- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote The difference in the thinking comes down to the fact that the concept of a creator explains nothing, and no one has ever seen one. As would be the same that no one has ever seen or can explain abiogenesis either, wishful thinking otherwise delusional.
You take care of yourself Stuart.
Quote (princess of the king @ Mar. 15 2010,09:47) Quote The difference in the thinking comes down to the fact that the concept of a creator explains nothing, and no one has ever seen one. As would be the same that no one has ever seen or can explain abiogenesis either, wishful thinking otherwise delusional.
You take care of yourself Stuart.
Speculation about abiogenesis is not delusional, for the reasons I explained.Chemistry helps a bit. God ideas don't help at all.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 12 2010,21:20) It is 0.000000000000001% which I used earlier to describe the probability of you version of reality being correct, although that is a vast exaggeration of my opinion actually. Anyway, as you appear to give a 0% probability of you being wrong, we divide my figure by your figure and get infinity: mathematically my mind is infinitely more open than yours, and that is true no matter what non-zero value of probability I choose.
Stuart
Ha, my point exactly. That is the chance you give it, yet it is one of 3 possibilities of which the others are absurd, and millions if not billions believe in the existence of a God.Thanks for proving once and for all that your atheism is more the product of your bias than any reason.
Thanks for demonstrating that.
Case closed I think.
Any other atheists want to try and provide a reason for there being no God? No bias please. Good reasons will be listened to. Rants are not considered good reasons.
Please apply here.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 16 2010,16:03) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 12 2010,21:20) It is 0.000000000000001% which I used earlier to describe the probability of you version of reality being correct, although that is a vast exaggeration of my opinion actually. Anyway, as you appear to give a 0% probability of you being wrong, we divide my figure by your figure and get infinity: mathematically my mind is infinitely more open than yours, and that is true no matter what non-zero value of probability I choose.
Stuart
Ha, my point exactly. That is the chance you give it, yet it is one of 3 possibilities of which the others are absurd, and millions if not billions believe in the existence of a God.Thanks for proving once and for all that your atheism is more the product of your bias than any reason.
Thanks for demonstrating that.
Well, there you have it. I have an infinitely more open mind mathematically, and t8 demonstrates that his mind is closed.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 16 2010,16:05) Case closed I think. Any other atheists want to try and provide a reason for there being no God? No bias please. Good reasons will be listened to. Rants are not considered good reasons.
Please apply here.
Please look in the other threads for my aesthetic argument against gods.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 16 2010,19:20) Well, there you have it. I have an infinitely more open mind mathematically, and t8 demonstrates that his mind is closed. Stuart
You give an infinite God almost a zero chance of existence and you have an open mathematical mind?If you had an open mathematical mind, you would be able to see that it is incredible that Maths actually works and that there is logic and code of a great intelligence all around you.
An open mind? More of a comedian Stu.
Anyway back to Dinos.
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 16 2010,19:21) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 16 2010,16:05) Case closed I think. Any other atheists want to try and provide a reason for there being no God? No bias please. Good reasons will be listened to. Rants are not considered good reasons.
Please apply here.
Please look in the other threads for my aesthetic argument against gods.Stuart
Without even going there, I bet there is no evidence that proves that God doesn't exist.And yet I have engaged you in a simple debate about the options that we have of what caused everything, and you didn't debate because you knew what I said was true and that you had no defence.
In case you need reminding:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3083
&
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3089Quote (Stu @ Mar. 15 2010,17:29) Quote (princess of the king @ Mar. 15 2010,09:47) Quote The difference in the thinking comes down to the fact that the concept of a creator explains nothing, and no one has ever seen one. As would be the same that no one has ever seen or can explain abiogenesis either, wishful thinking otherwise delusional.
You take care of yourself Stuart.
Speculation about abiogenesis is not delusional, for the reasons I explained.Chemistry helps a bit. God ideas don't help at all.
Stuart
Stuart,Have you ever ridden on a round about? The machine keeps spinning and spinning round and round, at times I think you may have been the creator of this.
Science is basically wisdom of a subject matter in all the aspects and possibilities of that matter.
Somewhere Stuart, you will have the lightest bulb in the bunch.
Take care
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 19 2010,08:01) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 16 2010,19:20) Well, there you have it. I have an infinitely more open mind mathematically, and t8 demonstrates that his mind is closed. Stuart
You give an infinite God almost a zero chance of existence and you have an open mathematical mind?If you had an open mathematical mind, you would be able to see that it is incredible that Maths actually works and that there is logic and code of a great intelligence all around you.
An open mind? More of a comedian Stu.
Anyway back to Dinos.
You can assert what you like about your god. Infinite. Irrational. Whatever. None of it is testable, so none of it is relevant to anyone who does not share your delusion. I am not a member of this club of deludees, and the properties you invent for your Imaginary Friend are of little consequence.Shall I make up some characteristics of your god, and maybe you could prove them wrong, if they are?
Your god's favourite colour is blue. Anyone who has worn fig green for more than 10 days during their life has the temperature raised during their final destruction by fire.
Fig-sellers are an abomination to your god.
Your god considers that the awarding of leg byes is unjust: if the bowler has beaten the bat, why should the batting team benefit from it?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 16 2010,16:03) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 12 2010,21:20) It is 0.000000000000001% which I used earlier to describe the probability of you version of reality being correct, although that is a vast exaggeration of my opinion actually. Anyway, as you appear to give a 0% probability of you being wrong, we divide my figure by your figure and get infinity: mathematically my mind is infinitely more open than yours, and that is true no matter what non-zero value of probability I choose.
Stuart
Ha, my point exactly. That is the chance you give it, yet it is one of 3 possibilities of which the others are absurd, and millions if not billions believe in the existence of a God.Thanks for proving once and for all that your atheism is more the product of your bias than any reason.
Thanks for demonstrating that.
Argumentum ad populam is a logical fallacy.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 19 2010,09:36) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 16 2010,19:21) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 16 2010,16:05) Case closed I think. Any other atheists want to try and provide a reason for there being no God? No bias please. Good reasons will be listened to. Rants are not considered good reasons.
Please apply here.
Please look in the other threads for my aesthetic argument against gods.Stuart
Without even going there, I bet there is no evidence that proves that God doesn't exist.And yet I have engaged you in a simple debate about the options that we have of what caused everything, and you didn't debate because you knew what I said was true and that you had no defence.
In case you need reminding:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3083
&
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3089
Just for the record, that is not the reason that I declined you.Stuart
Quote (princess of the king @ Mar. 19 2010,15:11) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 15 2010,17:29) Quote (princess of the king @ Mar. 15 2010,09:47) Quote The difference in the thinking comes down to the fact that the concept of a creator explains nothing, and no one has ever seen one. As would be the same that no one has ever seen or can explain abiogenesis either, wishful thinking otherwise delusional.
You take care of yourself Stuart.
Speculation about abiogenesis is not delusional, for the reasons I explained.Chemistry helps a bit. God ideas don't help at all.
Stuart
Stuart,Have you ever ridden on a round about? The machine keeps spinning and spinning round and round, at times I think you may have been the creator of this.
Science is basically wisdom of a subject matter in all the aspects and possibilities of that matter.
Somewhere Stuart, you will have the lightest bulb in the bunch.
Take care
I am a materialist, so of course you would expect me to treat science as the best way to increase knowledge. The fact is that no other means of “knowing” ever provides anything that is not basically an application of the scientific method by humans anyway.Stuart
Even a mind of average intellect could see that concentrating on the 3-dimensional physical realm will lead to 3-dimensional physical conclusions. But even there, we see great design, so atheists have no excuse.
If all our conclusions are based on 3 dimensions, (physical) then we will just ignore possibilities outside of that. Even physicists speculate on more dimensions and have theories to explain them. M-theory for example is a theory that identifies 11 dimensions.
Theories aside, even the most dull mind can allow the possibility of truth outside of its own existence and understanding. It is the mind of a bigot that is closed to anything it doesn't agree with and in the end, you can't debate a bigot because they have already won in their own mind. They are not open to new experiences or learning.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 23 2010,22:39) Even a mind of average intellect could see that concentrating on the 3-dimensional physical realm will lead to 3-dimensional physical conclusions. But even there, we see great design, so atheists have no excuse. If all our conclusions are based on 3 dimensions, (physical) then we will just ignore possibilities outside of that. Even physicists speculate on more dimensions and have theories to explain them. M-theory for example is a theory that identifies 11 dimensions.
Theories aside, even the most dull mind can allow the possibility of truth outside of its own existence and understanding. It is the mind of a bigot that is closed to anything it doesn't agree with and in the end, you can't debate a bigot because they have already won in their own mind. They are not open to new experiences or learning.
I think in 4 dimensions, and I defy you to demonstrate the reality of anything beyond that number.Stuart
You are missing the point again. To go around saying that nothing exists outside of what is already observable or proven is absolutely ridiculous.
I am not saying that there are without a doubt 11 dimensions, I am saying that there is some mathematics to back up this idea and I will add that it makes all the different String Theories non-contradictory. Of course it could well turn out to be fanciful imagination, but the real point you cannot ignore is that one way or another, there is a much bigger existence than what we see with microscopes and telescopes.
You seem to be so narrow minded that you cannot grasp the possibilities of things outside of your own small existence, mind, and country.
I can appreciate needing some proof of anything, but even a man of average intelligence knows that not all truth is so far proven and that there is so much more to know. For example, anyone can know if there is a God by genuinely praying to God. He never refuses a true seeker. You can have your proof that way. But if you are not interested, then you are not interested. But non-interest is not the same as “there is no God”.
Your rants about no God and things like that, show your ignorance and your inability to open your mind to any kind of possibility outside of your own belief system.
t8
Quote To go around saying that nothing exists outside of what is already observable or proven is absolutely ridiculous.
I agree.Quote I am not saying that there are without a doubt 11 dimensions, I am saying that there is some mathematics to back up this idea and I will add that it makes all the different String Theories non-contradictory.
You mean add enough dimensions and the mathematical problems disappear.Quote Of course it could well turn out to be fanciful imagination, but the real point you cannot ignore is that one way or another, there is a much bigger existence than what we see with microscopes and telescopes.
If it is absolutely ridiculous to say there ISN’T anything outside what is observable, then it is equally absolutely ridiculous to claim to know anything OUTSIDE what is observable. This is not something you can have both ways.Quote I can appreciate needing some proof of anything, but even a man of average intelligence knows that not all truth is so far proven and that there is so much more to know.
What do you mean by “all truth”?Quote For example, anyone can know if there is a God by genuinely praying to God. He never refuses a true seeker. You can have your proof that way.
This is the logical fallacy of no true Scotsman. It doesn’t matter what point you make about your attempts to recreate the alleged conditions under which this god will materialise, those attempts will never have been sufficient according to the specially-pleading believer. Only if you truly believe…so obviously if you got no reply you were not truly believing enough.Enough to what point? The point of believing anything at all?
Quote But if you are not interested, then you are not interested. But non-interest is not the same as “there is no God”.
It certainly isn’t. Is there a point behind that one?Quote Your rants about no God and things like that, show your ignorance and your inability to open your mind to any kind of possibility outside of your own belief system.
I thought they were just an expression of the fact that, as you cannot say there is nothing beyond what is observed, it is not possible to describe that which is beyond what you can observe.Stuart
Quote I think in 4 dimensions, and I defy you to demonstrate the reality of anything beyond that number. Sounds like something someone in flat world would say about the third dimension.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
