The JE Walker debates commentary thread
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-03-2014, 05:48 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 05:42 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Cjlr, man that looks rough. So far it's five or so pages of him trying to shift the burden of proof and accuse you of circular reasoning when you don't fall for it. So far as I can tell, there is no more content from him then that.

Here's what you do: make a new thread that asserts something that you can't back up. I don't care what it is. Maybe "God doesn't exist". Give the two premises "No one has verifiably seen God, and everything verifiable has been verified" and conclude "God doesn't exist". Then, sit back and declare that he has to disprove your two premises before you'll budge and refuse to admit any burden of proof on your own part.

I think he deserves it.

Oh, I'd almost like to believe I'm better than that.

Sleepy

Plus, there's no guarantee he'd go for it.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-03-2014, 05:49 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 05:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  I notice that Walker's most obtuse, simplistic statements where he demonstrates that he has not understood anything you've said, are 'Liked' by dildo97.

Amusing, that.

Has ol' diddo97 ever expressed a coherent thought about anything?

His thread and posts I've read are like I and I without the political opinions: only stupid remains.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
25-03-2014, 06:58 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
Okay cj, hit him with an excellent explanation of what causal means and how it is related to the argument (or not related, as it may be) and we'll watch him squirm.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-03-2014, 08:48 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
... this is never going to end.

Is it.

An eternity of the same circular assertions. The same weaksauce, flailing evasion. The same vacuous reversals.

It must be really easy to "argue" if you just restate the same script with no regard for the outside world.

10 My premises are true because reasons
20 You can't prove them wrong because they are true
30 goto 10

Weeping

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
25-03-2014, 09:00 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 08:48 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ... this is never going to end.

Is it.

An eternity of the same circular assertions. The same weaksauce, flailing evasion. The same vacuous reversals.

It must be really easy to "argue" if you just restate the same script with no regard for the outside world.

10 My premises are true because reasons
20 You can't prove them wrong because they are true
30 goto 10

Weeping

*Is it? Tongue

That was perfect, if he fails to even attempt to address any of that you can dismiss the argument outright and be done with it. You kicked his ass a long time ago, you've actually spent more time and effort than you needed to with him, and continuing the argument would be like a second Nye vs. Ham debate. Just be done with him.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like evenheathen's post
25-03-2014, 09:36 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 09:00 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  *Is it? Tongue

Oh, no. You misunderstand. I did not accidentally leave out the question mark. That was on purpose. The 'question' was rhetorical. I know the answer.

(25-03-2014 09:00 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  That was perfect, if he fails to even attempt to address any of that you can dismiss the argument outright and be done with it. You kicked his ass a long time ago, you've actually spent more time and effort than you needed to with him, and continuing the argument would be like a second Nye vs. Ham debate. Just be done with him.

But the he wins, heathen. Then he wins.
Wink

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
25-03-2014, 10:14 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
Nah. Then the ultimate argument just continues elsewhere, with your outstanding points left to bolster the truth to those who would listen.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-03-2014, 10:39 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 10:10 PM)Stevil Wrote:  As I see it, Jeremy needs to convince us that the option
Energy began to exist (violating the conservation of energy law) is more plausible than Energy is eternal.

If Jeremy is able to show that the "Energy began to exist" is plausible and favorable then he also needs to show that it is more plausible for it to have a cause rather than be probabilistic.

And bravo, Stevil. Not that I expect him to even pretend to understand it, but at least the concept is better explained to those who can.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-03-2014, 10:48 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 10:14 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Nah. Then the ultimate argument just continues elsewhere, with your outstanding points left to bolster the truth to those who would listen.

Actually both threads are classic. JW was SO sure that his apologetics background would stand him in good stead. It failed him completely. He was taught in an ivory tower, to use the usual "Biola" tricks. Too bad they didn't work. At all. Both threads will stand for a long time as the best rebuttal of WLC type bs we have. They will be useful in the future.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-03-2014, 11:46 PM
RE: The JE Walker debates commentary thread
(25-03-2014 08:48 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ... this is never going to end.

Is it.

An eternity of the same circular assertions. The same weaksauce, flailing evasion. The same vacuous reversals.

It must be really easy to "argue" if you just restate the same script with no regard for the outside world.

10 My premises are true because reasons
20 You can't prove them wrong because they are true
30 goto 10

Weeping




It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: