Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-12-2017, 02:50 PM   #46
Smellyoldgit
Stinkin' Mod
 
Smellyoldgit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 12,916
Probably not. Andrew seems so hopelessly wishful & naive in persuing some dribble of proof for his creator/guiding god, but deep down he knows it's all bullshit. He doesn't preach, but only calls by occasionally for his slapdowns, dropping back with his revised update of sphincter release.

Stop the Holy See men!
Smellyoldgit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2017, 04:38 PM   #47
AtomJack
Member
 
AtomJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 235
Oh. Yeah, if he's constipated the rest of the time, no sense in asking for a big plotz when he finally relieves himself. I haven't been to the Jerry thread in months. That's one sick mofo, right there. That one thread is working well. His own little playground!
AtomJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2017, 02:14 PM   #48
Andrew66
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 412
Quote:
Davin wrote View Post
No, it doesn't. Even over an infinite amount of time with in an infinite amount of universes, there can never be a square circle. It's probably not even possible for such a being to exist.

Is this your attempt at a ridiculously silly faulty dilemma? Either we think that there is a super powerful entity or we think that humans are the most powerful beings in existence? No room for anything else? For say that there are beings that are a bit more powerful than humans?
Davin you have no evidence which points to the impossibility of a very strong, much stronger than human, alien entity. Humans are "stronger" now than they were thousands of years ago because of acquired knowledge and development of science - so we know that beings of a species tend to get "stronger" over time. There are no square circles here.

The debate between us is as to just how strong an alien entity can potentially be. Indeed, there may be a threshold maximum level - beyond which you square circle argument becomes valid. However what is this maximum threshold. ?

If an alien being can (or has) evolved to be able to do some not that difficult acts (such as change water to wine, bring dead people or animals back to life, multiply matter - bread etc. levitate or walk on water ) then a "God" like being indeed exists - at least by Biblical or Quranic standards.

Do you think that humans through scientific development in the future will never be able to do the above? That is what you must believe to make your square circle analogy hold water.
Andrew66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2017, 02:17 PM   #49
Andrew66
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 412
Quote:
Smellyoldgit wrote View Post
Probably not. Andrew seems so hopelessly wishful & naive in persuing some dribble of proof for his creator/guiding god, but deep down he knows it's all bullshit. He doesn't preach, but only calls by occasionally for his slapdowns, dropping back with his revised update of sphincter release.
There is a point where religious dogma becomes bullshit, but there is a point where religion can be ascertained as plausible through a reasoned argument with reasonable premises.
Andrew66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2017, 02:32 PM   #50
Andrew66
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 412
Lets have some fun here,

Please comment on the correctness of the below statements.

1) 1 + 1 = 2
2) A God exists in many peoples imagination.
3) A God may exist in reality, however there is no empirical proof to support this claim.
4) A God may exist in reality, and there have been many arguments put forth which support the plausibility of such God.
5) There is a liklihood that there could very well be more powerful entities or species within existence than humans - however we have no empirical evidence yet to support this claim.

The above is a test of your academic honesty -

Rating scale

1,2 True, rest false Extreme Politically motivated Atheist, will not give an inch of credence towards atheistic claims. Debating style presentation to defence Atheism.

1,2,3 True A fair minded Atheist. E.g. Richard Dawkins.

1,2,3,4 A fair and open minded atheist (as 4 is written as an undeniably true statement - but it has words in it that would be very uncomfortable from an emotional standpoint for a hardcore Atheist to stomach)

1,2,3,4,5 A fair and open minded individual - agnostic.
Andrew66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2017, 02:59 PM   #51
dogpet
Obsessed Member
 
dogpet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The Mongrel Nation
Posts: 4,527
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
Lets have some fun here,

Please comment on the correctness of the below statements.

1) 1 + 1 = 2 t
2) A God exists in many peoples imagination. t
3) A God may exist in reality, however there is no empirical proof to support this claim. t
4) A God may exist in reality, and there have been many arguments put forth which support the plausibility of such God. f
5) There is a liklihood that there could very well be more powerful entities or species within existence than humans - however we have no empirical evidence yet to support this claim. debatable

The above is a test of your academic honesty - ta

Rating scale

1,2 True, rest false Extreme Politically motivated Atheist, will not give an inch of credence towards atheistic claims. Debating style presentation to defence Atheism.

1,2,3 True A fair minded Atheist. E.g. Richard Dawkins.

1,2,3,4 A fair and open minded atheist (as 4 is written as an undeniably true statement - but it has words in it that would be very uncomfortable from an emotional standpoint for a hardcore Atheist to stomach)

1,2,3,4,5 A fair and open minded individual - agnostic.
boodaya

thank goodness he's on our side
dogpet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 01:41 AM   #52
Sinfidel
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,924
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
There is a point where religious dogma becomes bullshit, but there is a point where religion can be ascertained as plausible through a reasoned argument with reasonable premises.

“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”


Martin Luther


Use foolproof airtight logic on a mind that's closed and you're dead. - William J. Reilly, Opening Closed Minds
Sinfidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 02:05 AM   #53
Sinfidel
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,924
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
Davin you have no evidence which points to the impossibility of a very strong, much stronger than human, alien entity.

Ah, you Theologues in Rationalist clothing, so full of contempt as you assume we're dumb enough to fall for your fallacies, as you challenge us to prove a negative. We are not obligated to disprove your allegations. As Carl Sagan put it, "That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
But let's play your little game.
You have no evidence that you are not the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler.
Prove you are not a child molester.

Use foolproof airtight logic on a mind that's closed and you're dead. - William J. Reilly, Opening Closed Minds
Sinfidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2017, 11:48 AM   #54
Andrew66
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 412
Quote:
Sinfidel wrote View Post
Ah, you Theologues in Rationalist clothing, so full of contempt as you assume we're dumb enough to fall for your fallacies, as you challenge us to prove a negative. We are not obligated to disprove your allegations. As Carl Sagan put it, "That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
But let's play your little game.
You have no evidence that you are not the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler.
Prove you are not a child molester.
Valid point.

Still, Davin argues that a God like being is impossible, a square can't fit into a circle. While I agree David should not have to prove a negative, he should nonetheless support is positive allegation that a God like being is "impossible".
Andrew66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2017, 09:32 AM   #55
Davin
Obsessed Member
 
Davin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
Davin you have no evidence which points to the impossibility of a very strong, much stronger than human, alien entity.
Why? It appears the you are having a failure in reading comprehension.

Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
Humans are "stronger" now than they were thousands of years ago because of acquired knowledge and development of science - so we know that beings of a species tend to get "stronger" over time. There are no square circles here.
Do you have data to support that? Humans are certainly living longer, but I don't know how you can compare strength.

Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
The debate between us is as to just how strong an alien entity can potentially be. Indeed, there may be a threshold maximum level - beyond which you square circle argument becomes valid. However what is this maximum threshold. ?
Let's find some evidence first, then we can see where it leads.

Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
If an alien being can (or has) evolved to be able to do some not that difficult acts (such as change water to wine, bring dead people or animals back to life, multiply matter - bread etc. levitate or walk on water ) then a "God" like being indeed exists - at least by Biblical or Quranic standards.
That's a might big "if."

Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
Do you think that humans through scientific development in the future will never be able to do the above? That is what you must believe to make your square circle analogy hold water.
No, that's not what I have to do to make the square circle analogy hold water. You seem to be struggling with very basic concepts. There's far less shame in asking for help with concepts that are too tough for you than your current strategy of perpetually looking like an idiot.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
Davin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2017, 01:38 PM   #56
Davin
Obsessed Member
 
Davin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
Valid point.

Still, Davin argues that a God like being is impossible[...]
I didn't argue that. Don't try to pin this on me just because you don't know how to read.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
Davin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2017, 01:47 PM   #57
Davin
Obsessed Member
 
Davin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
1) 1 + 1 = 2
Depends on the context and the base
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
2) A God exists in many peoples imagination.
Sure
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
3) A God may exist in reality, however there is no empirical proof to support this claim.
Sure
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
4) A God may exist in reality, and there have been many arguments put forth which support the plausibility of such God.
No such arguments exist
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote
5) There is a liklihood that there could very well be more powerful entities or species within existence than humans - however we have no empirical evidence yet to support this claim.
This is a point I've tried many times to discuss with you.

Once again, I concede that there is likely a species that is superior to humans somewhere out there. However there is a big leap from beings being a bit stronger than humans, to beings that can stroll in and out of a black holes whenever they feel like it. It's that leap that's the issue here.

Let's say that humans are a 5.
I will concede that that it's likely that some aliens could be a 10.
But that doesn't mean that it's equally reasonable to conclude that there are aliens that are 10^googol.

It's like, I can concede that there are people wealthier than me. But that doesn't mean that I accept that there is a person with 100% of all the money. You seem to have the idiotic idea that the latter conclusion is just as reasonable as the former.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
Davin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2017, 02:51 PM   #58
Sinfidel
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,924
Quote:
Andrew66 wrote View Post
Valid point.

Still, Davin argues that a God like being is impossible, a square can't fit into a circle. While I agree David should not have to prove a negative, he should nonetheless support is positive allegation that a God like being is "impossible".
Once again,
As Carl Sagan put it, "That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Davin is merely dismissing your unevidenced assertion.

Use foolproof airtight logic on a mind that's closed and you're dead. - William J. Reilly, Opening Closed Minds
Sinfidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2017, 05:50 AM   #59
Kinich Ahau
Obsessed Member
 
Kinich Ahau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Great Ocean Road
Posts: 2,372
Davin, I get the feeling Andrew might like Sellied(sheepfucker)Jerry's classic argument i.e. Either god exists or it doesn't, so there is a 50/50 chance that god exists.

Once you are dead, you are nothing. Graffito, Pompeii
Kinich Ahau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2017, 07:01 AM   #60
Davin
Obsessed Member
 
Davin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: One the armpits of the U.S. of A.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Kinich Ahau wrote View Post
Davin, I get the feeling Andrew might like Sellied(sheepfucker)Jerry's classic argument i.e. Either god exists or it doesn't, so there is a 50/50 chance that god exists.
Oh yeah, the mentally deficient, Trump cuck already trotted that one out: "Either a supreme, incredibly powerful and undefeatable entity exists or not.

It's not their fault they commit fallacies when trying to apologize for a god, because in order to accept a god, you have to commit at least one fallacy. And they try and try to make all these logic constructions to try to complicate it so much that the fallacy is hard to spot. But I've not come across any argument for god that was logically valid.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.
Davin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational