Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-10-2013, 10:29 PM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(24-10-2013 10:14 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(24-10-2013 09:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  All of those people have no evidence to support their beliefs, so their beliefs are worthless as evidence of fact.

Did you interrogate everyone on the planet or are you just making this claim up?

If anybody had real evidence for god, they'd already have a Noble Prize and we'd already be re-writing the science textbooks to account for this new information.

This has not happened. So it is safe to conclude that nobody has any real evidence for the existence of gods.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2013, 11:31 PM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(24-10-2013 10:29 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  If anybody had real evidence for god, they'd already have a Noble Prize and we'd already be re-writing the science textbooks to account for this new information.

This has not happened. So it is safe to conclude that nobody has any real evidence for the existence of gods.

What do you mean by "real" evidence? I'm glad your calling it evidence...cause that's what it is. Now if your opinion is that by "real" you mean, "strong", then I share your opinion. The consensus of the crowd on this matter isn't strong evidence for the existence of God. I think some could argue that it is strong evidence, but I am not going to make that argument. My only point was I see atheist errantly claim "AD POPULUM FALLACY" when none exists. Its obvious they don't know what it is.

Also winning the Nobel prize isn't relevant to evidence of God's existence. You are actually making the same category of fallacy as argumentum ad populum. You are basing a conclusion on an irrelevant fact. Kinda ironic isn't it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 01:07 AM (This post was last modified: 25-10-2013 02:25 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(24-10-2013 11:31 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(24-10-2013 10:29 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  If anybody had real evidence for god, they'd already have a Noble Prize and we'd already be re-writing the science textbooks to account for this new information.

This has not happened. So it is safe to conclude that nobody has any real evidence for the existence of gods.

What do you mean by "real" evidence? I'm glad your calling it evidence...cause that's what it is. Now if your opinion is that by "real" you mean, "strong", then I share your opinion. The consensus of the crowd on this matter isn't strong evidence for the existence of God. I think some could argue that it is strong evidence, but I am not going to make that argument. My only point was I see atheist errantly claim "AD POPULUM FALLACY" when none exists. Its obvious they don't know what it is.

Also winning the Nobel prize isn't relevant to evidence of God's existence. You are actually making the same category of fallacy as argumentum ad populum. You are basing a conclusion on an irrelevant fact. Kinda ironic isn't it?

And this is why you are a purposely obtuse troll.

None of it is real, objectively verifiable evidence. Eyewitness testimony is, at best, what the person believes they remember seeing. Subjective feelings are not evidence. Voices in your head are not evidence. There has never been any measurable, repeatable, testable, verifiable evidence that withstood peer review in favor of the existence of the super-natural, let alone any gods. What people commonly claim as 'evidence' for their gods, simply is not evidence (for anything except their own credulity and ignorance).

You've had the very fucking definition for the Ad Populum fallacy posted here for you, which made it abundantly clear that it is YOU who do not understand it and it's use.

My deferment to the lack of the Noble Prize for the existence of god is reasonable, it is not a simple call to authority or argument ad populum. If there was any real evidence for the existence of a god, and it withstood peer review, it would most likely upend the scientific community and make living legends out of those involved. This is a reasonable expectation, if evidence existed. However this has not happened. The worldwide scientific community has not rallied behind any verifiable evidence in favor of super-naturalism. Therefore, given their expertise in the field and proven track record of figuring out reality, I feel reasonable comfortable and certain in trusting in their expertise and drawing the conclusion that there is no real evidence for the super-natural or gods.

Personal anecdotes are not evidence. Gathering a large group of people together who all believe in the same anecdote does not change this. Your reasoning is simply fallacious.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 01:36 AM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(25-10-2013 01:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(24-10-2013 11:31 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  What do you mean by "real" evidence? I'm glad your calling it evidence...cause that's what it is. Now if your opinion is that by "real" you mean, "strong", then I share your opinion. The consensus of the crowd on this matter isn't strong evidence for the existence of God. I think some could argue that it is strong evidence, but I am not going to make that argument. My only point was I see atheist errantly claim "AD POPULUM FALLACY" when none exists. Its obvious they don't know what it is.

Also winning the Nobel prize isn't relevant to evidence of God's existence. You are actually making the same category of fallacy as argumentum ad populum. You are basing a conclusion on an irrelevant fact. Kinda ironic isn't it?

And this is why you are a purposely obtuse troll.

None of it is real, objectively verifiable evidence. Eyewitness testimony is, at best, what the person believes they remember seeing. Subjective feelings are not evidence. Voices in your head are not evidence. There has never been any measurable, repeatable, testable, verifiable evidence that withstood peer review in favor of the existence of the super-natural, let alone any gods. What people commonly claim as 'evidence' for their gods, simply is not evidence (for anything except their own credulity and ignorance).

You've had the very fucking definition for the Ad Populum fallacy posted here for you, which made it abundantly clear that it is YOU who do not understand it and it's use.

My deferment tot he lack of the Noble Prize for the existence of god is reasonable, it is not a simple call to authority or argument ad populum. If there was any real evidence for the existence of a god, and it withstood peer review, it would most likely upend the scientific community and make living legends out of those involved. This is a reasonable expectation, if evidence existed. However this has not happened. The worldwide scientific community has not rallied behind any verifiable evidence in favor of super-naturalism. Therefore, given their expertise in the field and proven track record of figuring out reality, I feel reasonable comfortable and certain in trusting in their expertise and drawing the conclusion that there is no real evidence for the super-natural or gods.

Personal anecdotes are not evidence. Gathering a large group of people together who all believe in the same anecdote does not change this. Your reasoning is simply fallacious.

I see you've moved from "safe to conclude" to "it would most likely".

Tap Dance much?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 09:53 AM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(24-10-2013 10:29 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(24-10-2013 10:14 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Did you interrogate everyone on the planet or are you just making this claim up?

If anybody had real evidence for god, they'd already have a Noble Prize and we'd already be re-writing the science textbooks to account for this new information.

This has not happened. So it is safe to conclude that nobody has any real evidence for the existence of gods.

There are people with evidence for god who already have Nobel Prizes. They're called "Nobel Prize-winning theists".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 10:05 AM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(25-10-2013 09:53 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(24-10-2013 10:29 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  If anybody had real evidence for god, they'd already have a Noble Prize and we'd already be re-writing the science textbooks to account for this new information.

This has not happened. So it is safe to conclude that nobody has any real evidence for the existence of gods.

There are people with evidence for god who already have Nobel Prizes. They're called "Nobel Prize-winning theists".

There is no Nobel Prize in Theology, so what do you mean?

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
25-10-2013, 10:21 AM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(25-10-2013 09:53 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There are people with evidence for god who already have Nobel Prizes. They're called "Nobel Prize-winning theists".

They're called Nobel Prize Winners. They receive the prize for their significant contributions to science, not their contributions to theology. I don't believe any Nobel Prizes have been awarded for intelligent design or young Earth theories. At least not in this century.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 12:10 PM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
Facepalm with both palms.

I mean that there are very smart people with evidence for God that they follow rather than deride.

But it was a brilliant free thinker who suggested the "Nobel in Theology" to begin. Triple facepalm.

There is no coming prize for "proving" there is a god since one must want the proof. Prime example, the unflagging failure of yours to pursue any opportunity I offer you to find such proof!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 02:36 PM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(25-10-2013 12:10 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Facepalm with both palms.

I mean that there are very smart people with evidence for God that they follow rather than deride.

But it was a brilliant free thinker who suggested the "Nobel in Theology" to begin. Triple facepalm.

There is no coming prize for "proving" there is a god since one must want the proof. Prime example, the unflagging failure of yours to pursue any opportunity I offer you to find such proof!

"There are people with evidence for god who already have Nobel Prizes."

Double face palm, plus both feet on my face.

If even one of them had scientific evidence for god, they would present it and the scientific community would run with it. Let's ponder why that hasn't happened... aaaaaand... we're done pondering. They don't have it. It's a personal god, or a god of the gaps. I really don't mind, as they don't let their religion affect their pursuit of knowledge in the real world. At the end of the day, their findings survive peer review by the scientific, not theist, community. I can only imagine the result if the Catholic scientist who first presented the idea of the big bang had decided to test his theory in a church instead of the scientific community. It wouldn't be around today, I can safely assume.

I have read almost all of your links and articles. You have admitted to skipping over quite a few of ours. When you do read them, you go into them with a "how can I debunk this" attitude. I read everything without an agenda. Yes, even the massive apologetic approach to biblical slavery you posted (it took days, thanks for that...). I also read links and articles from non-apologetic, non-Christian sources. You can assert your own facts and use as many fallacies as you like, but at the end of the day, your evidence doesn't come close to proving a god, much less YOUR god, exists. If it ever does, I'll be happy to change my views. Thumbsup

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:58 PM
RE: Pascal's Wager Expanded Edition
(25-10-2013 12:10 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Facepalm with both palms.

I mean that there are very smart people with evidence for God that they follow rather than deride.

But it was a brilliant free thinker who suggested the "Nobel in Theology" to begin. Triple facepalm.

There is no coming prize for "proving" there is a god since one must want the proof. Prime example, the unflagging failure of yours to pursue any opportunity I offer you to find such proof!

Francis Collins doesn't apply his same level of evidence, critical thought, and scientific scrutiny to his belief in god as he did to his work in genetics that earned him his Nobel Prize in Biology. His evidence for his god was hiking in the woods and seeing three frozen waterfalls. If three frozen waterfalls was his evidence for the structure of DNA, he'd have been laughed out of the room instead of getting a Nobel. You are a disingenuous liar of the first degree.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: