Missing Link Found

[zz_tophat]

*stuff* *things* *this and that*

No! You're wrong!

[Ad Bot]

[Jay Ray]

God created humans, and all of you guys who think otherwise can burn in hell!!

But no seriously, until they can prove anything, I am just going to look at it as an old fossil.

[Mateo]

Actually you've posted your own opinion.

Actually no. You cannot disprove something unless you can prove something.

What? Dude, get the basics of your facts straight!

Science has, no no means, proven that there was a beginning to...reality. The big bang supports this, but its a theory. Not proven. I subscribe to a theory that the universe expands and colapes every dozen billion years or so. Thus, no beginning.

I think he meant the beginning of life, not entirely sure.

EDIT: Also zz, I said currently, not "No one will ever disprove God ever." Maybe with evidence supporting evolution you believe that that idea is right, or maybe you think it is wrong. Either way no one knows yet.

[MoogleBoss]

Link went to Gamelon and was found after he went missing.

[Rughugger]

No, I found the missing link! I took a picture of it yesterday!

[Packer]

No, I found the missing link! I took a picture of it yesterday!

Lies, he went on Holidays.

[Rughugger]

Lies, he went on Holidays.

okay, that made me lol. Damn you sir! XD

[Muffinmix]

A LINK TO THE PAST!!

[Swholli]

I always like how our community is so indifferent about this whole religious thing.

It seems at least once a month we have this little battle. I guess that's what we're made of:

Children's blocks, and theology.

[zz_tophat]

Actually no. You cannot disprove something unless you can prove something.

Again that's your opinion.

Some would consider something that is unproven to be disproved (Prove to be false) by its very nature of not being proven true (true's meaning being: "Consistent with fact or reality; not false" showing that if something is inherently not proven it cannot be anything but false).

But both points of view are subjective arguments and there is no irrefutable, logical means of determining if something that may or may not exist, may or may not exist.

[Packer]

A LINK TO THE PAST!!

OMG ITS A CONSPIRACY.

[NickTheSushi]

What's this? People liking me?? Preposterous (╬ಠ益ಠ)

I like you :o

[Mateo]

Again that's your opinion.

Some would consider something that is unproven to be disproved (Prove to be false) by its very nature of not being proven true (true's meaning being: "Consistent with fact or reality; not false" showing that if something is inherently not proven it cannot be anything but false).

But both points of view are subjective arguments and there is no irrefutable, logical means of determining if something that may or may not exist, may or may not exist.

This would mean you're a hypocrite. "Your idea isn't proven but neither is ours so our idea is better."

Neither idea has been proven, so both ideas have been proved false. Sure why not.

EDIT: Hypocrite may not be the right word. (I use that term very loosely, though.)

[WhoDa?]

Lies, he went on Holidays.

Lies.

[zz_tophat]

This would mean you're a hypocrite. "Your idea isn't proven but neither is ours so our idea is better."

Neither idea has been proven, so both ideas have been proved false. Sure why not.

EDIT: Hypocrite may not be the right word. (I use that term very loosely, though.)

Actually I never said either was better, I just stated the reasoning behind mine and said that it's subjective. If you want to get butthurt and argue about it, fine: your mother is ugly.