Argument I don't understand
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2014, 07:34 AM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(09-10-2014 06:47 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(09-10-2014 06:32 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Did you go full retard in the last 24 hours

I'm confused. He's always been full retard. There is no other setting.

Maybe I just haven't been reading his posts. I remember him being odd and pretending to be a Star Trek character at one point, but I didn't remember him arguing for religious stuff in the past. I wonder if he's pulling a Diddo and just switching to what gets him the most reactions?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2014, 02:02 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(08-10-2014 01:53 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(08-10-2014 01:48 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  You will forgive me for saying so, but perhaps you are oversimplifying the opposite side's viewpoint a tad? Smile

The deliberate obfuscation such "arguments" are couched in works to hide it, certainly, but I've not seen any greater depth to any formulation.

Presupposing a creator, one will find in all observation evidence of a creator. Absent the presupposition, no such inference is drawn.

Millions of theists would say you are presupposing there is no god. Rather than say they are right, may I say I find you have some special knowledge there?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2014, 02:06 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(13-10-2014 02:02 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(08-10-2014 01:53 PM)cjlr Wrote:  The deliberate obfuscation such "arguments" are couched in works to hide it, certainly, but I've not seen any greater depth to any formulation.

Presupposing a creator, one will find in all observation evidence of a creator. Absent the presupposition, no such inference is drawn.

Millions of theists would say you are presupposing there is no god. Rather than say they are right, may I say I find you have some special knowledge there?

You're really not very good at this. Not presupposing the existence of something is not at all the same as presupposing its non-existence.

Go read a logic book.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
13-10-2014, 02:12 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(09-10-2014 06:47 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(09-10-2014 06:32 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Did you go full retard in the last 24 hours

I'm confused. He's always been full retard. There is no other setting.

As much as I loathe the use of the word 'retard', this is the correct usage for it and doesn't offend me in the least. I can think of no better word in this context. Good job to you both. Thumbsup

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2014, 02:15 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(13-10-2014 02:02 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(08-10-2014 01:53 PM)cjlr Wrote:  The deliberate obfuscation such "arguments" are couched in works to hide it, certainly, but I've not seen any greater depth to any formulation.

Presupposing a creator, one will find in all observation evidence of a creator. Absent the presupposition, no such inference is drawn.

Millions of theists would say you are presupposing there is no god. Rather than say they are right, may I say I find you have some special knowledge there?

Burden of proof.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes xieulong's post
13-10-2014, 02:49 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(13-10-2014 02:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-10-2014 02:02 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Millions of theists would say you are presupposing there is no god. Rather than say they are right, may I say I find you have some special knowledge there?

You're really not very good at this. Not presupposing the existence of something is not at all the same as presupposing its non-existence.

Go read a logic book.

One would think so, yes. But this is more like 5,000 people tell you there's a firestorm coming and you say their evidence is anecdotal. I thought atheists complain about proselytization of hell? "I have no evidence for god." Sure, unless you consider testimonials. You are de facto telling the court ALL those who testify to swear to tell the truth so help them god about god are not trustworthy. Interesting...

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2014, 03:01 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(13-10-2014 02:49 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(13-10-2014 02:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  You're really not very good at this. Not presupposing the existence of something is not at all the same as presupposing its non-existence.

Go read a logic book.

One would think so, yes. But this is more like 5,000 people tell you there's a firestorm coming and you say their evidence is anecdotal. I thought atheists complain about proselytization of hell? "I have no evidence for god." Sure, unless you consider testimonials. You are de facto telling the court ALL those who testify to swear to tell the truth so help them god about god are not trustworthy. Interesting...

Your post is utterly non-responsive - a complete non sequitur.

Testimonials are not evidence. And eye witness testimony has been shown to be untrustworthy.

Read a book.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-10-2014, 03:35 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
OP, I think that whoever you are quoting about the patterns and such may be talking about the error correcting codes of nature. Other than machinery and electronics, there is only one place found in nature that contains error correcting codes, natural selection.

I first heard about supersymmetry watching the discussing at the nobel conference found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvO2SC7ISX8. Dr Gates talks about his meddling with mathematics and that he has discovered more error correcting codes in nature other than natural selection (starting around 5 mins, though I'd watch from the beginning to understand the context of the debate).

I must state though that no matter how much you can outline patterns, there does not need to be an intelligent designer for them to exist.

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2014, 04:39 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(08-10-2014 01:46 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I would more likely point to patterns in the scriptures as evidence of God's fingerprints on the work. But I thank the creator for making what we call laws of physics, math and etc. to help prevent me from injuring myself--to help me do work--to help me at play or rest.

"Who but a slave thanks his master for what his master has decided to do without bothering to consult him?"

-Christopher Hitchens: god is Not Great-How Religion Poisons everything

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Phoenix's post
13-10-2014, 05:21 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
A natural pattern that you see in nature could be a new discovery waiting to be uncovered.

Asserting the pattern is evidence of an imaginary figure is like saying rain is evidence of a cloud monster crying.

I beg you. Please grow up.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Rahn127's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: