Numbers are part of mathematics. They are abstract concepts that are very real but are not physical. The fact that you cannot understand this and instead insult incessantly is revealing.

                      “though they are the result of human language developement”

                      Nope. Mathematics is an abstract discipline. It is the abstract study of topics such as quantity (numbers), structure, space, and change, which are all abstract concepts, not concrete physical things. Since you assume your own conclusion, namely that the physical world is all that exists and that the abstract doesn’t exist, you are forced to make silly false equivalencies like saying mathematics is just a “code language [sic].”

                      You can claim victory all you like, troll boy, but the fact is that you simply do not understand the relevant issues. You are such a poor debater that you don’t even understand the difference between ad hominem arguments and insults. You have assumed your own conclusion yet you insist on attempting to evangelize me. You have not refuted a single point I’ve made, you’ve simply skirted my points and kept repeating the same drivel (i.e. assuming your own conclusion).

                      I’m not here to sway your mind… you clearly stated that you were here to sway mine, evangelist!

                      “Thank you for sparing what useless time you have on earth to help me understand what your type thinks.”

                      Talk about condescension!

                      Keep reading books. Try one not authored by Dawkins… I promise it won’t hurt to question your own view a little bit.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Looks like another “youre wrong and I cant explain why” from you. No ones mad, this was quite enjoyable, every response I get from you is comedy, at this point I am just trolling, the more i make you look like a fool the more amused I am with your responses.

                      All that aside, provide evidence and I will conform! And collect your Nobel Prize! Until then, keep your bronze age bullshit away from those of us that want society to advance.

                    • Levi Russell

                      “Looks like another “youre wrong and I cant explain why” from you.”

                      Why can’t you refute my points? Why do you go on these silly tirades about “bronze age bullshit”, etc? Do you think that adds to the conversation? Nope, you’re just a Dawkins Acolyte.

                      Actually, it’s simply that you’ve assumed your conclusion and cannot understand either that 1) scientific inquiry is limited to the physical world or 2) that it is possible that things outside the physical world or both. So, you’re caught up saying stupid nonsense like “provide proof of ur god… hurr durrrrr.” Again, it’s like asking a sociologist to answer a question about physics. It is totally incoherent.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Ahh im beginning to understand… you cant provide evidence, we already know this. Youve found yourself a workaround, removing that personal responsibility of rational thought, since your belief somehow doesnt apply to the physical world, theres no need to explain how or why it exists, nor will there ever be a way to prove that it exists.. so the question to ask is: why do you believe it at all? You agree that it cannot be proven or verified in any scientific matter, it is a matter that must be entirely taken on faith.. which leads us back to yet another point you failed to recognize: if your standard for evidence is simply faith, then you must agree that all human concepts of deities are as possible as the one you choose to be correct, since there are thousands of gods and demigods that men have thought up with the same level of credibility as the one you chose for yourself

                      “….and how will he sidestep this one!?…”

                    • Levi Russell

                      Wow, that is a lot of drivel. Still nothing backing up any of your positions. Still nothing refuting mine.

                      Why do you keep going on these tirades assuming you know anything about what I believe? I haven’t even told you if I’m a theist. For all you know, I’m simply someone who believes that it is possible that things beyond the physical world exist. Are you really so certain that this is not the case that you feel the need to incessantly lambast me?

                      Please, provide me with physical evidence of mathematical concepts like the number five. You have to do this or your worldview is incoherent. Do you believe that mathematical concepts are physical objects? Do you believe that mathematical concepts are real? Why can’t you answer these simple questions, Joseph?

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      because im not making a claim that something exists… i have nothing that i need to prove.

                      back to my original, relevant question:

                      since you agree that your belief system cannot be proven in any realistic manner, and it is based entirely on faith, why do you believe it at all? and how have you come to the conclusion that your choice of deity (if you have chosen a deity) is somehow more credible than the thousands of others before and after it?

                    • Levi Russell

                      “because im not making a claim that something exists… i have nothing that i need to prove.”

                      So mathematical concepts aren’t real. Okay, got it. lol…

                      “since you agree that your belief system cannot be proven in any realistic manner”

                      It can, with logic. Just like mathematical relationships. This is very simple, evangelist, I don’t see how you’re so confused.

                      “and it is based entirely on faith”

                      I didn’t say that… YOU said that. This is what we who understand logic call “straw man.” As I said above, it is based on logic.

                      “and how have you come to the conclusion that your choice of deity is somehow more credible than the thousands of others before and after it?”

                      With logic. I don’t want to sit here on the internet and spell it all out to you. Open your mind and pick up a book. That’s what I did.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      “With logic”
                      “With logic”
                      “With logic”

                      You keep telling yourself that.

                      If it was real logic, youd have yourself a Nobel Prize.

                    • Levi Russell

                      Another post just rife with… no refutations. Hooray!

                      “If it was real logic, youd have yourself a Nobel Prize.”

                      lol “real logic?!” You sound like a 5th grader. Actually, this would be a simple non sequitur. Do they hand out a Nobel Prize for convincing fedora-clad Bronies to question Richard Dawkins?

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Question richard Dawkins? Which discovery has he made that you want me to question? As far as I know hes just an evolutionary biologist that studies those REAL things, you know people that spend their entire lives trying to figure out exactly what happened rather than relying on a book written by sunbaked goat herders from 5 thousand years ago.

                      Oh hey, its that magic number 5 again

                    • Levi Russell

                      I think he’s a fantastic evolutionary biologist. The problem is that he fancies himself a philosopher, which he is not.

                      “REAL things”

                      There you go assuming your own conclusion again. It’s really quite droll.

                      ” a book written by sunbaked goat herders from 5 thousand years ago”

                      Let’s make something else clear. Your whole point here is that anything that is not part of the physical universe is assumed to be not real. So does that mean that philosophy is an illegitimate field of inquiry? What about mathematics? These are fields of study dedicated to understanding the abstract. But, in your worldview, the abstract is not real. What I’m trying to show you, Joseph, is that you really don’t believe what you think you do. You assert that the number 5 is real, but you haven’t provided any scientific evidence for it (which you charge is the sole arbiter of reality). Gosh, quite a quandary (for you)!

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Not..really..

                      If you feel its your life’s purpose to try and discover that there is some sort of non-physical existence, then please by all means keep at it, its in my opinion that this is a seriously silly endeavor, since whatever non-physical world you believe in very apparently has no real observable effect on the physical universe.

                      Fortunately, you will never be able to prove that there is a non-physical existence, since you yourself agreed that it cannot be determined by any real world scientific approach. For myself, I will continue to disregard “unprovable” metaphysics and pseudoscience as nothing more than a big fuckin waste of everyone’s time.

                      Got anything else?

                    • Levi Russell

                      “then please by all means keep at it”
                      “Until then, keep your bronze age bullshit away from those of us that want society to advance.”

                      Which is it?

                      “since whatever non-physical world you believe in very apparently has no real observable effect on the physical universe”

                      By your assumption. You are really good at assuming things!

                      “Fortunately, you will never be able to prove that there is a non-physical existence, since you yourself agreed that it cannot be determined by any real world scientific approach. ”

                      There you go again! Mathematics is not real, people. According to the great internet atheist, Joseph, logic is not a “real” thing and cannot lead anyone to any type of conclusion that represents reality. Give this evangelist a Nobel Prize!

                      “For myself, I will continue to disregard “unprovable” metaphysics and pseudoscience as nothing more than a big fuckin waste of everyone’s time.”

                      Ah, willful ignorance. Typical of the fedora-clad Bronie crowd.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      Youve got some seriously bad reading comprehension… it is possible to study your unprovable system and keep it away from advancing society…

                      Whats with this mathematics tangent? Youre pissed off that I refused to acknowledge your horrible analogy?

                      If you can prove to me that this non-physical existence has some sort of merit in the physical universe please, please share. I beg of you, salvage whats left of your dignity.

                      Willful ignorance? My disregard of your metaphysics and pseudoscience is the same as my disregard for someone who tells me theyre on a life quest to find fairies. Not exactly willful ignorance, more like paying attention to what matters.

                    • Levi Russell

                      “Whats with this mathematics tangent?”
                      It illustrates your inconsistency.

                      “Youre [sic] pissed off that I refused to acknowledge your horrible analogy?”
                      No, actually I’m laughing to myself that you cannot understand my analogy. That’s why you refuse to acknowledge it. If it’s so horrible, please refute it!

                      “If you can prove to me that this non-physical existence has some sort of merit in the physical universe please, please share. I beg of you,”
                      Wow, begging. That’s sad. This discussion is not about merit, but I’ll just go back to my example of mathematics. Understanding mathematics is extremely important to the physical sciences. Since you seem to be literally obsessed with physical science, I would think you would appreciate that. Again, mathematics is a field of study dedicated to elucidating abstract relationships. It is not simply language. Sorry!

                      “salvage whats left of your dignity.”
                      lol… My dignity has nothing to do with this conversation or your inability to consider alternate worldviews from your own materialistic position. At this point I’m just enjoying watching you repeat the same sad nonsense.

                      “My disregard of your metaphysics and pseudoscience is the same as my disregard for someone who tells me theyre on a life quest to find fairies.”

                      And that’s why you don’t understand this. If fairies existed (they don’t), their discovery would consist of finding a physical thing that we did not know existed before. Perhaps that discovery would deserve a Nobel Prize, I don’t know. Since you reject, by assumption, anything outside the physical, you cannot possibly understand the difference between a physical object that exists in fantasy and an abstract concept. This doesn’t stop you from using abstract concepts every day (like math). But, such is ignorance.

                    • Joseph Citarello IV

                      ill accept that, i am ignorant of unproven things. so what? im ignorant of a shitload of proven things as well, what difference does it make? it doesnt validate your position in any way.

                      this thing with math, mathematics were conceptualized as man’s way of creating order in his environment, its how mankind has disproved most of the things that theism has brought to the table throughout humanity, its how we know that stars are incredibly far away, that the universe is expanding faster and faster, etc etc etc, however its never successfully been used to prove anything in metaphysics, and it never will be, mathematics are exclusive to physical existence. it is used as measurement, not something that any turd can use for his own imagination.

                    • Levi Russell

                      I’m glad we agree that abstract concepts are real and that materialism is false.

                      Have a nice day!

      • Rose Thompson

        Sorry, but I give credit where credit is due….to my Oncologist. I was diagnosed with untreatable cancer and given a 6 month survival expectancy. It was my doctor and not a God of any shape and form who determined a treatment course and performed the numerous surgeries which resulted in my being here today, nearly 3 years later. I can not find logic in the belief in a being who would first make one suffer with such a horrible disease, only to then turn around and cure them from it at a later time. Seriously, if he is to be praised for all that goes right, is he not also to blame for all of the ills as well. Always seems far too one sided for my liking.