Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-05-2014, 05:03 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
(18-05-2014 05:01 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  
(18-05-2014 04:58 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Here it is...all summed up and in pretty colors.

[Image: circular-reasoning-in-creationism.jpg]

But this graph leaves out the screaming of obscenities and ludicrous accusations between stages.

Yabut...it's usually me screaming the obscenities...we will have to pencil in jermy's ludicrous accusations.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2014, 05:05 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
Not a graph but statistics for today...drumroll please ratatatatatatatatatat

General
Newest Member: Bamboo_Lion
Members who have posted: 37.25%
Today's top poster: Jeremy E Walker (88 posts)
Most popular forum: Atheism and Theism (153,144 posts, 5,057 threads)

Beat_stick

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2014, 05:08 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
(18-05-2014 02:34 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  The evidence I speak of is something that comes after one has placed faith in Christ.

The presence of Christ in the heart of the redeemed is the empirical evidence I speak of and this presence is manifested through the life, actions, words, and thoughts of the redeemed.

That evidence is not empirical. It is personal revelation. Learn the difference. Empirical evidence cannot be reliably ascertained through actions requiring faith. Faith distorts the interpretation of empirical evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion.

You think this is just me as an atheist making this distinction? We have a theist on here (or did, he hasn't posted for awhile) who is very adamant about the difference between faith and logic. He readily admits that faith and rationality are not two sides of the same coin but two different coins.

This is not about atheism vs. theism, this is about the definition of words.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tartarus Sauce's post
18-05-2014, 05:10 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
(18-05-2014 05:05 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Not a graph but statistics for today...drumroll please ratatatatatatatatatat

General
Newest Member: Bamboo_Lion
Members who have posted: 37.25%
Today's top poster: Jeremy E Walker (88 posts)
Most popular forum: Atheism and Theism (153,144 posts, 5,057 threads)

Beat_stick

Doesn't 88 have some sort of negative connotation or I mis-remembering something...the file in brain is pulling up slowly.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2014, 05:11 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
Got it...I knew there was something...JEW posted 88...Consider

88
Nazi skinhead code for Heil Hitler. H being the 8th letter of the alphabet, therefore HH=88.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2014, 05:26 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
Jerry, I don't believe you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2014, 05:27 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
I've figured out why Jeremy's responses bore me. I've seen it all before.


Bot algorithm
  • Scan text for key words, calculate their weight and pick the winner.
  • Reply with randomly stock response selected from bin corresponding to winning key word. Responses can also be procedurally generated by combining sentence segments and inserting relevant words in place depending on part of speech.
  • If the text contains sufficient swear words (determined by ratio to text or novelty in thread) then pick stock response for swearing such as 'losing argument', 'filth' etc. Do not respond to points raised.
  • Look for short single sentences at the end of the thread. Key words found in these sentences are weighted higher, especially if the short sentence ends with a question mark.
  • Quote entire posts so that it gives the impression that the agent has understood it and is responding specifically to the points raised. Quoting single sentences raises suspicion that the bot is not attempted to respond. If confidence is particularly high then possibly quote only the last sentence of the text.
  • Keyword weight decreases for each post that it appears in so that it gives the illusion of a flow of conversation and means that stock responses from other bins can be used.
  • If no stock response is available then put winning key word into concordance and quote Bible passage. Can also use default wrapper text to refer to collection of passages without quoting them.
  • It can be safely assumed that displaying certain logical fallacies will evoke predictable responses that can be pattern matched (e.g. *know*{right,wrong}*). Respond with previously prepared responses to reinforce the illusion of intelligence.
  • Pad response with stock or procedurally generated provocative comments and / or personal anecdote which are scant on details.
  • By default ignore posts where insufficient key words are encountered or respond with default responses that are either generic and meaningless or insulting.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Mathilda's post
18-05-2014, 06:02 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
A theist who lies. Who would have thunkit ?

Blind assertions blind faith in fairy tales
And of course stupidity & gullibility

If only we could screen for this mental defect before birth.

"I'm sorry miss but our tests show your child will grow up to be stupid & gullible"

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
18-05-2014, 06:29 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
(18-05-2014 05:27 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  I've figured out why Jeremy's responses bore me. I've seen it all before.


Bot algorithm
  • Scan text for key words, calculate their weight and pick the winner.
  • Reply with randomly stock response selected from bin corresponding to winning key word. Responses can also be procedurally generated by combining sentence segments and inserting relevant words in place depending on part of speech.
  • If the text contains sufficient swear words (determined by ratio to text or novelty in thread) then pick stock response for swearing such as 'losing argument', 'filth' etc. Do not respond to points raised.
  • Look for short single sentences at the end of the thread. Key words found in these sentences are weighted higher, especially if the short sentence ends with a question mark.
  • Quote entire posts so that it gives the impression that the agent has understood it and is responding specifically to the points raised. Quoting single sentences raises suspicion that the bot is not attempted to respond. If confidence is particularly high then possibly quote only the last sentence of the text.
  • Keyword weight decreases for each post that it appears in so that it gives the illusion of a flow of conversation and means that stock responses from other bins can be used.
  • If no stock response is available then put winning key word into concordance and quote Bible passage. Can also use default wrapper text to refer to collection of passages without quoting them.
  • It can be safely assumed that displaying certain logical fallacies will evoke predictable responses that can be pattern matched (e.g. *know*{right,wrong}*). Respond with previously prepared responses to reinforce the illusion of intelligence.
  • Pad response with stock or procedurally generated provocative comments and / or personal anecdote which are scant on details.
  • By default ignore posts where insufficient key words are encountered or respond with default responses that are either generic and meaningless or insulting.

You put too much effort into this.

He's a side-stepping douche.

That is all.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
18-05-2014, 06:38 PM
RE: Jeremy E. Walker provides empirical evidence for the Christian God over other...
Jeremy please stop it . Why do you want to make a fool of yourself ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: