Plenty of reason to believe in a higher power

[Smellyoldgit]

Andrew66 wrote

If one universe, fine tuning argument points to a Higher Power.

Whilst avoiding walking the dog in the pissing rain, I came across this ancient thread from long ago - and god-brained Andy boy joined the fun!

http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16602

I particularly enjoyed PanAtheist's simple summary:

If a very-special-super-living-being could fix the constants of reality, why would it have cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, planetary evolution, and biological evolution work to bring humans about, and not just fix humans straight into existence? (And any very-special-super-living-being who uses natural selection to create living things is an utter cunt/bastard).

And how would "it" know that these constants are right anyway?

There is no fine-tuning argument. It is just nonsense. Nothing to rebut.

[Sinfidel]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Whilst avoiding walking the dog in the pissing rain, I came across this ancient thread from long ago - and god-brained Andy boy joined the fun!

http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16602

I particularly enjoyed PanAtheist's simple summary:

The universe is 99.99999999999999999999999999% fatally hostile to life, yet the religionutz claim it is beautifully "fine tuned". Send them into space without a spacesuit.

[Davin]

I sometimes wish we'd get some smart religious people to debate against. But the smarter they are, the more they realize that they're on the indefensible side and it's better to hide away.

Maybe those theists who will engage in what is said instead of cowering away from criticism. But then they'd have to face the truth, that their position is irrational.

Who don't commit fallacies. But there is no belief in a god that doesn't rely on at least one fallacy.

Maybe at least an honest one. But if they were honest, they'd have to face all of those things and honestly take a look at their belief in a god and accept that it is irrational, ignorant, and fallacious.

So it doesn't really matter how stupid, cowardly, irrational, and dishonest the theists we get are. Maybe if they were smarter it would at least be more challenging instead of just funny.

[Andrew66]

I agree alot with what Crazy Crackpipe Davin is saying, but he makes as usual a few subtle mistakes.

He assumes there is "always" at least one fallacy with any theistic style argument, that is unfair - he should be open minded to "new" arguments that have not been vetted.

The arguments I've put forth for example are not typical "theistic" arguments, and the positions I take are much more tempered in their asserted conclusions.

I believe, and I think most Theists actually would agree, that there is no compelling "reason" to believe the God of Bible or Quaran actually exists. It is a strictly a matter of faith.

But what can be argued, and what I've shown is

1) There are compelling reasons to suspect that a Higher Power may exist. (I'm not saying "God" of Bible or Quaran, just a Higher Power that may have God like qualities).

2) God of the Bible and Quaran does most certainly exist, at least as emanations from the human mind.

3) The Resurrection narrative of Christ is historically, evidenced based.

Crackhead Davin tries to assert fallacies on these arguments, which he has and will continue to fail. There are no fallacies, because I don't reach for an impossible argument which asserts an omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent creator for certain exists, nor that such creator is necessarily Jesus of Allah.

Don't get me wrong, I may have faith that Jesus is God - but I understand the limitation of argumentation.

[Davin]

Oh, poor, deluded, mentally weak, Andrew66...

There are no new theistic arguments, they all the same now. Maybe theists will try to do some replacing of the terms, but they are all the same underneath. And all have been shown to be irrational.

All you've shown us, is that you take some already tried and failed theistic arguments, and you pack even more fallacies into them. Why you think that an already irrational argument needs even more fallacies, I'm sure we'll never know.

It's like a child constantly trying to say that 2 + 2 = 17, then that dumbass child (Andrew66) telling the maths teacher that the teacher is the one doing math incorrectly. That's the normal modus operandi of all the mentally challenged theism peddlers, so at the very least, at least Andrew66 is not alone in looking like a full blown embarrassment.

Well, it's only a matter of time before Andrew66 comes up with yet another stupid, irrational argument for its god.

[Smellyoldgit]

Tedious Andrew wrote

But what can be argued, and what I've shown is

1) There are compelling reasons to suspect that a Higher Power may exist. (I'm not saying "God" of Bible or Quaran, just a Higher Power that may have God like qualities).

All you've done is spout unevidenced, speculative, sub-conjecture horseshit. Nothing vaguely resembling reasoned or compelling.

2) God of the Bible and Quaran does most certainly exist, at least as emanations from the human mind.

Chemicals floating in a few lumps of brain tissue exists as thoughts, NOT equated in any way to a 'real' existence. You've simply described a delusion.

3) The Resurrection narrative of Christ is historically, evidenced based.

History has an abundance of folks allegedly coming back from the dead - we call these myths, stories, fabrications etc. You've shown that your Jesus myth sits nicely within your larger delusion.

Throughout this recent bout of theistic babble, you've provided nothing new or vaguely resembling valid argument. No doubt you'll soon be back with more convoluted bollocks to provide amusement.

[Andrew66]

Davin wrote

Oh, poor, deluded, mentally weak, Andrew66...

There are no new theistic arguments, they all the same now. Maybe theists will try to do some replacing of the terms, but they are all the same underneath. And all have been shown to be irrational.

All you've shown us, is that you take some already tried and failed theistic arguments, and you pack even more fallacies into them. Why you think that an already irrational argument needs even more fallacies, I'm sure we'll never know.

It's like a child constantly trying to say that 2 + 2 = 17, then that dumbass child (Andrew66) telling the maths teacher that the teacher is the one doing math incorrectly. That's the normal modus operandi of all the mentally challenged theism peddlers, so at the very least, at least Andrew66 is not alone in looking like a full blown embarrassment.

Well, it's only a matter of time before Andrew66 comes up with yet another stupid, irrational argument for its god.

Did you cut and paste this rant?.
All my arguments only involve reasonable subject with appropriately tempered conclusions, they are not the same as what you are used to.
I don't say God exists for sure because.... Your rant is based on this faulty assumption

I don't think your actually reading my stuff anymore, your just deny because of your partisonship in favour of atheism.

For example

Here is a statement

A God of some persuasion may exist.

There is no fallacy here fuck head. Because I say "may" get it?? The statement cannot be denied. .

[Andrew66]

Smelly based on what your saying you either have read what I'm saying or your just like Crazy Crackpipe Davin and just being negative because of your partisonship for Atheism.

A Higher Power may exist, and there are are reasons to raise this suspicion. Why is denying this such a big deal to you?
God exists as an emanation from the human mind, and is real, it has real life and power. Why do you deny this?
The Jesus Resurrection narrative is evidence based, why is this such a big deal to you?

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

Smelly based on what your saying you either have read what I'm saying or your just like Crazy Crackpipe Davin and just being negative because of your partisonship for Atheism.

Gee, you'd expect a thesis writing highly educated Cosmologist to spell better than a Hillbilly school dropout!

A Higher Power may exist, and there are are reasons to raise this suspicion. Why is denying this such a big deal to you?

[Smellyoldgit]

Andrew66 wrote

A Higher Power may exist, and there are are reasons to raise this suspicion.

Learn the difference between 'possibility' and 'probability'. Star-shitting penguins 'may' exist. - Why do you not get this?

God exists as an emanation from the human mind, and is real, it has real life and power.

Look up delusion - Why do you have a problem with this?

The Jesus Resurrection narrative is evidence based,

Look up 'myth' - why is this such a big deal to you?

[Davin]

Andrew66 wrote

All my arguments [...] are not the same as what you are used to.

The only difference between your "arguments" and what I'm used to, are that you like to add in extra fallacies because you're an idiot.

Andrew66 wrote

I don't say God exists for sure because.... Your rant is based on this faulty assumption

That is your assumption, not mine.

Andrew66 wrote

A God of some persuasion may exist.

There is no fallacy here fuck head. Because I say "may" get it?? The statement cannot be denied. .

While is it true that there is no fallacy in that one statement, the statement is entirely devoid of meaning. Much like all the rest of your "arguments."

If you weren't a dumb little shit, you'd be better at this.

[Andrew66]

Davin wrote

While is it true that there is no fallacy in that one statement, the statement is entirely devoid of meaning. s.

Nope, the sentence has meaning - wrong again.

3 words, Crackpipe, I'm dun wit you, your unforly adverserial.

[Andrew66]

Sinfidel wrote

Gee, you'd expect a thesis writing highly educated Cosmologist to spell better than a Hillbilly school dropout!

bets yu an du is camment in mi speling - w t fuck ho carres.

[Andrew66]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Learn the difference between 'possibility' and 'probability'. Star-shitting penguins 'may' exist. - Why do you not get this?

Look up delusion - Why do you have a problem with this?

Look up 'myth' - why is this such a big deal to you?

U cantt no abut how mich prob vs. poss - their r reazons to sespect hier powor.

I don't hve prob wth "delusion" accept u don't have proof is so wrd mis used. God exits in imagination, then takes route in mind and gains p ower ok wit mey.

no prof myth, assumption in ur prt.

[Sinfidel]

Look - a quote from Andyboy's PhD thesis:

Andrew66 wrote

bets yu an du is camment in mi speling - w t fuck ho carres.