Questionnaire for atheists

Just some questions for God haters and other uppity rich kid marxists to have another mental breakdown over........

Questionnaire for atheists

This is just a series of questions I accumulated over the years from various sources. I have added my own over the years and indeed invite you to add your own. I do not claim any ownership of any of these questions. So use them at will and spread them, as long as they serve our cause, then that is all that matters.

#1 - If no God exists, how did the universe originate?
What was the nature of the environment that the so called “big bang” emanated from?

#2 - If the 'big bang' is the cause of the universe and if the 'big bang' was purely a random event, then how did it cause the various physical laws that governs the universe? Laws such as those that relate to the likes of gravity and chemistry for example.

#3 - If no God exists, why is the earth suitable for the existence of life? Why isn't there life on other planets? How is this the case? Although there can be allowances for variation due to temperatures, oxygen content of atmospheres, and distance from the Sun. How can there be variations considering the 'big bang' was supposedly a one time 'random' event?

#4 - If no God exists, how did life forms originate? Did life forms come from inanimate objects?

#5 - If life did come from physical inanimate objects, then what was the nature of these objects? And under what circumstances did these objects produce life forms?

#6 - Under what circumstances did the variation of life forms occur? Did these variations occur during the 'big bang' as a single random event? Or did they appear as a result of numerous 'random' events?

#7 - If it was the result of numerous 'random' events, then would this not be indicative of a replicating pattern? If so then these events cannot said to be random as they would require a designer and co-ordinator.

#8 - If no God exists, what caused the repeated disappearance of more primitive forms of life and the appearance of new more advanced forms of life?
[For example, at the beginning of the Mesozoic and Cenozoic.]

#9 - Evolution fundamentalists will often claim that chimps turned into humans by the means of the 'missing link'. Why is it that despite all the scientific means available today that no evidence of the 'missing link' has been discovered, documented, or publicly revealed.

#10 - Are humans of more intrinsic value than animals? Why or why not?

#11 – What is the likelihood of life arising by 'chance'? How common (or rare) are functional sequences (ie. proteins) among all the possible combinations of amino acids?
Considering that peptide bonds are needed to form a protein and even then you need a 'left hand' optical isomer. The chances of finding a functional protein by chance are 1 in 10 to the power of 164

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkWuVOSsoX4

Question is… do you still believe it is mathematically viable that life came by chance and do you have the ability to demonstrate it?

#12 - The problem of abiogenesis (the origin of the first life form) is one of the thorniest and most intractable issues in chemistry. Our increasing knowledge of microbiology and earth history has only added to the complexity of what needs to be explained. The simplest life is equivalent to modern bacteria, which is loaded with complex activity, information, and molecular 'machines.' The fossil record does not give evidence that there was a 'prebiotic soup,' or that there were any biological precursors to the first organisms, or that the atmosphere was the ideal mix to yield the necessary molecules, or that there was the expected long period of time between when the Earth could support life and when it actually appeared.
Evolutionists regularly segregate the abiogenesis problem from the issue of evolution because...
(1) It is a challenge they'd rather not be saddled with, or
(2) It is the most logical point for possible divine intervention.
However, for the atheist there is no escaping this issue; they are obliged to seek out some purely natural explanation.
a). What hope for an explanation do you have? Are you satisfied to have problems like this that are unanswered, or even unanswerable?
b). In telling the tale of life on earth science writers often unconsciously use the word 'miracle' for the appearance of the first organisms. Is this doubt on their behalf as to what they would like to prove as to the creation of existence?
c). What kind of evidence is needed before we are to actually accept that something like this really is a miracle?

#13 - If evolution is true, how and why is everything so determined that we can study it?

#14 - Is it possible to study something that is always changing, like evolution?

#15 - If we have no soul, why do we feel conscious of ourselves?

#16 - If we have no free will, why do we feel that we are making free choices?

#17 - If no God exists, why are we obligated to be nice other people? Why do we feel the need to? Is it that we are mere animals who just seek material gain from others?

#18 – If we live in a purely material world then how do we account for the many supernatural experiences that people have, such as encounters with God, ghosts, spirits, etc (obviously, exactly what all of these encounters actually are all interpreted by different people in different ways but the fact remains that people encounter things that do not fit a purely naturalistic world view). Are we really to conclude that all of these people are delusional, deceptive, or mad? Or could it be that people are having real encounters with real supernatural beings not explainable through purely scientific mediums?

#19 - Where does all of the incredibly complex information come from that is stored within DNA? Information doesn't just appear by itself. Someone has to put it there.

#20 - Atheists are mostly found to be employed in the academic/government fields. What is it about the atheist personality that attracts them to these fields? And why have these fields been overrun by political correctness?

#21 - Where does all the matter in the universe come from?

#22 - What is the source of math and logic? The existence of this remarkably fine-tuned universe aside how is it that we have these 'languages of reality' to so elegantly describe and interact with it?

#23 - What type of government does atheistic philosophy translate into?
a.) How does it understand the relationship between man and government?
b.) What type of government structures flow from an atheistic world view?
c.) Does it merely rely on someone else's system of thought, like the assumptions of naturalistic science? Or more accurately 'man interoperated science'?

#24 - Believers are often accused of being simple-minded, superstitious, or irrational.

Why is it so irrational for us to believe that the universe had a beginning because it actually was created? The laws of physics are so fine-tuned because it had a designer; people are preoccupied with good and evil because they are real things. We long for purpose and meaning because they exist to be had, life from non-life really is miraculous.
Consciousness and freewill seem real because they are; people are incurably religious because there is actually something real in religion.
If there really is no meaning or purpose to life, no objective good or evil, and the existence of 'truth' itself is open to debate, by what standard will you condemn the beliefs of believers?

#25 - How does an atheist assign meaning to human activity? Is all meaning subjective, or do some activities have self-evident and objective worth and meaning. If so, what are these activities, and how to you arrive at their value?

#26 - How does an atheist determine what is moral or immoral, right or wrong. Is there any objective standard or principles?

#27 - If you claim that Jesus Christ is a myth then what alternative explanation do you offer to the New Testament documentation and the tradition of the church, and what support do you have for your theory? Is it because of the miracles that you doubt the Scriptures?

#28 - Why is it that despite all the lauded scientific 'achievements' that there is an interest in the occult and magic which has remained? In fact atheists have had a constant and persistent interest in both the zodiac and paranormal activity. Why is this?

#29 - Many people believe that the moon and other planets have an effect on the psyche. Although this may be called astrology the fact is that the moon has effects on the likes of ocean tides. Do you call this a superstition under the name of astrology or a scientific fact?

#30 - The past several decades has added profoundly to our knowledge of chemistry, physics, and cosmology. It has become increasingly clear that we live in a universe finely tuned for the support of complex life. This fact is so universally acknowledged that even secular scientists have coined the term 'Anthropic Principle' to describe it.
How is it that we live in such an exquisitely fine-tuned universe?

Even assuming that the universe could have popped out of nothingness, why should it have been such an orderly and hospitable one? Is there a scientific, testable answer for this question that does not simply appeal to imagination?

#31 - Atheism by definition holds that there is no God and nothing beyond this world of matter, space, time, and energy.
Consistent with this viewpoint come a large number of necessary truths and the problems relating to them. Atheism is not made rational merely by the rejection of the evidence for God; it has its own wares to sell and difficulties to overcome.
a.) What is the evidence against the existence of God?
b.) If everyone on earth became an atheist how would the world be better off?
c.) Does not atheism have to rely on a system of coercion to enforce non belief?
d.) Nations that have a system of government under a monarchy do so because of a strong religious connection. The USA is referred to as 'One nation under God'. Is it an atheist aim to abolish royal families and the sovereignty of nations like the Maoists have achieved in Nepal and replace all sovereign nations with a world government?
e.) Why are atheists always at the forefront of Marxist tainted 'causes' such as global warming, unrestricted immigration, gay marriage, transgender children and other latte type neo-liberal causes?
f.) Why have atheists, pagans and Satanists been infiltrating 'white supremacist' organisations and attempting to turn racial issues into solely religious issues? Example being the anti-3rd world immigration issue is now an anti-Muslim issue. The same could be said for leftist 'anti-Zionist' causes that attack Jews solely on the basis of their religious beliefs and nothing else (even though Zionism is an atheist creed).

#32 - Why is it that atheists only target their approach to the young (20 and under) instead of those of their own age? Is it because people who are 40+ are not worth 'educating'? Or is it that gullible teenagers have bodies worth 'indoctrinating'?

#33 - If you believe that there is no God, how do you explain the concept of synchronicity. Do you dispute it because of the law of large numbers says otherwise? Maybe you just have faith in this axiom and it is really not an accurate description of reality.

#34 - If you believe that human beings and indeed all living life cannot possess a soul because spiritual essence is against all those who believe in a purely physical life form. How would you explain emotions such as love for example? Is love a purely chemical reaction?

And if so, could not the ingestion of chemicals make one fall in love or make one fall out of love? Although one can point to the drug Ecstacy/Xtasy/Extasy/etc. This drug only gives a sense of disordered lust, and even then only on a temporary basis.

#35 - In recent times there has been a push from the largely atheistic "scientific community" to accept that mankind are the descendants of aliens. If you believe this to be true, does this make either the 'theory of evolution' or 'origin of the species' to be invalid? Do you believe all life forms on Earth to have been brought here by aliens? And how did these aliens travel here?

Further more, do you believe it is possible that those you describe as “aliens” could actually be God and the Angels?

Nihiltheism aka Western Atheism

Nihiltheism aka Western Atheism

Nihiltheism is the 'anti religion' of the west, to sum it up it is a belief in nothing, opposition to all established (natural) order and it is practiced as a religion (usually in a political and social context)

Nihiltheism consists of 3 parts which complement and supplement each other, these are:
1. Antitheism
2. Maltheism
3. Misotheism

Antitheism is the opposition to all religion and any practices that give praise or worship to God. It is specifically aimed at/against the God of Abraham, it aims at abolishing such worship or else rendering it void and invalid by corrupting it. This is being done by making religion to be political or social creeds instead of a spiritual faith.

Attacks against religion are not only external attacks but also internal, this can be seen in the way queers or their enablers use a religion to propagate things which are against the teachings of the prophets of that religion. In fact it is fair to say that religions splinter because of this, for example liberal churches will portray Jesus as a pro gay liberal or even claim that he is gay in order to push an agenda such as gay marriage. As for atheists? Well in regards to the non liberal churches atheists will scream that Jesus is a homophobic racist, imperialist etc. But the fact is that liberal churches are filled with the very same atheists and an example of this is the Unitarians, which should be registered as a political party or social club instead of a faith.

These xtians will call for unlimited immigration by muslims, in that regard they mean wahhabis. Now when you hear this sort of wailing you may ask yourself 'but wont these muslims kill the poofters the xtians want marriage for?'

However wahhabism is the islamic equivalent of liberal churches, the psychoticness of these two fronts actually drive people out of religion. Wahhabism is in the same manner as liberal churches and askhenazi judaism in that they will not expel their atheists as long as they do not renounce their faith in a formal manner. Looking at these three fronts they have caused the breakage of any common link between judaism, christianity and islam because they have propagated the God of Abraham as 3 different unrelated gods instead of one God.

Maltheism

Maltheism is the belief in God but God is percieved as a malevolent entity/being. Maltheism holds that known existence is held captive by a demiurge or lesser God - that lesser God being the God of Abraham. A maltheist has to hold a belief in panentheism because that could be the only way that the God of Abraham could hold us captive and prevent the 'real god' from 'liberating' us.

Maltheism is a branch of gnosticism so it comes with all manner of beliefs and rites which in occult terms are pretty watered down and worthless. In fact it is quite fair to say that the occult wisdom relating to maltheism is of no value whatsoever.

So what sort of people 'hold' the belief in maltheism? Actually it is western atheists (nihiltheists) who are the vast overwhelming majority of maltheists, sure there may possibly be a handful of people who subscribe to the ancient greek texts and see their opposition to God as a purely spiritual battle. But as for the rest it is a political/social/economic jihad against the world of the Abrahamic faiths, but it is not a jihad under the name of another god instead it is done under the name of no god.

Nihiltheists will adamantly declare there is no god and yet will fanatically vomit all sorts of venom about the God of Abraham, stupid crap like how he is a racist, homophobic, misogynist, neo nazi war criminal. In fact it is a psychotic hatred allegedly on behalf of nothing, hindus and non theist creeds such as Buddhism and Taoism do not scream hatred against the God of Abraham. You do not become a personal enemy to God and declare it so if you donot believe in the existence of God, the hatred shown by nihiltheists cannot be done on behalf of 'nothing'. However lets go back to gnostic maltheism, the question to ask is 'if the God of Abraham is a lesser god then who is the real god?'

The identity of this 'real god' is never revealed, it cannot be revealed by maltheists aka gnostic atheists because they do not understand what cause they serve. They are so fanatically consumed by hatred of God and embracing the dialectic of their cause that they cannot see any longterm end or consequences of their 'faith'. That is because they adhere to a faith which does not adhere to them, and as for the 'god' of maltheism?
Well.... give Lucifer (Ha-Shaitan) his due.....

Misotheism

Misotheism is just the outright hatred of God, it doesnt require a creed such as antitheism or maltheism as such but it is the glue that combines them to form nihiltheism. With misotheism nihiltheists can move effortlessly between antitheism and maltheism in order to justify whatever hatred they wish to indulge in.
For example... a maltheist should only be concerned with opposing the God of Abraham but they can use their misotheism to indulge in antitheism so as to oppose not only any Abrahamic religion but also to oppose rival religions such as Buddhism.

So misotheism is the hatred of God for the sake of hating God, some may say that it is just a satanic creed... but then again who is the satan of choice?

Karl Marx is the prophet of Lucifer as the Satan and the saint of antitheism as can be shown by his life which does imitate Lucifer with a shared level of vanity and self importance. The prophet of Moloch is Margaret Sanger and this is shown by the shared level of psychotic behaviour and bloodlust.

A question to ask is 'which black prophet has the biggest kill rate? Marx or Sanger?'

Marxisms murder rate has really gone down to a trickle compared to its heyday while Sangers continually increases with its army of fanatical abortionists. It is fair to say that there is a cold war rivalry between Lucifer and Moloch because they are joint rulers in Thaumiel, but if Assiah is taken by Ha-Shaitan (whoever holds that title) then there can only be one god in this scheme - not two.

Looking at the current situation it would seem that Moloch has the upper hand in this rivalry, not only does the abortion rate remain consistant and indeed increases but also the disposal of the fetus is done in a way to worship Moloch. The fetuses are incinerated just like children were incinerated in Moloch worship in ancient times, on top of that you have those who advocate for post birth abortion. Lucifer was never worshipped on earth or sacrificed to on such a massive scale as Moloch was and indeed still is. So what difference would we see if we were in the unfortunate position of being here if either Lucifer or Moloch became the 'god'?

In the case of Lucifer there initially would be little difference, the earth would be run like a fiefdom or an estate with a dictator or absolute monarch. It would not be pleasant but there would be order, but with Moloch it would be an absolute dystopia with no logic or reasoning. And do we not see this happening now? We have people going against the laws of nature, logic and reason because it is 'hip','gnarly' and 'cool'. People now take pride in their willing stupidity of which any consequences are seen to be 'funny'. People dont worry about consequences because they have no concept of them.

Margaret Sanger died a psychotic drunken junkie, she is not a hero and yet it is fashionable to portray her as one. If that is the case then why not put Pol Pot on $100 notes?

But it’s not just the showbiz world that produces celebrities, politics and science does the same things as long as the TV pulpit is their stage. Regardless of how inept and corrupt a politician may be or how flawed and illogical the information a scientist may teach, if they can get a repeating spot on TV and have a good hair stylist as well as nice clothes then how can they ever be wrong? Or as the herd will say “Don’t be so judgmental!” You also have ‘social media’ hysteria which is also a tool for the inner herd to issue orders to the dumbass stooges who call themselves fans and acolytes. And for some reason that I cannot fathom, they obey without question and the reason they do not question is because there is no way for them to do so. They are inner herd, you are outer herd; your life means nothing and if you die tomorrow there are plenty of stooges to replace you.

And this is where schadenfreude comes into it, a shameful glee where people celebrate the misery of others. A good place to see this is on ‘reality TV’ shows of various sorts even though they are not truly reality because they are scripted to an extent because of viewer enticements to watch and time constraints. Viewers will pick a favourite contestant and hope for the others to fail, they will enforce their opinions on others whether they watch a particular show or not. So they have in effect become a volunteer spruiker for a particular show and by default for a particular TV channel. Advertisers on that show will play on the fanaticism of the viewers to get them to buy particular merchandise supposedly to improve their lifestyle and be in the ‘cool’ crowd just like the contestants on the show.

Again we see the wealth-celebrity-lifestyle triangle that separates the inner herd from the outer and those in the outer herd are merely imitating the inner herd by participating in this. If you will not or cannot participate as an imitator in the triangle, then you become a social pariah and exiled to the edges of the outer herd until you adjust your ‘mindset’ and become a willing participant devoting your entire life to that TV show until it ends (at least for the ratings season anyway…). Still, if you do not run with the herd then they will take every chance possible to laugh at any misfortune you might have. As far as they are concerned the cause of any misfortune you have is that you have not dedicated your life to a TV show, doesn’t matter what it is or who was responsible – it’s your fault! Get hit by a drunken driver while crossing the road? Well if you were devoting your time to the show you would not have been crossing the road at that particular time and if the drunk driver is a fan of that show? Well what’s wrong with having a few drinks with other show fans? If you were drinking with him then none of this would have happened!

You can say that I’m over exaggerating this example but if you go into any courtroom you will see defence lawyers coming up with all sorts of excuses and justifications for the actions of a defendant, regardless if they are obviously guilty. Again we can look at courtroom dramas where this sort of behaviour is acceptable; people take such things as real life and unfortunately cause it to be enacted in real life because it has to be true because it was on TV.

You can also see it in many workplaces where instead of helping their fellow employees, some employees will hope for others to fail in their duties or else sabotage them to ensure they do. These sorts of employees have no exceptional skills of their own to be promoted within a business and so seek the ruination or dismissal of others they see as competition in order to go up in that business. If they are successful in this then they will get a better position, more money and more control over the rest of the employees. We can see this in companies which are flooded by non English speaking foreigners in white countries, these rogue employees are controlling any potential opposition to their self indulgent narcissism by ensuring the employment of those who may be on visas or else cannot voice their concerns about the behaviour of such supervisors because of their language skills.

Back to the contestants of the so called reality shows, people seek to get on these shows to gain the wealth-celebrity-lifestyle triangle because they are ‘entitled’. So you have those who attempted and failed to get on the show, those who got on the show and were booted leaving a single winner. The winner is now in the triangle until the next season thinking they are in the inner herd. As for those who helped them win by txt messaging polls etc? Well… who gives a shit? That’s what outer herd stooges are for, and as for those who failed on the show or even to get on? They played the entitlement card this time and lost, they can’t play it again until a new fashionable game comes along onto the screens. So they have to be content to play the victim card.