For further clarification, due to the length of the post I had to post the comment as 2 seperate posts. Only the first post (1/2) keeps being removed whilst the second post (2/2) remains visible.
... View more
I am a new Yahoo user. Today I posted a comment as a reply to a comment posted by another user on a news article. A few moments after posting my comment I noticed that it had disappeared. Even if the comment was down voted it should still be visible in my list of all comments on my profile but it is not. My comment adheres Yahoo's guidelines so I would like to know why it is being removed and why there is no available support from Yahoo. My comment is posted below. If the comment does not adhere to the guidelines then I would like an explanation. 1/2 "Most of the West now realise that there is no god in fact, it's a bit stupid to think there is." The use of the word, "now," in your statement implies that there has been a decline in religious following and the belief in God in the, "West." If that is the case then please indicate the time period that you are referring to and where you found that information. However if you are only referring to the current year or a very short time period then the information collected by the Pew Research Center would overwhelming contradict your claim. The larger a study is the more prone it is to inaccuracies. Such a study conducted by the Pew Research Center will definitely contain errors and there is no way to determine that the statistics were not manipulated. I do not follow a religion, however from observation of my environment I see no evidence whatsoever that your statement is factual. In fact I find it very difficult to identify people who truly do not follow a religion or believe in God or a god(s) of some form. Many people claim to be atheist when in fact they are not. Those particular so called atheist partake, follow and believe in almost all of the same things that a person with religious faith does. If any of those so called atheist accepts that existence has been created and identifies the process or entity that created existence then they are accepting and believing in a creator, a god. As an example it's common for an atheist to believe in the Big Bang theory. The Big Bang theory is just a theory and is not a fact. To believe in such a theory without having any understanding of cosmology or related studies is nothing more than having faith in a theory proposed by a scientist. This is very similar to aspects of religion and in this case the singularity (Big Bang) is God, science is the religion, the theory is a scripture and the scientists are the priests. If any of those so called atheists celebrates one of the many holidays common in the, "West," than they are in fact worshipping and observing a holy day. Holiday is derived from, "holy day," thus the celebration of a holiday is a practice of worship on that sacred day. Many of those holidays have traditions which are nothing more than rituals with pagan religion origins. As an example it's common for an atheist to celebrate Easter. If Easter is not celebrated as a Christian in observance of the resurrection then it is celebrated as the worship of the fertility goddess Eostre. Eggs and Bunnies are symbols of fertility and so the giving and receiving of chocolate eggs or chocolate bunnies is an act of performing a ritual in worship of the goddedd Eostre. Christmas and Halloween are also much the same. Religion attempts to provide people with an answer to the question of where life came from. The story of Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden is an example of that, but it has neither been proven nor disproven. Science also attempts to do the same through the theory of Evolution which also has not been proven or disproven even though the supposedly missing link is still missing. Religion attempts to provide people with a purpose for being. Science also attempts to provide people with a purpose through the concept of survival of the fittest developed through the theory of Evolution. So if a so called atheist believes in the Big Bang theory then they believe that the singularity is the creator(god) of existence. A theory is not fact so they would have to have faith. Like religious followers that need a priest to interpret the scriptures for them, the aethest also needs scientists(priest) to interpret and develop theories(scripture) for them. If a so called atheist also celebrates a holiday with traditions then they are worshipping and performing rituals on a holy day. A so called atheist believing in the theory of Evolution and the survival of the fittest is nothing more than having faith in science to provide the origin of life and purpose for living. Belief in a creator, faith in a theory, guidance in a theory by scientists, celebration of holidays, performance of traditions, explanations for the origins of life and purpose for living. All of those things mentioned are equivalent to a religion and belief in God. A typical atheist will claim not to believe in God or follow a religion yet they partake in all of the aforementioned which would indicate that they actually do believe in a god and do follow a religion. They are absolutely ignorant and oblivious to their own beliefs because the belief is embedded so deeply into the, "West" and the society they were born into that it has become a part of their life without them even knowing it. 2/2 Based on your statement that you think that it is, "a bit stupid," to believe in God and since you presumably live in the, "West," I find it unlikely that you do not believe in the Big Bang theory or one of the, "theories of everything." In that case you would indeed believe in a creator. Believing in a creator is the same as believing in a god and I find it, "a bit stupid," that you would believe in a god but be completely oblivious to the fact. At least religious followers can choose to make informed decisions about their beliefs and are in general aware of their own faith. Which is stupider? A person that claims not to believe in God but performs actions that would indicate otherwise and is unaware or a person that knowingly believes in God with full awareness. It is very common for a typical atheist to consider themselves to be atheist when they are in fact a pagan. They are pagans following a nameless religion with a nameless god, a simple trick for simple people. "With science disproving all of the theories of religious people, all those who still ''want to'' believe, only have a book for evidence". Which religious people are you referring to? Are you referring to religious figures mentioned in religious texts or are you referring to religious scholars? Either way the probability of your statement that, "all," of those theories have been disproven is close to 0%. I may be wrong so if I am please provide the evidence. Also, science has never been able to difinitevly disprove the existence of God so based on scientific evidence (or lack thereof) any belief in the existence of God is just as valid as as any belief in the nonexistence of God. Both arguments are beliefs and both require faith. "only have a book for evidence" You are suggesting that a book is of little value to support any evidence. If that's the case then is the same true for books on the subject of cosmology and the theory of Everything that attempt to explain the creation of our existence or what about any book that record any form of written testimony at all? Ironically the Big Bang theory was proposed by by a Catholic priest. Science and religion are not always mutually exclusive and the Big Bang theory does not contradict the belief of creationist and can compliment the beliefs of a creationist by trying to explain the fine details of, "how," rather than the, "who or what." "Incredible. Isn't this proof of how we as humans have advanced at different levels?" I think your post is much better proof of how we as humans advance at different rates and reach different levels. Your post is full of empty rhetoric and you clearly demonstrate your belief in the superiority of the, "West," over other regions of the world in a subtlety(actually not subtle at all) racist manner. I understand very clearly that you probably would not admit to being racist due to the fact that being a racist often times means also being a coward, but a dog does not need to bark before I'm able to identify it as a dog either. You are what you are after all but I find it hilarious that you seem to revel in the advancements of the, "West," when it is the, "West," which probably has the highest number of people from regions outside of its own helping in its progress. I assume that you have not sat in on an engineering or science lecture at a major university and observed the diversity of both the students and the faculty. I also assume that you have not had the opportunity to work at or visit the HQ of any large tech company or science and engineering companies. Your views are very narrow and so I find it difficult to believe that you could make any significant contribution to the advancement of the, "West." As a matter of fact I find it more believable that you would be more of a hindrance to any form of advancement and I doubt you have any merit of your own that you could speak of. Your post is repugnant.
... View more