It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Creator or Chance Accident - I will prove this to you!

page: 15
22
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


...um...of course we're going to argue against it when we don't believe in it. It's hurting people and rotting minds.




posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Hmmm... Love your neighbor as yourself. People hurt, minds rotted, check.
Don't bear false witness. People hurt, minds rotted, check!

I gotcha bro, your superior logic wins out!



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Just to add to that list: keeping sex within marriage, not taking from others what isn't yours, etc. All logical, rational, intelligent things to do, for sure, and things that help us and society in general.

But then, to get back to the topic of the ultimate origins of everything there is. Ultimately, I don't think there will ever be tangible proof in this material world either way about how it --and everything in it-- came to be. Is it possible the laws of physics came to be what they were by random chance, setting everything else into motion? Sure. We'll never prove that. But had things been even slightly different, stars, galaxies, planets, and the conditions for life would never have developed. Is it possible that God is behind it all, and He set it all in motion? Again, of course, and we can't prove it or rule it out.

The most intellectually honest thing to say is we can't tangibly prove it either way.

But that doesn't mean that there isn't much more to reality than we can perceive with our limited senses or measure with our limited means.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


Hmmm... Love your neighbor as yourself. People hurt, minds rotted, check.

Don't bear false witness. People hurt, minds rotted, check!

I gotcha bro, your superior logic wins out!

Precept is cheap.

Action is where the money is.

The history of religion (and somewhat notably the two religions from which those precepts are drawn) is glutted to the point of doleful rupture with hurt people and rotted minds. The minds were the ones that preached loving their neighbour while persecuting him unmercifully.

The hurt people were, of course, the neighbours.

And that is only the beginning.

Religion not only rots minds. It stunts them. It prevents us from seeing the world as it is with a minimum of preconception; it forbids us from finding out the truth of things as they are presented to our senses by nature. It demands instead that we believe another, false ‘truth’ based on no evidence but blackmail: believe or it will be the worse for you.

That’s not just intellectually stultifying; it’s morally retarded. The fastidious may say corrupt. I say outrageous. Because: for pity’s sake, massa, yaas yaas shoor I’ll agree to anything if you hang me over da’ griddle. And I’ll do my best to keep my promise, too, because who wants to spend the rest of forever in a cage with the Fisherman?

But.

What’s it worth – seriously? No, I mean – seriously? To this God of yours? Worshippers terrified into good behaviour for terror of the worm that dieth not and the fire that is unquenched? This kind of bullying is worth something? To the Omnipotent Omniscient Omnipresent Waterintonwineturning Letherelightbeing Almighty God this abject grovelling obedience – no, where’s that old word from the Book of Common Prayer – obeisance has value in the sight of His Gloriousness? Really?

Path. Et. Ic.

*


Do you get what I’m after here, graphuto, you wonderful old logician you? Are you – as Keef Steptoe would say – catching my drift? Morality under coercion corrupts the coercer. Threatening human beings with damnation makes a slimeball out of God.

That
is where those precious precepts, inscribed under divine Sanction, lead you: to the last chapters of the Book of Job, or that moment on Sinai when He pompously moons His obeisant prophet. Remember that bit?

*


And then we come to its effect on the Creation. Allow me a gentle, almostundermybreath

O M F G ! ! !


Have you seen what this fewmet-pudding of faith does to people who eat it? Stupid question: out of the eater came forth meat, not wisdom. So I’ll tell you, young Samson of the Academy. It turns them into slaves. Yes. In their minds. Where the chains are invisible but adamant.

Yet they kiss those chains, like the Punjabi tribesman kissed the sahib’s blade back in the old, bad days. Why?

This is why:


'I prayed to God last night to help me, and he answered me. I know what to do now.’


That, O Graf Eu Toh, is a licence to do anything.

And they did.

People hurt? Check.

Minds rotted? Check.

And plenty more besides, all brought to us courtesy of good old bloodsuckin’ parasite-metameme Religion.


edit on 20/4/11 by Astyanax because: it did.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 



Originally posted by graphuto
Hmmm... Love your neighbor as yourself.


Never said every single one of its precepts is entirely flawed, but the great majority if it is. So...straw man.


Now...the idea that the Earth is 6000 years old?


People hurt, minds rotted, check.


That's more like it.



Don't bear false witness. People hurt, minds rotted, check!


You do realize that this is a strictly legal commandment, right? And again, a straw man.



I gotcha bro, your superior logic wins out!


I like how you're creating a massive straw man and then declaring yourself victor.

What about "Stone to death a rape victim" or "Women shouldn't teach or hold authority over men" or "Men shouldn't have long hair" or "Women should be in subjugation to men" or "Women should either cover their heads or have them shaved" or "Ignore science"?



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Ariel
 



Originally posted by Ariel
Just to add to that list: keeping sex within marriage, not taking from others what isn't yours, etc. All logical, rational, intelligent things to do, for sure, and things that help us and society in general.


Keeping sex within marriage? I'm sorry, but what about the twelve tribes of Israel arising from the children of a man, his two wives (who were sisters) and his concubines. Also, keeping sex within marriage isn't a necessarily good idea.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

Action is where the money is.


True.


The history of religion (and somewhat notably the two religions from which those precepts are drawn) is glutted to the point of doleful rupture with hurt people and rotted minds. The minds were the ones that preached loving their neighbour while persecuting him unmercifully.

The hurt people were, of course, the neighbours.


Yes, and the problem was not with the precepts, or religion. The problem was with the ones who in practice went against the very ideals of love they preached. The problem was in human failings such as cruelty, greed, bigotry, etc....


Religion not only rots minds. It stunts them. It prevents us from seeing the world as it is with a minimum of preconception; it forbids us from finding out the truth of things as they are presented to our senses by nature. It demands instead that we believe another, false ‘truth’ based on no evidence but blackmail: believe or it will be the worse for you.


Again, it's the misguided biases, midset, fears, what have you. Of humans. We have the minds we've been given to think, to question, to create, to explore! The only ones saying we can't investigate to understand the world, the universe around us is certain other humans with that misguided mindset. Science shouldn't blind us in the way you've described into believing that it's all there is, either.



What’s it worth – seriously? No, I mean – seriously? To this God of yours? Worshippers terrified into good behaviour for terror of the worm that dieth not and the fire that is unquenched? This kind of bullying is worth something? To the Omnipotent Omniscient Omnipresent Waterintonwineturning Letherelightbeing Almighty God this abject grovelling obedience – no, where’s that old word from the Book of Common Prayer – obeisance has value in the sight of His Gloriousness? Really?


Terrified? No, we're not meant for that at all. That's a major misconception that a lot of people seem to have. It's more about what we choose to do and what that creates. It's by our daily actions of living in love with others that we create a life we can feel good about, and we grow in love day by day doing that. It's by daily actions of choosing selfishness, greed, lying, manipulating others, etc. that can create what we describe as hell. And it creates a life that in the end is meaningless and is something we don't feel good about. How many times have we called for accountability for people who do these things? How many times have we here on ATS alone discussed all the things wrong in the world, created by greed and selfishness?

Eternal accountability? Is that deserved? I suppose that's the next logical question. There are some, hopefully many, who in life realize when their actions hurt others and then turn away from doing that again, and try to make amends to the extent possible, and who seek forgiveness. Who try to forgive themselves and others to heal and move on. There should be that healing and forgiveness available! Time and again, in example after example, we've seen how much better that is than vengeance. What about the ones who refuse to see how they hurt others and never try to change, make amends, heal, and break free from that? How could they create anything different after death? We've seen how it creates hell on earth. I've heard that the choice is fixed at death. I don't know if that's true or not. Hopefully not. But maybe the reason hell is eternal is that the ones there are not only there by choice, they've also chosen to not allow healing and forgiveness.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

Keeping sex within marriage? I'm sorry, but what about the twelve tribes of Israel arising from the children of a man, his two wives (who were sisters) and his concubines. Also, keeping sex within marriage isn't a necessarily good idea.


As to the issue of the concubines. Nobody ever said that it's a surprise that people do have sex outside of marriage, though concubines were supposed to be a marriage-like relationship. And people can certainly be chosen for a purpose, whether establishing a tribe or anything else.

As for whether such a relationship is a good idea, I can only imagine the emotional intricacies, jealousies, and even heartbreak, that relationships like that can involve (having harems/concubines/marriages involving bigamy).

Why wouldn't keeping sex within marriage be a good idea? Casual sex devalues the bond it creates, not to mention it isn't just for gratification. Adultery is one of the worst breaks of trust imaginable. And though one could say, "just use protection!" protection is not foolproof. Sex still, every time, takes the chance of creating a new life.

Just look at society today and consider how not keeping sex within marriage is impacting society. How many children are brought unwanted into the world? How many children don't know their birth parents? How many children don't know who their father is, either because the father doesn't want to be involved in their lives, or the mother doesn't know which of the guys she was with is the father? How many newly created lives are destroyed because abortion rather than adoption is chosen? None of these seem fair to a child.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   
You seem like a decent ole stick so I’ll do this in two, out of respect (no I mean it):

(one)



The problem was not with the precepts, or religion. The problem was with the ones who in practice went against the very ideals of love they preached. The problem was in human failings such as cruelty, greed, bigotry, etc....

Oh, wait a minute. The precepts were divine, the failings were human?

Two thousand years. Ten billion individual human lives, at least – probably more. And in all those years and lives, only a few, vanishingly small in number, have found it possible to live consistently with these precepts. All others have (by their own article of faith) sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

You know what that sounds like to me? It sounds like there’s something the matter with the precepts. They aren’t suited to real human conditions and behaviour. It’s like God fouled up when He created us, then tried to set things right with a cheat – giving us a set of rules to try to make us behave the way he wanted us to behave in the first place but wasn’t God enough to get right. Imperfect God, flawed Creation: I trust you’re familiar with these old Gnostic ideas. The gnosties were the only believers to solve the Problem of Evil.


We have the minds we've been given to think, to question, to create, to explore!

Yes, well then let’s.

(two)



Terrified? No, we're not meant for that at all. That's a major misconception that a lot of people seem to have. It's more about what we choose to do and what that creates. It's by our daily actions of living in love with others that we create a life we can feel good about, and we grow in love day by day doing that. It's by daily actions of choosing selfishness, greed, lying, manipulating others, etc. that can create what we describe as hell.

Nah. That is just basic Not Being Stoopid. And Christianity is the second-worst Big Religion (after Islam) at teaching people how Not to Be Stoopid.

Buddhism will set you straight on How to Live a million times better than Christianity ever will. The worm at the heart of Buddhism is that the good Buddhist is always a superfluous entity and a social parasite, but no religion escapes the charge of corruption. Buddhism is for smart people; I’m not a Buddhist.

I don’t believe in afterlives so I don’t really have much to say about the rest of your post. I think Hell is the second stupidest idea human beings ever came up with. The worst of the lot was Immortality.


edit on 20/4/11 by Astyanax because: of something even worse.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


And you seem a decent sort yourself. You do make a good point about how people fail to live up to all the precepts. But I would still say that doesn't make the precepts themselves wrong. I wouldn't advocate saying that killing innocent people is all right because most people can't live up to it. I wouldn't advocate that it's all right to steal what belongs to others (though in a life or death situation and we're talking an item needed for survival, that's something the owner should if living in love provide willingly to help you out) just because most couldn't live up to that ideal. I wouldn't advocate that it's all right to create a lie to the detriment of someone else just because most couldn't live up to the ideal of avoiding perjury, slander, gossip, etc. You see where I'm going with this.

And just maybe we're created the way we are because we're meant to have the challenges we do in overcoming, in improving, in getting better at living in love with others. Maybe the journey of growth itself is more important and more valuable than the black-and-white "do you follow the seemingly impossible or not?". Maybe it's more important to recognize the damage it does when we don't live in love with others (just look at the ills of society we talk about every day on here), struggle to overcome these difficulties, and to forgive ourselves and others for the times we can't.


As for what I've described being just basic not being stupid, I agree with you there. All these basics are pretty much common to most religions. And Buddhism, etc. It's definitely basic common sense about living our lives well. But I guess the reason it's spelled out in most religions, laws, etc., is the simple fact that we don't always follow that basic good common sense about not hurting others (and ourselves in the process). I think one of my main points, that probably I didn't make clearly in my last post, was that it wasn't at all about blind obedience or control/coercion, but about our freewill choices and the consequences they lead to and what that creates.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Ariel
 

Yes, well. You know the old story about how Dr. Johnson and his chum Boswell were walking down a typically narrow London street of their era and came upon two women yelling at each other across the street from the windows of their opposed houses.

'They shall never agree,' old Dictionary said to Boswell, 'for they argue from different premises.'

I do not believe we were created. I believe the true ground of morality is what we may call our tribal and social instincts. I’ve beaten this drum often enough before on this site: it seems clear enough that altruism, loyalty, kindness, aspiration, reciprocity and exchange, cooperation, kindness to juveniles and weaker members of the social group and so on are part of the toolkit that any reasonably brainy social animal would need in order to live and procreate.

Since in my view the origin of morals is evolutionary and biological, the contradictory promptings of precept and Adamic nature you refer to in your earlier post do not exist for me. I don’t need to find excuses for why God made us the way they are and then demanded that we go against our nature; for me, things are the way they are for rather obvious reasons, meaning nature, and God has nothing at all to do with it.

What I see is a conflict, unending, between our selfish interests and our social ones. But this should not be made more of than it warrants. Mostly, these conflicts are resolved in patterns of behaviour that produce an equitable, or at least tolerable, distribution of benefits and penalties amongst all those involved. As all social primates do, we evolve rites and customs – as well as religions, laws and apparatus of states for the purpose of ensuring this. Such are the reins by which we handle our moral conflicts. The collective name we give these restraints is culture, though the word can be used in many other ways too.

This dynamic will not go away – nor, I suspect, will our dissatisfaction at the state of affairs. I think we do very well accommodating ourselves to it; but I also think a permanent cure for it, in the form of religious precept or in any other form whatsoever, is a chimera.


edit on 20/4/11 by Astyanax because: the Fall is a lame excuse.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Creator or genetic engineer? It's like the scenario of a caveman trying to explain how fire works. Why do people always jump to such brash conclusions when they can't explain something? Hurry up rapture, take these self-righteous a**holes under your wing, we can't stomach them anymore.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
It comes down to this:

Nobody knows how life started in the first place, no one has objective evidence that would prove their position. However, scientists ADMIT they don't know, while the other party (religious people) claim to have the answer when they really know just as little as the rest of us.

This entire thread is a prime example of "god of the gaps", and I'm almost tempted to give SuperiorEd a S&F if he changes the thread title to "god of the gaps - examples"


His entire argumentation is based on:

- Ad hominem attacks: *Insert random bible quote that disses disbelievers*

- Hypothesis Contrary To Fact: "Genesis is correct."

- Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension)

- Inflation Of Conflict: "Sooooooooo many scientists disbelieve evolution."


- Argument From Adverse Consequences: "You better believe or you'll pay in the end..."

- Burden Of Proof: "Scientists can't disprove god's existence...ergo he exists."

- Argument By Question: "Where do the physical forces come from? Scientists don't know...see, god is the ONLY rational explanation."

- Reductive Fallacy: "God did it!"

- Fallacy of Origins: "The bible claims XYZ, ergo XYZ must be true...because clearly everything in the bible is truth."

- Wisdom of the Ancients: "Moses wrote that...and what he said has been told for centuries...ergo it must be true."

- Not Invented Here: "Islam/Hinduism/etc are all wrong...only the Christian bible is right."

- Argument By Dismissal: Used a dozen times by SuperiorEd...every time one of his garbage claims are refuted, he simply ignores the rebuttal


- Argument To The Future: "You'll see...in the future god's existence will become evident."

- Argument By Vehemence: Repeating the same nonsense over and over again thinking it'll make people fall for it eventually.

- Argument To Authority: "Professor XYZ said that..." Even if there's been no peer reviews or independent verification
Or "Newton said that..." when Newton only had a small portion of the knowledge we have today.

- Appeal To False Authority: "Scientist XYZ claims that evolution is wrong..." Which is especially funny if that scientist doesn't hold a degree allowing him to make such claims


- Bad Analogy: "Israel is a fig tree..." 'nough said


- Appeal To Widespread Belief: "Millions of believers..."

- Argument By Pigheadedness: "Evolution is wrong...woman came from the rib of man, end of story!"


- Argument By Repetition: Repeating the same nonsense over and over again even after it's been totally debunked...

- Argument By Selective Reading: Bible & Creationist websites

- Inconsistency: "The bible always tells the truth...except for the rape/genocide stuff, that's just a misunderstanding and human error."

- Non Sequitur: "Christianity helps millions of people...ergo god exists."

- Meaningless Questions: "irresistible forces meeting immovable objects"

- Error Of Fact: "Scientist can't explain wind."

- Changing The Subject: Every single time his hogwash claims are refuted


- Outdated Information: "Darwin said XYZ and was wrong..." As if science didn't make progress in over 150yrs.

- Least Plausible Hypothesis: "God did it...and no, it doesn't matter if it's backed up by objective evidence."

- Affirming The Consequent: "You shall not kill in the bible is correct, therefore everything is correct..."

- Moving The Goalposts: "Multiverses..."

- Appeal To Complexity: "Scientists can't explain that...ergo god did it, it's the only logical explanation."

- Argument By Laziness: Many of SuperiorEd's post are demonstrably wrong...and he'd realize if he just spent a few minutes doing proper research instead of copy/pasting crap from blogs...

Every single one of the wanna-be proof presented by SuperiorEd is a who's who of fallacious arguments



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Error Of Fact: "Scientist can't explain wind."

I believe they had some trouble explaining this guy.
edit on 20/4/11 by Astyanax because: of wind.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 



I hadn't heard that story, but yes, we clearly come to some similar conclusions about the precepts of morality but from different directions. Please don't misunderstand, thinking I was making excuses for why we are the way we are. I was not doing that any more than you were. Just interesting speculation about the possibilities, is all. And just making the point that the journey of growth in love is more valuable than whether or not we follow the precepts, regardless really of how we arrive at them.

And I'm not sure that we even go against our nature by going against those precepts. The way I look at it is that all of it--the best and the worst--is in human nature. The selfishness, the greed, the aggression, the gentleness, the love and compassion, the loyalty, etc. is all a part of us.

It's more about what we choose to nurture in our daily lives. The precepts of living well, of living in love with others, are about the best of human nature and living in a way that helps society. I agree that religion isn't a permanent cure, and it never was meant to be so, or to fundamentally change human nature.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Ariel
 


That's an issue of lack of sex education in the USA...because that's a clearly American issue. Not as big of a deal in Scandinavia which has an equivalent rate of premarital sex (and I'm saying premarital, not extra marital because I have an issue with people breaking a commitment of any sort) without the same rate of irresponsible extramarital pregnancy (again, I'm distinguishing it from responsible extramarital pregnancy).


But this is really off topic. I mean, not that it's not interesting, it just doesn't go to what we're talking about in this thread.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Well, it goes much deeper than a mere lack of education. The situation itself is still a significant deal wherever it occurs; it has significant impacts, child or no. But you're right. The topic is really interesting, but I don't want to veer off the topic of this thread, either.


Though I suppose what one believes about how the universe originated has an impact on everything from one's view of the material universe, to what may or may not be beyond, to the discussion on morality/living in society, etc.

Anyway, this is most definitely an interesting topic. I've enjoyed reading everyone's contributions to the thread that each contribute a piece to the grand puzzle. Will we ever have all the pieces? No. But the discussion is satisfying enough in itself, despite knowing that there's no ultimate proof.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Since you cut and pasted the same post here, I will give you a unique answer to this, separate form the one I gave in the other post.

I went back and read my posts briefly to compare my tone to the tone of the responders. My posts took a posture of providing context for my argument. Some of those who responded were nice. Most (The Atheists) attacked like dogs on a defenseless bird. I would just ask you to go back and read and rate the tone of each post from 1-10. Provide a bar graph and then rate my responses to the attackers. Put your money where your mouth is. You make the claim here that I used all the plays in the Atheists book against them. Prove it. Provide the statistics. The evidence is right behind us here on this thread. Don't just attach these argument tactics to me. Rate the others by the same standard. At least I provided content and context to my thoughts. If you don't think I did a good job, then hats off. Keep your bias to yourself and provide a few points of interest. Context builds ground to stand together. Bias builds ground to stand against.


Originally posted by MrXYZ
It comes down to this:

Nobody knows how life started in the first place, no one has objective evidence that would prove their position. However, scientists ADMIT they don't know, while the other party (religious people) claim to have the answer when they really know just as little as the rest of us.

This entire thread is a prime example of "god of the gaps", and I'm almost tempted to give SuperiorEd a S&F if he changes the thread title to "god of the gaps - examples"


His entire argumentation is based on:

- Ad hominem attacks: *Insert random bible quote that disses disbelievers*

- Hypothesis Contrary To Fact: "Genesis is correct."

- Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension)

- Inflation Of Conflict: "Sooooooooo many scientists disbelieve evolution."


- Argument From Adverse Consequences: "You better believe or you'll pay in the end..."

- Burden Of Proof: "Scientists can't disprove god's existence...ergo he exists."

- Argument By Question: "Where do the physical forces come from? Scientists don't know...see, god is the ONLY rational explanation."

- Reductive Fallacy: "God did it!"

- Fallacy of Origins: "The bible claims XYZ, ergo XYZ must be true...because clearly everything in the bible is truth."

- Wisdom of the Ancients: "Moses wrote that...and what he said has been told for centuries...ergo it must be true."

- Not Invented Here: "Islam/Hinduism/etc are all wrong...only the Christian bible is right."

- Argument By Dismissal: Used a dozen times by SuperiorEd...every time one of his garbage claims are refuted, he simply ignores the rebuttal


- Argument To The Future: "You'll see...in the future god's existence will become evident."

- Argument By Vehemence: Repeating the same nonsense over and over again thinking it'll make people fall for it eventually.

- Argument To Authority: "Professor XYZ said that..." Even if there's been no peer reviews or independent verification
Or "Newton said that..." when Newton only had a small portion of the knowledge we have today.

- Appeal To False Authority: "Scientist XYZ claims that evolution is wrong..." Which is especially funny if that scientist doesn't hold a degree allowing him to make such claims


- Bad Analogy: "Israel is a fig tree..." 'nough said


- Appeal To Widespread Belief: "Millions of believers..."

- Argument By Pigheadedness: "Evolution is wrong...woman came from the rib of man, end of story!"


- Argument By Repetition: Repeating the same nonsense over and over again even after it's been totally debunked...

- Argument By Selective Reading: Bible & Creationist websites

- Inconsistency: "The bible always tells the truth...except for the rape/genocide stuff, that's just a misunderstanding and human error."

- Non Sequitur: "Christianity helps millions of people...ergo god exists."

- Meaningless Questions: "irresistible forces meeting immovable objects"

- Error Of Fact: "Scientist can't explain wind."

- Changing The Subject: Every single time his hogwash claims are refuted


- Outdated Information: "Darwin said XYZ and was wrong..." As if science didn't make progress in over 150yrs.

- Least Plausible Hypothesis: "God did it...and no, it doesn't matter if it's backed up by objective evidence."

- Affirming The Consequent: "You shall not kill in the bible is correct, therefore everything is correct..."

- Moving The Goalposts: "Multiverses..."

- Appeal To Complexity: "Scientists can't explain that...ergo god did it, it's the only logical explanation."

- Argument By Laziness: Many of SuperiorEd's post are demonstrably wrong...and he'd realize if he just spent a few minutes doing proper research instead of copy/pasting crap from blogs...

Every single one of the wanna-be proof presented by SuperiorEd is a who's who of fallacious arguments





posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
You are a good example to us all. Thank you for the delivery. I thought my OP was well stated.


Originally posted by Ariel
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Well, it goes much deeper than a mere lack of education. The situation itself is still a significant deal wherever it occurs; it has significant impacts, child or no. But you're right. The topic is really interesting, but I don't want to veer off the topic of this thread, either.


Though I suppose what one believes about how the universe originated has an impact on everything from one's view of the material universe, to what may or may not be beyond, to the discussion on morality/living in society, etc.

Anyway, this is most definitely an interesting topic. I've enjoyed reading everyone's contributions to the thread that each contribute a piece to the grand puzzle. Will we ever have all the pieces? No. But the discussion is satisfying enough in itself, despite knowing that there's no ultimate proof.
edit on 20-4-2011 by Ariel because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-4-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 


We've already proven you wrong dozens of times in this thread. And it's a bit laughable that you pretend to be a victim when people are attacking the CONTENT of your claims, not you. I don't know you, you might be a nice guy in real life...but the content of your claims here are DEMONSTRABLY wrong. And we've demonstrated how you are wrong, go back and read the responses. What you're doing is ignoring every single response that 100% debunks your claims.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join