Atheists are the most elitist and ignorant people in the world that have no concept of language and time

Atheists are the most elitist and ignorant people in the world that have no concept of language and time.

...

I can't tell if that image is intended to troll atheists or to troll creationists by presenting their apologetics in a poor light.

Everyone use to include bats as birds originally because there was no point in separating them, they flew, they were birds. now things are too technical for no reason, bats were excluded from birds because they are related to things that don't fly, and it proofs god isn't real for some reason.

that was his own "argument"

>Everyone use to include bats as birds originally because there was no point in separating them, they flew, they were birds.
Are airplanes birds?

Living creatures that existed for millions of years retard

So to qualify as a bird, a subject must both fly and be a living thing.

Are bees birds? Is an ostrich a bird?

Butterfly's are just basically small birds, right? By that logic anything with wings is a biRd?
Seems like the intellectually superior thing to believe

>ostrich
>bird

oh i see, your ignoring the obvious things that were already addressed

So ostriches are not birds. What kind of animal are they? Is that the same kind of animal or different kind of animal than penguins?

And again, are bees birds, yes or no?

This reminds me of a thread a couple days back of op asking "why do I get banned for trying to debate atheists????"

A bat is a bird with the body of a rat. A bee is too hierarchical, like an ant, to be a bird. One may consider them flying ants except they are better than ants because they produce honey.
An ostrich is a bird that behaves like a bipedal horse, one may call it a horse bird.

>A bee is too hierarchical, like an ant,
What do you mean specifically with this statement?

>An ostrich is a bird that behaves like a bipedal horse, one may call it a horse bird.
But our current definition of a bird is "living creature that flies." An ostrich cannot fly, thus, it cannot be a bird, even a specific variety of bird. So we either need to modify our definition or conclude that an ostrich is no type of bird.

It is a bird that consciously chooses not to fly. We ought to admire the ostrich.

THATS SOMEONE ELSE RETARD

If anything, it's Christcucks who are the most elitist and ignorant people in the world

>"I happen to hold the answer to every question asked by all of humankind since the dawn of time: I know how the story of our creation, the purpose of our existence, our future to come, the cosmology of this universe, and what happens to us after death, all based on this canon of disparate documents compiled 1,700 years ago!"

Go to Hell

I'm aware. You haven't responded to yet, so I'm continuing the conversation with others. If you have something to contribute, please feel free to do so.

Sounds just like atheists

Since when did atheists claim to know the "purpose" of human existence?

They say its to "reproduce"

Is this the special needs thread?

Not an argument

Since always.

Did I mention that everything in your original post is wrong?

...

...

Clearly.

Redditors don't understand 'belief' unless it's in humanist constructs.