Current Events > Does anyone still unironically advocate atheism?

Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Twin3Turbo 08/10/17 8:22:40 PM #355:	VaniIIa Coke posted... Twin3Turbo posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? God is God. Wow. That explains it. Man he cleared that age old question up just like that! You are a genius too. Good to see you got one thing right --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884552828] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Twin3Turbo posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid.</quote> As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause?</quote> Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> God is God. Wow. That explains it.</quote> Man he cleared that age old question up just like that!</quote> You are a genius too.</quote> Good to see you got one thing right</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tsukasa1891 08/10/17 8:23:47 PM #356:	SSJ-JohnLennon posted... TrevorBlack79 posted... People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence. But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die. By that logic the boggy man is real because you can't prove he isn't. --- This is my signature and it's ending one word at a time GameFAQs likes to hide this feedback link http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/feedback/ <cite>Tsukasa1891 posted [p:884552888] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>SSJ-JohnLennon posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TrevorBlack79 posted...</cite> <quote>People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence.</quote> But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die.</quote> By that logic the boggy man is real because you can't prove he isn't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 08/10/17 8:26:13 PM #357:	VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? I don't assume cause for things that don't exist. Why do you assume cause for matter and energy? We already know matter and energy can't be created nor destroyed... So you treat energy like God? This is why I have absolutely no respect for atheists. They complain about shit, and then do the same shit with a different label. Difference being I'm not complaining about what I'm doing. Athiests bitch about what I do then utilize the same logic while cherry picking subtraction of God. In an infinite universe, I keep open all possibilities that the ambiguity of God holds true and honest to. If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence? --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:884553032] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> I don't assume cause for things that don't exist. Why do you assume cause for matter and energy? We already know matter and energy can't be created nor destroyed...</quote> So you treat energy like God? This is why I have absolutely no respect for atheists. They complain about shit, and then do the same shit with a different label. Difference being I'm not complaining about what I'm doing. Athiests bitch about what I do then utilize the same logic while cherry picking subtraction of God. In an infinite universe, I keep open all possibilities that the ambiguity of God holds true and honest to.</quote> If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Terra-enforcer 08/10/17 8:26:57 PM #358:	@SSJ-JohnLennon posted... TrevorBlack79 posted... People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence. But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die. "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell. --- Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-3032-7898-9500 http://psnprofiles.com/Terraforce777 http://miiverse.nintendo.net/users/Rayquaza487 <cite>Terra-enforcer posted [p:884553065] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>@SSJ-JohnLennon posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TrevorBlack79 posted...</cite> <quote>People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence.</quote> But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die.</quote> "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Twin3Turbo 08/10/17 8:42:15 PM #359:	hockeybub89 posted... If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence? He's not a Christian. He's a pantheist that apparently crushes atheist with his foolproof logic despite not doing a damn thing in this topic other than assert all sorts of stuff that he simply made up with literally no back up as well as take things that other people say out of context. --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884553885] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote>If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence?</quote> He's not a Christian. He's a pantheist that apparently crushes atheist with his foolproof logic despite not doing a damn thing in this topic other than assert all sorts of stuff that he simply made up with literally no back up as well as take things that other people say out of context.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ibrahim529 08/10/17 8:42:52 PM #360:	i believe in god and senator dodd and keeping old castro down --- freedom <cite>Ibrahim529 posted [p:884553920] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>i believe in god and senator dodd and keeping old castro down</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/10/17 9:09:12 PM #361:	VaniIIa Coke posted... So you treat energy like God? No. Try again. --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884555410] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>So you treat energy like God?</quote> No. Try again.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rika_Furude 08/10/17 10:41:19 PM #362:	LordZangetsu_LZ posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? God is God. Wow. That explains it. Lmao, about the level of inteligence you can expect from someone religious --- Posted with GameRaven 3.2.1 <cite>Rika_Furude posted [p:884560420] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote> Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. </quote> As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? </quote> Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> God is God. Wow. That explains it.</quote> Lmao, about the level of inteligence you can expect from someone religious</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/10/17 10:55:46 PM #363:	I even told him to stop with the empty tautologies a while ago. But he didn't even listen. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884561156] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>I even told him to stop with the empty tautologies a while ago. But he didn't even listen.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#364	Post #364 was unavailable or deleted.
LordZangetsu_LZ 08/10/17 11:40:02 PM #365:	Rika_Furude posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? God is God. Wow. That explains it. Lmao, about the level of inteligence you can expect from someone religious --- "The Bible has noble poetry in it... and some good morals and a wealth of obscenity, and upwards of a thousand lies." -Mark Twain <cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted [p:884563519] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rika_Furude posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote> Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. </quote> As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? </quote> Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> God is God. Wow. That explains it.</quote> Lmao, about the level of inteligence you can expect from someone religious</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Chaosmaster00 08/10/17 11:48:10 PM #366:	God is dead. --- 3DS: 1590-4884-9269 \| Discord Chat for online gaming with Chaos! https://discord.gg/hDQ6rWb The more you learn, the less you know, maaan... <cite>Chaosmaster00 posted [p:884563878] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>God is dead.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JohnLennon6 08/11/17 7:56:34 AM #367:	Terra-enforcer posted... @SSJ-JohnLennon posted... TrevorBlack79 posted... People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence. But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die. "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell. What are you even mad about? --- Blue Lives Matter <cite>JohnLennon6 posted [p:884577174] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Terra-enforcer posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@SSJ-JohnLennon posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TrevorBlack79 posted...</cite> <quote>People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence.</quote> But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die.</quote> "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell.</quote> What are you even mad about?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GameofWheels 08/11/17 5:06:27 PM #368:	JohnLennon6 posted... Terra-enforcer posted... @SSJ-JohnLennon posted... TrevorBlack79 posted... People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence. But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die. "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell. What are you even mad about? Everything from what it seems like --- I'm Gameofwheels. Not Gameofchills. FC: 3196 5348 2859 PSN: Gameofwheels <cite>GameofWheels posted [p:884604403] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>JohnLennon6 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Terra-enforcer posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@SSJ-JohnLennon posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TrevorBlack79 posted...</cite> <quote>People who base their beliefs on reason and evidence.</quote> But there is no evidence that there is no god. You can't know until you up and die.</quote> "Religious people are stupid because there is no proof! Even though no other explanation has any more 'proof' than they do" Like, if you want to troll there's a better way. This makes you just look daft as hell.</quote> What are you even mad about?</quote> Everything from what it seems like</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VaniIIa Coke 08/11/17 9:48:09 PM #369:	The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... So you treat energy like God? No. Try again. Lmao.. So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. I'm actually not asking if you treat energy like God, I'm telling you. Furthermore, scientists have no idea what the fuck energy actually is. http://www.ftexploring.com/energy/definition.html Yet it's the foundation of science. I say, energy, is the energy of God. And you have no way to prove otherwise. You may claim I have no proof it is, but proof is not my necessity, it's yours because you need what you have not. So, by your own rules, fuck off. I don't need proof, because I have it. God is proof. able to withstand something damaging; resistant. "the marine battle armor was proof against most weapons" synonyms:resistant to, immune from, unaffected by, invulnerable to, impenetrable by, impervious to, repellent to --- ~Reward your curiosity~ <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted [p:884618479] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>So you treat energy like God?</quote> No. Try again.</quote> Lmao.. So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. I'm actually not asking if you treat energy like God, I'm telling you. Furthermore, scientists have no idea what the fuck energy actually is. http://www.ftexploring.com/energy/definition.html Yet it's the foundation of science. I say, energy, is the energy of God. And you have no way to prove otherwise. You may claim I have no proof it is, but proof is not my necessity, it's yours because you need what you have not. So, by your own rules, fuck off. I don't need proof, because I have it. God is proof. able to withstand something damaging; resistant. "the marine battle armor was proof against most weapons" synonyms:resistant to, immune from, unaffected by, invulnerable to, impenetrable by, impervious to, repellent to </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/11/17 10:30:52 PM #370:	Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know." --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884620325] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VaniIIa Coke 08/11/17 10:46:55 PM #371:	hockeybub89 posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? I don't assume cause for things that don't exist. Why do you assume cause for matter and energy? We already know matter and energy can't be created nor destroyed... So you treat energy like God? This is why I have absolutely no respect for atheists. They complain about shit, and then do the same shit with a different label. Difference being I'm not complaining about what I'm doing. Athiests bitch about what I do then utilize the same logic while cherry picking subtraction of God. In an infinite universe, I keep open all possibilities that the ambiguity of God holds true and honest to. If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence? There is one God, cultures paint him differently. Religions too. Many people find him through religion, many don't. So I do not stop at the "christian" God. And my head is just fine. Also I have evidence for God. You don't. Not my problem. --- ~Reward your curiosity~ <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted [p:884621047] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> I don't assume cause for things that don't exist. Why do you assume cause for matter and energy? We already know matter and energy can't be created nor destroyed...</quote> So you treat energy like God? This is why I have absolutely no respect for atheists. They complain about shit, and then do the same shit with a different label. Difference being I'm not complaining about what I'm doing. Athiests bitch about what I do then utilize the same logic while cherry picking subtraction of God. In an infinite universe, I keep open all possibilities that the ambiguity of God holds true and honest to.</quote> If you're open to all possibilities, why stop at the Christian God? Why not believe in everything since everything is possibly true? Your head might explode from so many beliefs. Why is he the one thing you can accept without evidence?</quote> There is one God, cultures paint him differently. Religions too. Many people find him through religion, many don't. So I do not stop at the "christian" God. And my head is just fine. Also I have evidence for God. You don't. Not my problem.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/12/17 3:05:39 AM #372:	VaniIIa Coke posted... So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created? --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884630425] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. </quote> Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VaniIIa Coke 08/12/17 2:57:55 PM #373:	The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created? Why are you talking about nothing? Not really sure what you're getting at. Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours. --- ~Reward your curiosity~ <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted [p:884651665] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. </quote> Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created?</quote> Why are you talking about nothing? Not really sure what you're getting at. Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ManLink4321 08/12/17 3:00:56 PM #374:	Dragonblade01 posted... Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know." People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try. --- The Hero of Hyrule. <cite>ManLink4321 posted [p:884651816] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know."</quote> People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/12/17 4:43:58 PM #375:	VaniIIa Coke posted... Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours. Why did you make a topic about your butt? --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884657558] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours.</quote> Why did you make a topic about your butt?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GameofWheels 08/12/17 5:13:31 PM #376:	The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours. Why did you make a topic about your butt? Because it feels a bit sore. --- I'm Gameofwheels. Not Gameofchills. FC: 3196 5348 2859 PSN: Gameofwheels <cite>GameofWheels posted [p:884659251] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours.</quote> Why did you make a topic about your butt?</quote> Because it feels a bit sore.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Twin3Turbo 08/12/17 5:16:55 PM #377:	No wonder he thinks that he crushes atheist logic with his pantheism. He literally thinks he can just assert whatever the hell he wants and create his own definitions about complex subjects, then when people point out they he's making crap up, he pretends he's winning the argument. --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884659427] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>No wonder he thinks that he crushes atheist logic with his pantheism. He literally thinks he can just assert whatever the hell he wants and create his own definitions about complex subjects, then when people point out they he's making crap up, he pretends he's winning the argument.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/13/17 12:05:07 AM #378:	ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know." People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try. Discrediting evolution and other scientific research is a major tactic of intelligent design proponents. Though I will admit that they attempt to prove intelligent design separately as well (very badly, mind you). --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884679896] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know."</quote> People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try.</quote> Discrediting evolution and other scientific research is a major tactic of intelligent design proponents. Though I will admit that they attempt to prove intelligent design separately as well (very badly, mind you).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ManLink4321 08/13/17 2:03:20 PM #379:	Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know." People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try. Discrediting evolution and other scientific research is a major tactic of intelligent design proponents. Though I will admit that they attempt to prove intelligent design separately as well (very badly, mind you). Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" --- The Hero of Hyrule. <cite>ManLink4321 posted [p:884704744] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>Science has a decent understanding of how energy works, but it makes no definitive claim as to why it works or why it even is. But even if you are right that science's understanding of energy is just as baseless as others' understanding of god, that doesn't make belief in god any less unreasonable. All you would have demonstrated is that the former is also unreasonable, nothing more. It's like when people try to prove intelligent design by disproving evolution. Even if you did disprove evolution, you're still left with the Herculean task of providing enough evidence for intelligent design to fill the gap left behind. Sometimes the only justifiable position to hold is "I don't know."</quote> People who try to prove intelligent design don't try to disprove evolution as well. Nice try.</quote> Discrediting evolution and other scientific research is a major tactic of intelligent design proponents. Though I will admit that they attempt to prove intelligent design separately as well (very badly, mind you).</quote> Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/13/17 2:41:17 PM #380:	ManLink4321 posted... Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884706406] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ManLink4321 08/13/17 9:19:54 PM #381:	Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents. You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski? --- The Hero of Hyrule. <cite>ManLink4321 posted [p:884725785] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents.</quote> You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/13/17 10:48:55 PM #382:	ManLink4321 posted... Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do Intelligent design became a famous thing when they got mad at books teaching evolution and wanted them teach intelligent design instead... https://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-evolution-vs-intelligent-design-debate First line of the interview: Dr. Wells, you have been following the evolution vs. intelligent design debate for quite some time To say that intelligent design people aren't arguing against evolution is... Well, just not true. You can say they shouldn't, or that they don't have to. But they are. And have been for some time. --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884730125] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do</quote> Intelligent design became a famous thing when they got mad at books teaching evolution and wanted them teach intelligent design instead... https://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-evolution-vs-intelligent-design-debate First line of the interview: <quote>Dr. Wells, you have been following the evolution vs. intelligent design debate for quite some time</quote> To say that intelligent design people aren't arguing against evolution is... Well, just not true. You can say they shouldn't, or that they don't have to. But they are. And have been for some time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rika_Furude 08/13/17 10:54:40 PM #383:	Why are christians so against evolution anyway? Its exactly the same as being against gravity, or being a flat earther --- Posted with GameRaven 3.2.1 <cite>Rika_Furude posted [p:884730428] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>Why are christians so against evolution anyway? Its exactly the same as being against gravity, or being a flat earther</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/13/17 11:01:00 PM #384:	ManLink4321 posted... Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski? Also I am feeling swerly... Dembski: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3529/2b09fb8ec3872ba6d13917c2dc0bddf41dd0.pdf Behe: https://www.amazon.com/Edge-Evolution-Search-Limits-Darwinism/dp/0743296222 Meyer: http://www.discovery.org/a/1134 Wells: https://archive.org/details/Jonathan.Wells.Icons.of.Evolution Johnson: https://www.amazon.com/Darwin-Trial-Phillip-Johnson/dp/0830838317 Berlinski: https://www.amazon.com/Deniable-Darwin-Other-Essays/dp/0979014123 --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884730782] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski?</quote> Also I am feeling swerly... Dembski: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3529/2b09fb8ec3872ba6d13917c2dc0bddf41dd0.pdf Behe: https://www.amazon.com/Edge-Evolution-Search-Limits-Darwinism/dp/0743296222 Meyer: http://www.discovery.org/a/1134 Wells: https://archive.org/details/Jonathan.Wells.Icons.of.Evolution Johnson: https://www.amazon.com/Darwin-Trial-Phillip-Johnson/dp/0830838317 Berlinski: https://www.amazon.com/Deniable-Darwin-Other-Essays/dp/0979014123</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 08/13/17 11:03:37 PM #385:	VaniIIa Coke posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? God is God. Wow. That explains it. God is something besides God, pshh that's a lie. Have some common sense you dolt. Your argument is actually logically unsound. Your argument is literally circular reasoning and by using your premise as your argument you are actually invalidating your own argument. <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:884730910] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid.</quote> As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause?</quote> Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> God is God. Wow. That explains it.</quote> God is something besides God, pshh that's a lie. Have some common sense you dolt.</quote> Your argument is actually logically unsound. Your argument is literally circular reasoning and by using your premise as your argument you are actually invalidating your own argument.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/13/17 11:39:37 PM #386:	ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents. You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski? If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884732755] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents.</quote> You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski?</quote> If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VaniIIa Coke 08/14/17 10:56:07 AM #387:	Dash_Harber posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid. As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause? Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God? God is God. Wow. That explains it. God is something besides God, pshh that's a lie. Have some common sense you dolt. Your argument is actually logically unsound. Your argument is literally circular reasoning and by using your premise as your argument you are actually invalidating your own argument. Projecting lmao. this is litterally how athiests percieve others logic because of what they themselves do. The burden of proof is the example. Which is not a part of logic or reasoning or even philosophy. It's part of the legal system. Like how braindead do you need to be to function like this? --- ~Reward your curiosity~ <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted [p:884751591] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Great explaination lmao. Magic rocks, this is laughably stupid.</quote> As opposed to magic Man. Although the question is why do think there's a cause?</quote> Lmao magic man? God is not man. God is God. Why do you no cause for an explosion, but assume cause for God?</quote> God is God. Wow. That explains it.</quote> God is something besides God, pshh that's a lie. Have some common sense you dolt.</quote> Your argument is actually logically unsound. Your argument is literally circular reasoning and by using your premise as your argument you are actually invalidating your own argument.</quote> Projecting lmao. this is litterally how athiests percieve others logic because of what they themselves do. The burden of proof is the example. Which is not a part of logic or reasoning or even philosophy. It's part of the legal system. Like how braindead do you need to be to function like this?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/14/17 11:12:13 AM #388:	VaniIIa Coke posted... The burden of proof is the example. Which is not a part of logic or reasoning Then you don't understand at least one of those three concepts... --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884752282] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>The burden of proof is the example. Which is not a part of logic or reasoning </quote> Then you don't understand at least one of those three concepts...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/14/17 11:16:03 AM #389:	The concept of burden of proof exists in both law and philosophy. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884752453] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>The concept of burden of proof exists in both law and philosophy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Twin3Turbo 08/14/17 11:16:20 AM #390:	The more I read from this guy, this quote becomes more and more hilarious. VaniIIa Coke posted... Personally, I'm a panentheist. It for the strangest reason makes atheists arguments cave in on their own logic. Most atheists are biased, uneducated, and seem to repeat key points that haven't been mentally thought through to support their position. --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884752464] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>The more I read from this guy, this quote becomes more and more hilarious. <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Personally, I'm a panentheist. It for the strangest reason makes atheists arguments cave in on their own logic. Most atheists are biased, uneducated, and seem to repeat key points that haven't been mentally thought through to support their position.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordZangetsu_LZ 08/14/17 2:23:02 PM #391:	what the hell is going on in this thread. --- "The Bible has noble poetry in it... and some good morals and a wealth of obscenity, and upwards of a thousand lies." -Mark Twain <cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted [p:884762298] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>what the hell is going on in this thread.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Hexagon 08/14/17 2:33:20 PM #392:	LordZangetsu_LZ posted... what the hell is going on in this thread. This swirl of confusion and desperation you are witnessing here is known @VaniIIa_Coke 's "logic". <cite>Hexagon posted [p:884762867] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote>what the hell is going on in this thread.</quote> This swirl of confusion and desperation you are witnessing here is known @VaniIIa_Coke 's "logic".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Twin3Turbo 08/14/17 2:50:46 PM #393:	Hexagon posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... what the hell is going on in this thread. This swirl of confusion and desperation you are witnessing here is known @VaniIIa_Coke 's "logic". Nah bro there is no confusion. It's him making "atheist arguments cave in their own logic" --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884763863] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Hexagon posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote>what the hell is going on in this thread.</quote> This swirl of confusion and desperation you are witnessing here is known @VaniIIa_Coke 's "logic".</quote> Nah bro there is no confusion. It's him making "atheist arguments cave in their own logic"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ManLink4321 08/14/17 3:35:04 PM #394:	Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents. You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski? If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea. lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg --- The Hero of Hyrule. <cite>ManLink4321 posted [p:884766474] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents.</quote> You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski?</quote> If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea.</quote> lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Twin3Turbo 08/14/17 3:38:55 PM #395:	ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... ManLink4321 posted... Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?" I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents. You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski? If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea. lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg Err, the way to counter him calling you a liar is to specifically point out where you feel he said that Intelligent Design was about discrediting evolution. If he did that then you should be able to easily find it. I'm too lazy to check personally. --- https://imgflip.com/gif/di4a4 <cite>Twin3Turbo posted [p:884766712] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>Nope, Intelligent Design is not about discrediting evolution only. Intelligent Design is about establishing criteria for intelligent causation in nature, and, seeing the evidence for design in all of the fields of science. Also, Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with evolution if the question that's being asked is "How did the design first get implemented?"</quote> I didn't say that's what intelligent design is about. I said that's a common tactic of intelligent design proponents.</quote> You did say that Intelligent Design was about the stuff I quoted you as saying it was. Otherwise, I wouldn't have need to expose your lie for what it is. Also, Intelligent Design proponents don't do what you claim they do; they merely provide evidence for Intelligent Design as it is seen in science. You don't get to make up rules for what Intelligent Design proponents do and get away with it. Have you actually read anything written by Dembski, Behe, Meyer, Wells, Johnson and Berlinski?</quote> If I did, I apologize. I only mean that it's a common tactic among intelligent design proponents, not a feature of intelligent design itself. And pointing out people who don't do that or pointing out instances where they don't doesn't change that. EDIT: Also I checked and I never said that it's a feature of intelligent design itself, you liar. I always referred to people, not the idea.</quote> lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg</quote> Err, the way to counter him calling you a liar is to specifically point out where you feel he said that Intelligent Design was about discrediting evolution. If he did that then you should be able to easily find it. I'm too lazy to check personally.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/14/17 4:17:39 PM #396:	Just a quick reminder: Intelligent Design arguments are in fact pretty heavily rooted in Evolution. Every one of the men he listed started their ID carreer arguing against Evolution. Not only did the poster NOT claim what he is complaining about, the claim wouldn't even be absurd. --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884769054] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>Just a quick reminder: Intelligent Design arguments are in fact pretty heavily rooted in Evolution. Every one of the men he listed started their ID carreer arguing against Evolution. Not only did the poster NOT claim what he is complaining about, the claim wouldn't even be absurd.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lightsasori 08/14/17 4:21:52 PM #397:	LordZangetsu_LZ posted... what the hell is going on in this thread. The real question should be why the hell is this thread still alive? --- "Yare yare daze" ~ Jotaro Kujo "Children are pure, they know who's the strongest." ~ MaskDeSmith <cite>Lightsasori posted [p:884769282] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote>what the hell is going on in this thread.</quote> The real question should be why the hell is this thread still alive?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Hexagon 08/14/17 4:25:14 PM #398:	Lightsasori posted... LordZangetsu_LZ posted... what the hell is going on in this thread. The real question should be why the hell is this thread still alive? This thread actually died several times. Don't you believe in resurrection? ~~Also plz let me be #500~~ <cite>Hexagon posted [p:884769481] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>Lightsasori posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordZangetsu_LZ posted...</cite> <quote>what the hell is going on in this thread.</quote> The real question should be why the hell is this thread still alive?</quote> This thread actually died several times. Don't you believe in resurrection? Also plz let me be #500 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/14/17 10:12:03 PM #399:	ManLink4321 posted... lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg You said I claimed that intelligent design is about disproving evolution. That is wrong. And you cannot reasonably argue that intelligent design proponents do not make disproving evolution a key part of their strategy. Intelligent design proponents include a great many more than the few potentially more reputable people you listed. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884789871] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>ManLink4321 posted...</cite> <quote>lol @ you calling me a liar. When you get exposed for making fraudulent claims about Intelligent Design proponents, go on the attack with an ad hominem because you don't really have an argument to go on with. lol gg</quote> You said I claimed that intelligent design is about disproving evolution. That is wrong. And you cannot reasonably argue that intelligent design proponents do not make disproving evolution a key part of their strategy. Intelligent design proponents include a great many more than the few potentially more reputable people you listed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 08/15/17 12:48:42 PM #400:	VaniIIa Coke posted... The Deadpool posted... VaniIIa Coke posted... So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created? Why are you talking about nothing? Not really sure what you're getting at. Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours. Wow, trolling AND using shamefully embarrassing cliches. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:884820993] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Deadpool posted...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>So energy cannot be created or destroyed, and this parallels the intrinsic nature of God. </quote> Things that don't exist don't have a nature, intrinsic or otherwise. But wait, do you believe matter and energy can be destroyed and created?</quote> Why are you talking about nothing? Not really sure what you're getting at. Beliefs are like opinions, and opinions are like butts. Everyone's got one, and nobody wants to hear yours.</quote> Wow, trolling AND using shamefully embarrassing cliches.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VaniIIa Coke 08/17/17 1:08:27 AM #401:	Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically untill it manifests as the burden of proof? --- ~Reward your curiosity~ <cite>VaniIIa Coke posted [p:884924714] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically untill it manifests as the burden of proof?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Deadpool 08/17/17 1:12:37 AM #402:	VaniIIa Coke posted... Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically One premise has to be proven independently of the second premise. If A is only true if B is true, then B can't only be true if A is true. You'd have to assume one first. --- We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons. <cite>The Deadpool posted [p:884924874] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically </quote> One premise has to be proven independently of the second premise. If A is only true if B is true, then B can't only be true if A is true. You'd have to assume one first.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/17/17 1:18:12 AM #403:	Well, I don't know if circular reasoning is the real fallacy you're committing. You're issue is one of begging the question. But in general, circular reasoning is a fallacy because it creates a situation where the conclusion of some premise becomes the evidence for the first premise. This then loops forever. For example: Premise 1: If X, then Y Premise 2: X is true. Conclusion: Y is true. And when pressed on the premises, the following is given: Premise 1: If Y, then X Premise 2: Y is true. Conclusion: X is true. --- PSN: kazukifafner <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:884925076] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote>Well, I don't know if circular reasoning is the real fallacy you're committing. You're issue is one of begging the question. But in general, circular reasoning is a fallacy because it creates a situation where the conclusion of some premise becomes the evidence for the first premise. This then loops forever. For example: Premise 1: If X, then Y Premise 2: X is true. Conclusion: Y is true. And when pressed on the premises, the following is given: Premise 1: If Y, then X Premise 2: Y is true. Conclusion: X is true.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 08/17/17 11:40:19 AM #404:	VaniIIa Coke posted... Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically untill it manifests as the burden of proof? No, because nothing in your circular argument has manifested as proof. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:884943521] in Does anyon... [t:75606899]...</cite> <quote><cite>VaniIIa Coke posted...</cite> <quote>Can someone explain how circular logic is flawed logically untill it manifests as the burden of proof?</quote> No, because nothing in your circular argument has manifested as proof.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Current Events > Does anyone still unironically advocate atheism? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Does anyone still unironically advocate atheism?