89 replies to this topic

[Lister]

This conversation continues to be asinine, because the premise that you are asking to have disproven is not testable.

You have no imagination and I feel sorry for you. Just thought you should know.

[shadowhawk]

I got your point shadow. I didn't feel the need to agree with you and pat you on the shoulder telling you how awesome a guy you are and how cool it would be to be friends with you. I figured you had that handled. I brought up another point I felt was pretty relevant. Perhaps you felt it wasn't relevant?

My whole point in making this thread was to bring out and target any Atheists that believe in the 100% truth of something. Hence why I figured you’d understand that I got your point and moved on. Do you then not believe in the 100% truth of things?

Thanks Lister. Nice words to me. Not used to that. I do not believe you can prove anything 100% That does not mean I don't believe some things to be true.

I assumed that was true about you Shadow however you make it EXTREMELY hard for me and others! If you said to me that you believed strongly that the God of the Bible created Life through DNA I would totally support you regardless of my own beliefs! But you always reply with "Prove it!" or some other blunt rejection of an open conversation!

It's like having a conversation with someone who's constantly holding a knife at your throat!

I would have no problem flicking half these Atheists away as at their core they’re only interested in being RIGHT! Hence you just have to admit that they’re right (Whether they are or not; Who cares if they have nothing to add) and they break down and give up. You on the other hand want to have a conversation. You want to be right but you also want to exchange ideas. The only trouble is you won’t do it unless you have a fully loaded Gun by your side!

How can I decide whether your ideas are right for me or not if you won’t present them from your heart? This is why I’m always pushing you to write stuff instead of quoting, pasting a link and/or copy and pasting from a source. I want to hear what YOU have to say not what they said.

You said in a past post that perhaps I wasn’t taught right (kind of insulting) however this is the core of education! Showing that you understand the content by phrasing your own arguments build upon the ideas (not always the words) of others arguments.

I want you to Prove Me Wrong shadow because this is how I build up my core understanding of life. Being wrong is part of science and thus should be part of ID should it not? What do you THINK?

I don’t care who says something. My reaction does not depend on the source. That is one reason I don’t reject any kind of source for ideas. I don’t get how an educated person could reject the tools of education. You are making a lot of assumptions when you say what I argue is not heartfelt.

No one is an island when it comes to truth and what I know is not largely sourced in me. I am to educated for that nonsense.

The reason I came to LONGECITY was because of my interest in life Extension. After about a year I posted in the “FAITH,” topic answering, “Christian.” I might as well have thrown a bomb in a hive of bees. Don’t answer, “Christian.” Every New Atheist and agnostic in Longecity, came pouring out. Not being one to run away, I haven’t. I wouldn’t recommend this as a place to study or learn about religion. To many bigots.

Some, like you, may disagree with me but at least we are civil. I don’t agree that you can’t get ideas from all kinds of media and make them your own. This form of communication has its limits. It is easy to enrich such a limited format with bookmarks and videos. Why not, especially when the source is an expert. I already gave you many bookmarks. If you study them you will have far more than you could get from this.

[Godot]

This conversation continues to be asinine, because the premise that you are asking to have disproven is not testable.

You have no imagination and I feel sorry for you. Just thought you should know.

Let me get this straight -- you're saying that people should believe in your model of the universe just because you are able to imagine that it's true? Lol

[shadowhawk]

This conversation continues to be asinine, because the premise that you are asking to have disproven is not testable.

I agree with you except most tests are not testable and are not designed to prove everything. What test do you propose to use? Kind of asinine.

[Godot]

I don't propose any test. My whole point is that the proposition cannot be tested, and so therefore cannot be proven or disproven.

I can't disprove the notion that Lister's god created the universe any more than Lister can disprove the notion that I created the universe.

[shadowhawk]

I don't propose any test. My whole point is that the proposition cannot be tested, and so therefore cannot be proven or disproven.

I can't disprove the notion that Lister's god created the universe any more than Lister can disprove the notion that I created the universe.

Well there are ways to test and prove things. It depends on what you accept as proof and what you are testing.. I think I could give you proofs that you did not create the universe. Does Lister have a God? Lets be rational.

[Godot]

I don't propose any test. My whole point is that the proposition cannot be tested, and so therefore cannot be proven or disproven.

I can't disprove the notion that Lister's god created the universe any more than Lister can disprove the notion that I created the universe.

Well there are ways to test and prove things. It depends on what you accept as proof and what you are testing.. I think I could give you proofs that you did not create the universe. Does Lister have a God? Lets be rational.

There are ways to test and prove things, but the sneaky creation of the universe is not one of those things.

If you think you could prove that I did not create the universe, then be my guest. You will not succeed, since it is not a testable hypothesis. There is literally no way that you could test it.

[Lister]

Godot, what do you think the point of this thread is exactly? I did explain it a few times on the thread but let’s just start again assuming you’d rather not read back…

What do you think it is I’m trying to achieve here other than introducing myself to the forum? I did explain it but I get the feeling you’ve missed the point.

Shadow,

Thank you for your response. That response right there is exactly the sort of response I was talking about. I would love for you to place down a source and for you and me to have a conversation about it. I work a lot and I have my other hobbies so I’d rather not spend hours going through the zillions of links you have. Instead I’ll trust you and we can proceed with the discussion about specific things. That would be nice.

I did this to an extent on the DNA issue but we both got side tracked. I will try this with my ID thread.

Also I'm sorry the A and A's poured out and all over you but to be fair there is likely a large amount of similarly challenged people within the faith (though I can't prove that). I will always try my best to present my cases to you in as reasonable a way as possible (though I may fail from time to time to which I ask for your forgiveness).

Edited by Lister, 29 September 2012 - 04:56 AM.

[shadowhawk]

I don't propose any test. My whole point is that the proposition cannot be tested, and so therefore cannot be proven or disproven.

I can't disprove the notion that Lister's god created the universe any more than Lister can disprove the notion that I created the universe.

Well there are ways to test and prove things. It depends on what you accept as proof and what you are testing.. I think I could give you proofs that you did not create the universe. Does Lister have a God? Lets be rational.

There are ways to test and prove things, but the sneaky creation of the universe is not one of those things.

If you think you could prove that I did not create the universe, then be my guest. You will not succeed, since it is not a testable hypothesis. There is literally no way that you could test it.

So you believe you created the universe. I could argue the point but it is not worth entering into this bit of delusion. So...good for you!

[Godot]

Congratulations, you have missed the point completely.

[shadowhawk]

Lister: Shadow,

Thank you for your response. That response right there is exactly the sort of response I was talking about. I would love for you to place down a source and for you and me to have a conversation about it. I work a lot and I have my other hobbies so I’d rather not spend hours going through the zillions of links you have. Instead I’ll trust you and we can proceed with the discussion about specific things. That would be nice.

I did this to an extent on the DNA issue but we both got side tracked. I will try this with my ID thread.

Also I'm sorry the A and A's poured out and all over you but to be fair there is likely a large amount of similarly challenged people within the faith (though I can't prove that). I will always try my best to present my cases to you in as reasonable a way as possible (though I may fail from time to time to which I ask for your forgiveness).

I spent some time discussing the intelligent design issue earlier. This is probably the wrong topic to discuss it in.

Thanks for the civility.

[shadowhawk]

Congratulations, you have missed the point completely.

I assume you are addressing me. What part of your claim did I not understand?

What do I need to be congradtulated for?

[Godot]

I stated: you (and lister) cannot prove that I did not create the universe, for exactly the same reason that no one can prove that god did not create the universe. Neither one can be proven or disproven; they are meaningless statements.

You took this to mean that I believe that I created the universe. Your conclusion is invalid.

[shadowhawk]

I stated: you (and lister) cannot prove that I did not create the universe, for exactly the same reason that no one can prove that god did not create the universe. Neither one can be proven or disproven; they are meaningless statements.

You took this to mean that I believe that I created the universe. Your conclusion is invalid.

Can you prove anything? What do you, if anything, accept as proof? Is anything true that does not have proof?

[Godot]

Yes, as I said, some things can be proven or disproven. They are called hypotheses and they are the basis of all science.

Whether something or someone created the universe and then hid the evidence, is not one of those things. It may well be true (although I doubt it), but that is irrelevant to the challenge issued by this thread, which is for someone to disprove that absurdity. It can however, as I have explained, neither be proven nor disproven. It is a meaningless statement.

[shadowhawk]

Godot: Yes, as I said, some things can be proven or disproven. They are called hypotheses and they are the basis of all science.

Something being a, “hypotheses does not mean it is proven or disproved or even if it is capable of proof. Prove the only way to discover truth is science. There are limitations to science and science is not proven by science. It starts off with a philosophical set of assumptions which are not all agreed to by philosophers of science. You didn’t answer my questions.

Whether something or someone created the universe and then hid the evidence, is not one of those things. It may well be true (although I doubt it), but that is irrelevant to the challenge issued by this thread, which is for someone to disprove that absurdity. It can however, as I have explained, neither be proven nor disproved. It is a meaningless statement.

What absurdity? What are you talking about Is the question of this thread about God? Again, what kind of proof do you accept? Since you say some things can be proven or disproved, using the kind of proof you accept, name me something.

Prove that saying someone or something created the universe is a meaningless statement. You made the statement, where is your proof? Lets keep this fun.

[Lister]

Yes, as I said, some things can be proven or disproven. They are called hypotheses and they are the basis of all science.

Whether something or someone created the universe and then hid the evidence, is not one of those things. It may well be true (although I doubt it), but that is irrelevant to the challenge issued by this thread, which is for someone to disprove that absurdity. It can however, as I have explained, neither be proven nor disproven. It is a meaningless statement.

Godot… you’re hopeless man!

How would you feel if you were talking to your friends about the bad weather and I jumped in and started pointing at the sky screaming “The Weather is really bad you idiots”?

If you’re trying to troll you’re doing a piss poor job of it. You know why they call it an Xbox 360? Because you turn 360 degrees and walk away from it.

[Godot]

Sorry, I didn't realize that the Spirituality & Religion forum was Longecity's retard room. Please continue driveling.

[shadowhawk]

Sorry, I didn't realize that the Spirituality & Religion forum was Longecity's retard room. Please continue driveling.

ad hominem, when you are in over your head start calling names. That is all you have? Didn't answer one question. Ho hummm. So typical.

[Godot]

Blah. My remark came only in response to a second ad hominem attack from Lister, which by the way did not address my arguments whatsoever.

I have not addressed your questions because your thought process is nonsensical. Your questions don't make any sense, and you have not understood even simple statements I have made.

[shadowhawk]

Blah. My remark came only in response to a second ad hominem attack from Lister, which by the way did not address my arguments whatsoever.

I have not addressed your questions because your thought process is nonsensical. Your questions don't make any sense, and you have not understood even simple statements I have made.

Whether you recognize it or not you are still calling names. You have said nothing. What question was nonsensical? I asked you, responding to your statements the following in the last few posts..

1. What absurdity? What are you talking about?
2. Is the question of this thread about God?
3. Is the question of this thread about God?
4. What kind of proof do you accept?
5. Prove that saying someone or something created the universe is a meaningless statement.
6. Prove the only way to discover truth is science.
7. Can you prove anything?
8. What do you, if anything, accept as proof?
9. Is anything true that does not have proof?

Not one answer! I know these questions may seem nonsensical to some and over your head. Confusing. They don’t make sense to people with keen minds like yours. OK, no use relating to retards as you say. My thought process is to screwed up to handle this. Typical.

[Godot]

1) The challenge posed by this thread is absurd, because it is impossible. The actions of Lister's God cannot be proved or disproved because they do not relate to testable matters of material existence.
2) & 3) Obviously this thread is about the idea of God. I'm not sure why you are asking me this.
4) Proof: http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/proof
5) The statement is meaningless because it would not be possible to set up an experimental method whereby it could be proved or disproved. I challenged you to construct such a method, and you stated that you could. However, you have not done so.
6) I have never made that claim.
7) See #4
8) See #4
9) Yes, I'm sure many true things are yet unproven.

[shadowhawk]

1) The challenge posed by this thread is absurd, because it is impossible. The actions of Lister's God cannot be proved or disproved because they do not relate to testable matters of material existence.
2) & 3) Obviously this thread is about the idea of God. I'm not sure why you are asking me this.
4) Proof: http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/proof
5) The statement is meaningless because it would not be possible to set up an experimental method whereby it could be proved or disproved. I challenged you to construct such a method, and you stated that you could. However, you have not done so.
6) I have never made that claim.
7) See #4
8) See #4
9) Yes, I'm sure many true things are yet unproven.

Now wasn't that easy? And you understood it this time without all the ad hominen.

[Lister]

2) & 3) Obviously this thread is about the idea of God. I'm not sure why you are asking me this.

No it's not.

It's about how no one can prove me wrong 100% hence beleiving that God exists 100% or does not exist 100% is reduclous. In fact beleiving anything 100% is absurd. Do you understand? Would you like me to break it down further? If you had read the thread you would see that this thread is OBVIOUSLY not about the idea of God; which you clearly didn't.

YES IT'S AN ABSURD CLAIM! THAT'S THE POINT!

Hence everything you've said in your replys has been repeating over and over and over what I've already said. Your point is the point I already made. Do you understand that? Hello? Anyone in there?

I don't have a God. Unless you're referring to the all mighty FSM! Praise be to his noodly self.

[shadowhawk]

And we know the FSM was made up, by who and when!

[Deep Blue]

God...

There is currently no evidence to suggest the existence of such a being.

...created the world 6000 years ago.

This is incorrect. The age of the earth is roughly 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating of the oldest rocks found on earth yield an age of 4.4 billion years.

More on how this number was established: http://en.wikipedia....ge_of_the_earth

Edited by Deep Blue, 18 October 2012 - 10:45 PM.

[shadowhawk]

Also mikeinnaples, you just summarized this thread. I’m guessing you did that to try and bring everything together and not because you just read 3 lines and then hit reply? Cause that’d be a silly mistake wouldn’t it?

It depends on what is being said. No use arguing against logical fallacies or name calling. Also some posts are addressed to certain posters.

I have to quote this. You are basically telling everyone that there is no point in arguing with you or even responding to you.

Classic.

Straw man. Didn't say that at all. Can you read?

I read just fine. Cry much?

You use logical fallacies and you name call consistently. You state that there is no point in arguing with people that do so.

Would you argue with yourself?

Nothing worth relating to here. Typical.

[mikeinnaples]

Did you just really reply to a message from 3 months ago with your typical stupid response? Wow, I am so glad I stopped responding too you in general, you really are a broken record.

[shadowhawk]

Did you just really reply to a message from 3 months ago with your typical stupid response? Wow, I am so glad I stopped responding too you in general, you really are a broken record.

I see you are well. Nothing new here, just the same old stuff as always.. Have a good day.

[Lister]

Did you just really reply to a message from 3 months ago with your typical stupid response? Wow, I am so glad I stopped responding too you in general, you really are a broken record.

I see you are well. Nothing new here, just the same old stuff as always.. Have a good day.

I shall have the last word!

And that word shall be: Mukluks!