T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
Right. Just like gods those things wouldn't exist on other planets either. So four facts.Just three facts no leprechauns, pixies, fairy dust or loch ness monsters.
Last edited:
Right. Just like gods those things wouldn't exist on other planets either. So four facts.Just three facts no leprechauns, pixies, fairy dust or loch ness monsters.
Drew's new claim: Video games exist - therefore god-did-it.
No, you don't get to repeat your idiotic questions until you tell me whether you agree that there's an elephant in my fridge, and if not, why not.Any reply to my case for life on exoplanets?
Let me offer evidence of another belief and see if you accept the facts of evidence I offer is valid or if I'm just being illogical.
What would count asproofevidence life exists on planets outside our solar system?
F1. The universe exists
No universe no planets, stars, solar systems exist. For there to be life outside of our solar system a universe has to exist. The existence of the universe is evidence life exists on exoplanets.
F2. Planets and solar systems exist.
The fact planets exist in our solar system was for the longest time the only evidence we had from which we could infer other solar systems existed around other stars.
F3. The fact life exists on a planet revolving around a star
Of course. Why should we think it exists only on our planet. The fact it exists exponentially raises the possibility it exists on other planets.
All these things are true but it doesn't guarantee life exists elsewhere. All these facts are necessary for the claim to be true and they qualify as evidence in favor of the belief claim there is life on other planets. Is it irrational to believe life might exist on other planets?
Just three facts no leprechauns, pixies, fairy dust or loch ness monsters.
No I would say a video-game designer did it. What would you say... mindless forces did it accidentally? You should quit while you're only a mile behind.
Some people are claiming that mindless forces are proof of designers. I'm still trying to get my head around that contradiction. Maybe quit when you're still only light years behind?Drew's new claim: Video games exist - therefore god-did-it.
No I would say a video-game designer did it. What would you say... mindless forces did it accidentally? You should quit while you're only a mile behind.
What Theist set that requirment? To my knowledge, Theism claims god comes before any creation, as such a universe existing is not required for a God to exist.
The definition of theism.
theism
[ˈTHēˌizəm]
NOUN
- belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.
Moreover, none of us cared whether the god is “visible,” we are asking for your specific claim of it interacting in any way; parting seas, healed releatives, punished people, turned storms, answered prayers of any kind.God appears visually only in the last days.
According to your Bible, God showed his backside to the prophet Moses, and later God resided for over 30 years in western Asia before flying off into the sky.
You are being illogical. In exactly the same way that we’ve already explained that you were illogical before.Let me offer evidence of another belief and see if you accept the facts of evidence I offer is valid or if I'm just being illogical.
Any reply to my case for life on exoplanets?
Let me offer evidence of another belief and see if you accept the facts of evidence I offer is valid or if I'm just being illogical.
What would count asproofevidence life exists on planets outside our solar system?
F1. The universe exists
No universe no planets, stars, solar systems exist. For there to be life outside of our solar system a universe has to exist. The existence of the universe is evidence life exists on exoplanets.
F2. Planets and solar systems exist.
The fact planets exist in our solar system was for the longest time the only evidence we had from which we could infer other solar systems existed around other stars.
F3. The fact life exists on a planet revolving around a star
Of course. Why should we think it exists only on our planet. The fact it exists exponentially raises the possibility it exists on other planets.
All these things are true but it doesn't guarantee life exists elsewhere. All these facts are necessary for the claim to be true and they qualify as evidence in favor of the belief claim there is life on other planets. Is it irrational to believe life might exist on other planets?
Just three facts no leprechauns, pixies, fairy dust or loch ness monsters.
The difference is the concern about epistemology among atheists, and the lack of it among theists.Inferred does not = fact. That's the difference between Atheism and Theism. One states a faith-based belief as fact and the other doesn't
The guys i'm playing cards with have revealed their hands, and Joe's is a Straight Flush: A Jack-high straight, all of the cards in Hearts. To win this deal, i need to have a Royal Flush, preferably in Spades. (There is no actual precedence in suits, but the accepted wisdom is that Spades outrank Hearts (which outrank Diamonds which outrank Clubs), so it's just easier).
Fact one: Spades exist in the deck we're using.
Fact two: None of the hands revealed wo far display any of the cards I need for my Royal Flush.
Fact three: Tom dealt this hand and Tom hates John. Not saying Tom cheats, but Tom would not intentionally give John the winning hand if he could avoid it.
Fact four: There is about $600 in the pot. I need about $600 to fix something on my car.
With these facts in mind, i would say it is very likely that i have a Royal Flush. My having a Royal Flush is far more likely than my having no better than a pair of twos.
As long as nobody turns over their cards, you’re all good.
Thry already did. My opening line.The guys i'm playing cards with have revealed their hands, and Joe's is a Straight Flush: A Jack-high straight, all of the cards in Hearts. To win this deal, i need to have a Royal Flush, preferably in Spades. (There is no actual precedence in suits, but the accepted wisdom is that Spades outrank Hearts (which outrank Diamonds which outrank Clubs), so it's just easier).
Fact one: Spades exist in the deck we're using.
Fact two: None of the hands revealed wo far display any of the cards I need for my Royal Flush.
Fact three: Tom dealt this hand and Tom hates John. Not saying Tom cheats, but Tom would not intentionally give John the winning hand if he could avoid it.
Fact four: There is about $600 in the pot. I need about $600 to fix something on my car.
With these facts in mind, i would say it is very likely that i have a Royal Flush. My having a Royal Flush is far more likely than my having no better than a pair of twos.
As long as nobody turns over their cards, you’re all good.
There are some tie-ins on this to the "determinism" threads.God is a talking point.
A story from India I read. A guru lectures his students that god isin them, the rocks, animals, everything. Filled with bliss a student walks away down a path. He sees an elephant runnng at him and thinks if god is in me and god is in the elephant I have nothingto fear.
The elephant grabs him with its trnk and tosses him aside.
Bewildered he asks the guru what happened.
The guru said ' The god in the elephant was telling the god in you to get out of the way, and you were not listening'.
There is no shame in not knowing stuff. It is impossible for a single human to know everything about everything that humans as a group know. But if you want to challenge skeptics, you have to educate yourself on what they say. You can't just make up stuff.
I'll cease it here, before it becomes a toing and froing - you have a point of view, fair enough..
I am from a working class backgound. I was one of those kids, that loved school dinners lol, speaking od dinners I smell burning.
There is no shame in not knowing stuff. It is impossible for a single human to know everything about everything that humans as a group know. But if you want to challenge skeptics, you have to educate yourself on what they say. You can't just make up stuff.
I'll cease it here, before it becomes a toing and froing - you have a point of view, fair enough..
I am from a working class backgound. I was one of those kids, that loved school dinners lol, speaking od dinners I smell burning.
Indeed there's no shame when it is indeed the case. And (I'm sorry I need to say here) when it comes to pride or ego (or having some personal grudge) by falsely ascribing "making things up" to someone, who isn't - would just make you look a little foolish, especially by the person, who has to educate himself.
So...
Did I ever make any claim that Egnor said anything about souls in his talk? You were so eager, to make the false statement, you bypassed that bit of logic, which should have told you: "There's is no evidence for me saying it, therefore I can't quote it directly." Common Sense?
Or did you try and bluff it?
Forum Rules said:Clarification of Rule 9:
9. Not derail threads or detract from board discussions;
Posts which consist of little else besides a link to another document or video are not 'discussion', and are considered disruptive. Links provided in support of one's position are fine, but one is obliged to summarize or paraphrase the relevant point in their own words and in-thread. The posts should contain an argument or refutation, or at least a description with personal commentary, and not be mere links with some cut-n-paste quotation(s). In other words, post your thoughts and not just other people's thoughts.