Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-02-2016, 03:22 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 02:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Yes.

It is the difference between saying "your math is wrong" and "I reject mathematics as a concept".

This is not complicated.

Sure, I can accept mathematics as a concept while rejecting your interpretation of a math problem...BUT, I can' t reject mathematics as a concept, WHILE accepting your interpretation of a math problem.

In my case with evolution, I reject it as a biological concept, therefore, your "biology" is wrong.

And you are right, it isn't complicated.

(27-02-2016 02:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  And the only justification that you have presented for this is your own personal incredulity.

Nonsense. I reject evolution because I can give you more reasons why it is false than you can give me of why it is true..in other words, the proponderance of the evidence is against it.

Therefore, it will be foolish of me to accept a theory that has so little amount of evidence for it...and an abundance of evidence AGAINST IT.

So it has nothing to do with personal incredulity if I have multiple REASONS why I don't believe it.

So try again.

(27-02-2016 02:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Again, logical deduction exists. The fact that we do not have literally every skeleton from a given line of descent is irrelevant, and your continued insistence on pretending that it is only makes your argument appear still more asinine.

So basically, "of the millions upon millions, we don't have just one". Got it Thumbsup

(27-02-2016 02:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  No.

Of course not, that would shatter your whole worldview. Cant let that happen, can we? Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2016, 03:35 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 03:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Sure, I can accept mathematics as a concept while rejecting your interpretation of a math problem...BUT, I can' t reject mathematics as a concept, WHILE accepting your interpretation of a math problem.

And yet, in neither case is the problem equivalent to the underlying mathematics.

Your constant equivocation between the theory of evolution and "reptiles evolved into birds" is still fallacious.

(27-02-2016 03:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Nonsense. I reject evolution because I can give you more reasons why it is false than you can give me of why it is true.

No. You can't.

(27-02-2016 03:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-02-2016 02:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Again, logical deduction exists. The fact that we do not have literally every skeleton from a given line of descent is irrelevant, and your continued insistence on pretending that it is only makes your argument appear still more asinine.

So basically, "of the millions upon millions, we don't have just one". Got it

You don't actually understand what the word "deduction" means, do you?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2016, 04:09 PM (This post was last modified: 27-02-2016 04:24 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 03:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Nonsense. I reject evolution because I can give you more reasons why it is false than you can give me of why it is true..in other words, the proponderance of the evidence is against it.

No you idiot. It's PREponderance of the evidence, not "proponderance" ... fool. Learn the big words before you try to use theml. You just don't know what it is, AND you are incompetent to even speak on the subject, ... fool. That's a LEGAL standard, not a scientific standard. Thanks for proving yet again, you know NOTHING about science, or anything for that matter. You have no education, do you ? Did you even go to high school ?
It sucks to be as stupid as you. Can't your Jebus send someone with a brain ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2016, 05:41 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  And yet, in neither case is the problem equivalent to the underlying mathematics.

Your constant equivocation between the theory of evolution and "reptiles evolved into birds" is still fallacious.

This guy still doesn't get it Laugh out load

(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  No. You can't.

Been there, done that.

(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You don't actually understand what the word "deduction" means, do you?

Actually, I do. But to convince me, I need inductive reasoning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2016, 05:49 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 05:41 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  And yet, in neither case is the problem equivalent to the underlying mathematics.

Your constant equivocation between the theory of evolution and "reptiles evolved into birds" is still fallacious.

This guy still doesn't get it Laugh out load

(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  No. You can't.

Been there, done that.

(27-02-2016 03:35 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You don't actually understand what the word "deduction" means, do you?

Actually, I do. But to convince me, I need inductive reasoning.

No one can convince anyone as intentionally stupid as you of anything.
You actually think you will get "converts' this way ?

Fool.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2016, 07:09 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
I have snipped your pointless insults and empty posturing.

(27-02-2016 05:41 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  But to convince me, I need inductive reasoning.

Point one, inductive reasoning is, by definition, weaker than deductive reasoning, as it deals with probabilities rather than necessities. Demanding that someone supply you with weaker evidence in order to gain your support is incredibly silly.

Point two, we have inductive reasoning in support of the theory of evolution. You just prefer, as per usual, to pretend that we don't, because you are a very, very silly man who does not care about rationality or truth. You have your preconceived beliefs about intelligent design, and you don't give a damn about whether or not the evidence supports your position.

Come to that, you don't care about what the evidence is at all, or even what those who don't support your nonsense are actually saying. The entirety of this thread stands as testament to this.

Your apologetics need work.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
28-02-2016, 05:55 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(27-02-2016 07:09 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Point one, inductive reasoning is, by definition, weaker than deductive reasoning, as it deals with probabilities rather than necessities. Demanding that someone supply you with weaker evidence in order to gain your support is incredibly silly.

Its funny you say that, considering the fact that your use of deductive reasoning and the actual substance of your case, I find to be considerable WEAK. Remember how I keep saying "I don't see any reasons to believe.."...now, I say this after you make your piss-poor case for the theory, so in other words, I find your case to be WEAK.

The theory says what it says...it is what it is...it doesn't matter how you present it, the fact of the matter is, the mere essence of what the theory is stating: I FIND NO REASON TO BELIEVE IT.

(27-02-2016 07:09 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Point two, we have inductive reasoning in support of the theory of evolution. You just prefer, as per usual, to pretend that we don't, because you are a very, very silly man who does not care about rationality or truth.

All I know is that dogs produce dogs.

(27-02-2016 07:09 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You have your preconceived beliefs about intelligent design, and you don't give a damn about whether or not the evidence supports your position.

I go where the evidence takes me...and it takes me to intelligent design. I don't fight the truth, I embrace it. You, on the other hand...

(27-02-2016 07:09 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Come to that, you don't care about what the evidence is at all, or even what those who don't support your nonsense are actually saying. The entirety of this thread stands as testament to this.

Your apologetics need work.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2016, 06:26 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(28-02-2016 05:55 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Its funny you say that, considering the fact that your use of deductive reasoning and the actual substance of your case, I find to be considerable WEAK.

You've said this.

You have also failed to give us any reason to consider your opinion as anything other than exceptionally stupid.

(28-02-2016 05:55 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  The theory says what it says...it is what it is...it doesn't matter how you present it, the fact of the matter is, the mere essence of what the theory is stating: I FIND NO REASON TO BELIEVE IT.

Because you do not understand it, deliberately ignore all evidence presented, and actively reject all hope of rationality in favor of your preconceived beliefs, yes.

(28-02-2016 05:55 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  All I know is that dogs produce dogs.

This has been dealt with so many times already that it's getting ludicrous.

(28-02-2016 05:55 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I go where the evidence takes me...and it takes me to intelligent design.

Then present your case, because you have utterly failed to do so thus far.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
28-02-2016, 07:03 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You've said this.

You have also failed to give us any reason to consider your opinion as anything other than exceptionally stupid.

And you feel that way because an entire worldview is something that is extremely difficult to let go.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Because you do not understand it

Dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, fish produce fish. Anything contrary to that, I don't understand.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  , deliberately ignore all evidence presented

I didn't ignore it, I didn't ACCEPT IT. Apparently you don't know the different between the two.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  , and actively reject all hope of rationality in favor of your preconceived beliefs, yes.

Nonsense. The theory that you are pushing isn't necessarily contrary to my preconceived beliefs...so it isn't based on my beliefs that I reject it, because I can accept it, and STILL maintain my Christianity.

So, there must be another reason why I reject the TOE. Hmmm Consider

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  This has been dealt with so many times already that it's getting ludicrous.

Yeah, and you've also seen the "dogs produce dogs" phenomena so many times, and the fact that you think that the modern day dog originated from a non-dog..is...ludicrous.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Then present your case, because you have utterly failed to do so thus far.

My Case:

1. Kalam Cosmological Argument
2. Leibniz Cosmological Argument
3. Argument from Consciousness
4. Modal Ontological Argument
5. Argument from Entropy
6. Moral Argument
7. Argument from Language
8. Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus

Pick at your own risk, buddy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2016, 07:04 PM (This post was last modified: 28-02-2016 07:17 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(28-02-2016 07:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You've said this.

You have also failed to give us any reason to consider your opinion as anything other than exceptionally stupid.

And you feel that way because an entire worldview is something that is extremely difficult to let go.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Because you do not understand it

Dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, fish produce fish. Anything contrary to that, I don't understand.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  , deliberately ignore all evidence presented

I didn't ignore it, I didn't ACCEPT IT. Apparently you don't know the different between the two.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  , and actively reject all hope of rationality in favor of your preconceived beliefs, yes.

Nonsense. The theory that you are pushing isn't necessarily contrary to my preconceived beliefs...so it isn't based on my beliefs that I reject it, because I can accept it, and STILL maintain my Christianity.

So, there must be another reason why I reject the TOE. Hmmm Consider

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  This has been dealt with so many times already that it's getting ludicrous.

Yeah, and you've also seen the "dogs produce dogs" phenomena so many times, and the fact that you think that the modern day dog originated from a non-dog..is...ludicrous.

(28-02-2016 06:26 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Then present your case, because you have utterly failed to do so thus far.

My Case:

1. Kalam Cosmological Argument
2. Leibniz Cosmological Argument
3. Argument from Consciousness
4. Modal Ontological Argument
5. Argument from Entropy
6. Moral Argument
7. Argument from Language
8. Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus

Pick at your own risk, buddy.

All entirely debunked, a million times. You have no case. None. At All.
Still WAITING for you to explain how your god "found itself" in the Reality it did, and was not it's creator. THE most important question, you have FAILED to address. You are unable to do so.
You are a failure.




Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: