Run The Gauntlet
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-02-2013, 07:19 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Quote:Incidentally, with regards to Michael Behe, here is an incomplete list of things he admitted to federal court:

- No peer-reviewed journal has ever published research supporting ID
- Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box" was not peer-reviewed, despite him claiming it was
- ID's plausibility to people is in direct proportion to their faith
- The US National Academy of Sciences' definition of the term "theory" does not encompass ID, and that his own definition of "theory" would also include astrology.
- The basic arguments for the evidence of design in nature are essentially the same as those proposed by the Rev. William Paley (1743-1805)
- That he claimed evolution could not explain immunology without even bothering to investigate the subject.
Wow, I was honestly aware of #2, that's not good. As for #1, it's true except that creation publications typically print side-by-side the ID position and refutations the other side--there's no "fair and balanced" treatment.
As for being in hiding, that man got his tail kicked by his peers. He told us about flying to Argentina for a talk and here's an in-flight magazine with fellow scientists bashing him.
I'll say this, though. I was not thinking of "Scopes II" when I mentioned Behe. I was thinking of him as he once was, a Catholic who was not a fundamentalist and didn't no "born again" from a hole in the head. And he's looking at the vast complexity inside human individual cells and he's thinking it's way too complex even for millions of years of Evolution. That's all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 07:22 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(22-02-2013 07:15 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  and I'd be more prone to indulging myself in some non-healthy behavior.
What behaviours would these be?

If you wouldnt indulge in them now, why would you suddenly decide to indulge in them if you lost your faith?

You wouldnt murder people being a theist, yet you would murder people if you didnt believe in god?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 07:28 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Quote:Now please answer Vosur's question about what kind of evidence you would accept for my existence.

Ah yes, of course. I can be gracious, after all, I already reduced from "prove you exist" to "give evidence for existence". Of course, "you people" always ask first for Christians to prove God exists.

Why, just yesterday I invited someone to pray and they said, "You pray" and after we chatted about free will he said, "Well, then, I'll pray 'God, make me believe!'" He admitted within a few minutes he wasn't really praying at all and then we talked about how God will not push past one's free will...

Anyway, here's the thing. I admit I'm hesitant to define terms for evidence here because I've noticed not two of you can agree on anything at all on these forums (or nearly so). Now, I did think of some Bible terms for evidence and perhaps we can do those. Anyone know the standard for accepting facts in evidence that the Bible gives? Rather fascinating.

But what if we were to put this all aside and simply have several of you on this thread admit it's very difficult across the 'Net to provide evidence for existence? It's easier in person, no? Then you wouldn't even have to waste your time giving evidence for me to believe you exist. Of course, if you were to ADMIT that fact, then you would also have to ADMIT you're completely pulling chains when you ask Christians to prove GOD exists on the 'Net. (Something I'll surely do the moment anyone here proves their existence to me beyond a reasonable doubt with verifiable evidence.)

We have what my good friend (whom I mentored, along with Chuck "Born Again Christian" Norris) the Dos Equis Man calls 'Ze Mexican Standoff, is it not so? Cheers and many blessings. Stay thirsty (for truth and love) my friends.

PS. God told me just yesterday regarding several of you that there is evidence for His existence quite close to you in space and time but you're going to have to do a bit more of "Where's Waldo" to find it. He said look for yourself in the picture, too. See if you can find yourself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 07:33 AM (This post was last modified: 22-02-2013 07:37 AM by Vosur.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(22-02-2013 07:28 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Now please answer Vosur's question about what kind of evidence you would accept for my existence.

Ah yes, of course. I can be gracious, after all, I already reduced from "prove you exist" to "give evidence for existence". Of course, "you people" always ask first for Christians to prove God exists.

Why, just yesterday I invited someone to pray and they said, "You pray" and after we chatted about free will he said, "Well, then, I'll pray 'God, make me believe!'" He admitted within a few minutes he wasn't really praying at all and then we talked about how God will not push past one's free will...

Anyway, here's the thing. I admit I'm hesitant to define terms for evidence here because I've noticed not two of you can agree on anything at all on these forums (or nearly so). Now, I did think of some Bible terms for evidence and perhaps we can do those. Anyone know the standard for accepting facts in evidence that the Bible gives? Rather fascinating.

But what if we were to put this all aside and simply have several of you on this thread admit it's very difficult across the 'Net to provide evidence for existence? It's easier in person, no? Then you wouldn't even have to waste your time giving evidence for me to believe you exist. Of course, if you were to ADMIT that fact, then you would also have to ADMIT you're completely pulling chains when you ask Christians to prove GOD exists on the 'Net. (Something I'll surely do the moment anyone here proves their existence to me beyond a reasonable doubt with verifiable evidence.)

We have what my good friend (whom I mentored, along with Chuck "Born Again Christian" Norris) the Dos Equis Man calls 'Ze Mexican Standoff, is it not so? Cheers and many blessings. Stay thirsty (for truth and love) my friends.

PS. God told me just yesterday regarding several of you that there is evidence for His existence quite close to you in space and time but you're going to have to do a bit more of "Where's Waldo" to find it. He said look for yourself in the picture, too. See if you can find yourself.
And you've just avoided answering the question for the fifth time. Congratulations. [Image: eusa_slow_clap.gif]

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
22-02-2013, 07:59 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(22-02-2013 07:28 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Now please answer Vosur's question about what kind of evidence you would accept for my existence.

Ah yes, of course. I can be gracious, after all, I already reduced from "prove you exist" to "give evidence for existence". Of course, "you people" always ask first for Christians to prove God exists.

Why, just yesterday I invited someone to pray and they said, "You pray" and after we chatted about free will he said, "Well, then, I'll pray 'God, make me believe!'" He admitted within a few minutes he wasn't really praying at all and then we talked about how God will not push past one's free will...

Anyway, here's the thing. I admit I'm hesitant to define terms for evidence here because I've noticed not two of you can agree on anything at all on these forums (or nearly so). Now, I did think of some Bible terms for evidence and perhaps we can do those. Anyone know the standard for accepting facts in evidence that the Bible gives? Rather fascinating.

But what if we were to put this all aside and simply have several of you on this thread admit it's very difficult across the 'Net to provide evidence for existence? It's easier in person, no? Then you wouldn't even have to waste your time giving evidence for me to believe you exist. Of course, if you were to ADMIT that fact, then you would also have to ADMIT you're completely pulling chains when you ask Christians to prove GOD exists on the 'Net. (Something I'll surely do the moment anyone here proves their existence to me beyond a reasonable doubt with verifiable evidence.)

We have what my good friend (whom I mentored, along with Chuck "Born Again Christian" Norris) the Dos Equis Man calls 'Ze Mexican Standoff, is it not so? Cheers and many blessings. Stay thirsty (for truth and love) my friends.

PS. God told me just yesterday regarding several of you that there is evidence for His existence quite close to you in space and time but you're going to have to do a bit more of "Where's Waldo" to find it. He said look for yourself in the picture, too. See if you can find yourself.

I myself only ask for evidence of God's existence - if I have ever said "prove God exists" then my bad, I merely meant "provide evidence for your case".

It is impossible to completely 100% prove the existence of anything, since there are always wild explanations with next to no probability of being true that cannot be disproven. It is enough to provide evidence that builds a case that is beyond reasonable doubt.

On the internet this is more difficult than in person, however it is not that difficult. We know (beyond reasonable doubt) that humans exist, we know (beyond reasonable doubt) that humans sign up for and contribute to internet forums. So when we see something being posted it is not reasonable to suggest that it is not being posted by a human.

But way to go on dodging every question thrown at you instead of providing meaningful answers, it is almost an art form.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 08:32 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 02:08 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You did not understand a thing I said in my last post. And dodged the request to define what you want people to prove exists in your first post. In some cases, people dodging around a question with deflections and opinions for answers is considered good form, but your attempts are simply to ignore it and try to build another fallacious argument in the place of an answer.

Define what you want people to provide evidence for.

And the whole point of this
“If whatever definition I provide is un-falsifiable, unverifiable, un-provable, not independently verifiable, or not logically sound, then it is something that cannot be distinguished from fantasy or imagination.”



was to highlight that you will either provide a definition that meets the above quote and is basically just bullshit, or you will provide a definition that will defeat your own argument. Go ahead, I've got time. Drinking Beverage
Still enjoying some coffee, and some OJ too. Drinking Beverage

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 09:16 AM
Re: Run The Gauntlet
For someone claiming to have "proof"/"evidence" of God (which would be a world first and a huge accomplishment) PleaseJesus is being predictably vague in what he considers evidence and obstinate in his refusal to define what he considers evidence.

My take is that he has nothing, his entire argument is that we can't sufficiently prove our existence, but we still believe we exist, therefore it is reasonable to believe in his deity even though he can't prove its existence in the same way we can't prove ours.

Completely ridiculous, as even if we were in a matrix or whatever scenario OP imagines as the alternative to our actually existing, his deity hasn't been proven to exist within that matrix - there's no observable proof of its existence, regardless of the conditions of our observations. If it was to exist outside of all possible observation, it definitely doesn't interact with the world and thus its existence/nonexistence is moot. We can't know anything about it and can't say we know it exists.

If it was the Christian god, it's a dick since eternally torturing people for not believing, while providing no reasonable basis for that belief, is extremely petty and sadistic. There's absolutely nothing about that god worthy of respect, let alone worship.

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 09:29 AM (This post was last modified: 22-02-2013 09:34 AM by PleaseJesus.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Quote:And you've just avoided answering the question for the fifth time. Congratulations.

Hmmm. PJ wonders at Vosur's ill will, since Vosur is the leading TTA'er on telling everyone in the world what constitutes reasonable evidence and precisely what the Lord God Almighty has to do to make Vosur come around (a lousy relational communicatory standard, says PJ. Try telling your wife, "I'm not talking to you until you communicate with me the way I want you to"... I'm going to act as if you don't exist."

Perhaps Vosur fears I won't accept his claims that it's self-evident he exists. Bu-bu-but I told PJ, we need verifiable, substantiated evidence, and na-na-now I can't produce any so maybe I don't exist?!



Quote:It is impossible to completely 100% prove the existence of anything, since there are always wild explanations with next to no probability of being true that cannot be disproven. It is enough to provide evidence that builds a case that is beyond reasonable doubt.

Double hmmm... Then why do you ask me on this forum to prove God exists--especially since all religions handle the reasonable doubt standard well since God is invisible and most religions talk of a mystery God available only to sincere seekers and initiates? It bothers me I have to even OFFER proof of God's existence after untold billions have reported, "Come get it for yourself, sinner."

PJ's attenna (which is now his Daliesque moustache) is sensing that you have a titanic-sized double standard. What is the sound of the Titanic sinking when you're in the forest watching a tree being cut down?




Quote:Still enjoying some coffee, and some OJ too.

Triple hmmm... wondering how the coffee stayed warm for 24 hours. PJ was once vended with "Get your ice cold drinks here!" and then The Most Interesting Man In The World (on PJ's speed dial) asked in response, "Do you have any warm drinks instead, say the temperature of human urine?" He is an interesting fellow indeed.

Let's do it this way, and PJ will help your towering intellects define terms. You tell PJ what PJ needs to do to prove PJ's existence BARD, (Beyond A Reasonable Doubt or William Shakespeare) and then we'll go from there.

Okay dokey? I'm putting aside all your horse poopy about how to prove God's existence on a forum, since as materialists "you people" don't believe in spooks, spirits, or anything trusted religious associates tell you about how to live your lives, (at least for now) and you tell PJ how to prove, (excuse me, you asked me to prove God but instead, you might tell me how to give evidence I exist since nothing is ever really "proven", including reality) oops, I mean, give evidence PJ's a real Christian man and not a Poe or a figment of Chas's imagination (most doubtful since Chas prefers to confine his witticisms to the approximate length of headlines in The Times) and we'll move on.

Thanks and many props to all you LOTR fans, Gandalf (some call me Mithrandir, to the East I go not).

PS. Proof God is Jesus and exists is as near as your answering my challenge, uh, I mean, question. I've now redacted from "prove you exist" (and left the terms to you buh-buh-but you had to ask five times for a definition of terms because you were scared I'd attempt to do to big-old-you what you do to **God's children** at these forums daily, pine at them for "proof" and then trample on their pearls) to "give evidence you exist" to "you tell me to give evidence I exist".

And if you can't think of terms for how I might define my own existence to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt, then kindly shut down and cease from asking believers to prove God exists on the same forum. Thanks!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 09:36 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(22-02-2013 09:29 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Hmmm. PJ wonders at Vosur's ill will, since Vosur is the leading TTA'er on telling everyone in the world what constitutes reasonable evidence and precisely what the Lord God Almighty has to do to make Vosur come around (a lousy relational communicatory standard, says PJ. Try telling your wife, "I'm not talking to you until you communicate with me the way I want you to"... I'm going to act as if you don't exist."

Perhaps Vosur fears I won't accept his claims that it's self-evident he exists. Bu-bu-but I told PJ, we need verifiable, substantiated evidence, and na-na-now I can't produce any so maybe I don't exist?!
Sixth time. Thumbsup

And I have never made the claim that my existence is self-evident, you dishonest liar.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 09:38 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Can you explain why we have to prove that we exist before you show proof of god?

Just give us the proof?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: