- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Challenge for the enlightened members of the OT
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:03 pm to YumYum Sauce
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:03 pm to YumYum Sauce
quote:
shite, I didn't make it to the end, came during the Virgo supercluster.
0
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:04 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
But knot knowing a fundamental things DOES NOT in ANY WAY leave open the equal possibility that "God" fills in that gap.
Howzat? You don't know how it happened, but somehow it precludes the possibility that God fills that gap?
quote:
And the reason ought to be obvious...and that's that you most first prove the existence of god, right?
But your belief system requires no such proof of itself? Just a bit self-serving, isn't it? In order to prove that God created life, one must prove God exists. But in order to prove that something else created life, one must only observe that life exists. How convenient!
quote:
Notice how nothing there states anything with any certainty. It's a working hypothesis, based on the fact that, until we know differently, a naturalistic origin is the most likely place to look.
But an entire belief system, based on this supposition, is not a faith. Got it.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:06 pm to troyt37
quote:
You have no idea how life started, but unless given proof, you refuse to believe God created life.
No...you're refusing to play this game honestly.
Before you can offer God as the answer to some question, you must FIRST provide evidence for God. The problem is, you want to walk into this discussion as if everyone already agrees on this God you keep referring to, and we all agree he exists, behaves like you says he does, etc.
We don't. It would be like postulating Big foot and the answer to some question and just assuming we all believe in Big Foot.
As soon as you prove God, you can offer him as an answer. Until then, God as an answer to these questions is no more useful than offering fairies, or pixies, or yetis, or aliens, etc. You are reducing him to a place holder for scientific ignorance...
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:07 pm to troyt37
quote:
But your belief system requires no such proof of itself? Just a bit self-serving, isn't it? In order to prove that God created life, one must prove God exists. But in order to prove that something else created life, one must only observe that life exists. How convenient!
Holy fricking shite
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:13 pm to troyt37
quote:
Howzat? You don't know how it happened, but somehow it precludes the possibility that God fills that gap?
Yup! Because until you first prove God, he's not a card you can slap down in a debate. How is that not understood?
quote:
But your belief system requires no such proof of itself? Just a bit self-serving, isn't it?
You continue to ascribe a belief system to me. My belief system revolves around what we already know...which is that we live in what appears to be a materialistic universe. As such, all answers to question are assumed to be materialistic ones...UNTIL someone who's proposing a supernatural one provides evidence that the universe is more than material.
It does not require faith on my part to tell you that you have not proven your assertion, and therefore the default proposition is most logical.
quote:
Got it.
You really don;t, and from the looks of it have no interest in actually "getting it." Which is why I asked you to tell us if you agreed with that bolded statement of faith from Answers.org I posted a page or so ago.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:15 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Holy fricking shite
One of my most favorite things in the world is when I run into someone who is both ignorant AND belligerent.
It's right up there with whiskers on kittens and brown paper packages tied up with strings...
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:18 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
No...you're refusing to play this game honestly.
Ok, so...
Before you can offer (something else) as the answer to some question, you must FIRST provide evidence for (something else).
The question is, how was the first living thing created.
What exactly has your belief system provided evidence for, that is responsible for the creation of life, where no life existed? That's as fair as it gets, right?
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:29 pm to troyt37
quote:
Before you can offer (something else) as the answer to some question, you must FIRST provide evidence for (something else).
Pretty much, yes.
Try this. If you ask me how that nail over there got into the wall and I say I'm not sure, probably a hammer since we know that's probably right. If you suggest some supernatural cause one agrees exists as an alternative and THEN insist that both possibilities are equally likely, then I'm going to point out the bullshite involved there. If you're going to offer an explanation that's an extraordinary claim, you're going to have to provide extraordinary evidence...or at least SOME evidence. Pretending you don't is why I'm saying you are not having an honest discussion here. You want special rules.
quote:
The question is, how was the first living thing created.
Asked and answered...multiple times.
quote:
What exactly has your belief system provided evidence for, that is responsible for the creation of life, where no life existed?
The natural world, for starters. We know a damn good amount about the fundamentals of physics and chemistry which enables us to determine things like the age of the known universe and our own planet. We understand chemical processes enough to offer plausible hypotheses for how the first self-replicating molecules could have arose on a planet we largely understand from that time period. But it is speculation, based on the ONLY working model we have...which is that a natural cause it most likely.
You, offer magic as an alternative and scoff at being told that you most first show your work before magic can be a valid argument.
quote:
That's as fair as it gets, right?
I'm being far more fair than this discussion warrants, honestly.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 3:50 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
If you're going to offer an explanation that's an extraordinary claim, you're going to have to provide extraordinary evidence...or at least SOME evidence. Pretending you don't is why I'm saying you are not having an honest discussion here. You want special rules.
And yet you admit you do not know, nor do you have any evidence to support your belief in how life was first created, yet insist it is not a faith based belief. Special rules indeed.
quote:
The natural world, for starters. We know a damn good amount about the fundamentals of physics and chemistry which enables us to determine things like the age of the known universe and our own planet. We understand chemical processes enough to offer plausible hypotheses for how the first self-replicating molecules could have arose on a planet we largely understand from that time period. But it is speculation, based on the ONLY working model we have...which is that a natural cause it most likely.
You, offer magic as an alternative and scoff at being told that you most first show your work before magic can be a valid argument.
And you offer supposition, most likely scenarios, hypothesis, plausibility, and speculation, but insist it is not "magic."
Posted on 12/28/17 at 4:01 pm to troyt37
quote:
And yet you admit you do not know, nor do you have any evidence to support your belief in how life was first created, yet insist it is not a faith based belief. Special rules indeed.
Honestly...I'm trying to be patient, but you're trying me.
My "belief" is that a natural answer is the most likely to all questions in a natural world. I'll happily consider a supernatural one once I am shown evidence the supernatural realm exists. Until then...
quote:
And you offer supposition, most likely scenarios, hypothesis, plausibility, and speculation, but insist it is not "magic."
quote:
Definition of magic 1 a : the use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces
Because offering a natural explanation, whether right or wrong, does not constitute invoking "magic." It's literally the opposite of that. There's nothing supernatural about the possibility that self-replicating molecules emerged through natural processes...even if that is not what happened. It may be ultimately wrong, but it's not invoking an explanation that requires anyone to prove the existence of the constituent parts.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 4:23 pm to GeauxTigerTM
I wasn't joking when I said he lacked the vocabulary. He's not even moving the goal posts, he's just using words he heard other people say.
This can be an interesting debate, this isn't it.
But have you heard the good/dumb news? About our loving and endearingly dim Lord.
This can be an interesting debate, this isn't it.
But have you heard the good/dumb news? About our loving and endearingly dim Lord.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 4:27 pm to LucasP
quote:
This can be an interesting debate, this isn't it.
Agreed...I'm not feeling well enough for this nonsense.
quote:
But have you heard the good/dumb news? About our loving and endearingly dim Lord.
Yes...I read the Rant.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 4:40 pm to GeauxTigerTM
Our Lord has tried his hardest to provide an existence that makes sense. It's not perfect, but we love him for his efforts. He's the best God we could have asked for.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 5:23 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Then how do you believe it all started?. Someone had to have created it. Stuff just cant appear from nothing.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 5:32 pm to chadr07
quote:
Stuff just cant appear from nothing.
Using real deep words there, chief.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 5:38 pm to Tyga Woods
Isaac Asimov
The Last Question
The Last Question
Posted on 12/28/17 at 5:41 pm to chadr07
quote:I don't have any idea
Then how do you believe it all started?.
quote:uh, no
Someone had to have created it.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 6:18 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Honestly...I'm trying to be patient, but you're trying me.
I'm not trying your patience, man. It's the knowledge that your belief system does not provide one bit more evidence about the origins of life than mine does. It's the realization that when the very same club you use to batter traditional religious beliefs is used on your own belief system, it fares no better.
Common sense kicks the hell out of faith based belief systems. It hammers virgin births, and 6 day creation. But it also destroys life from lifelessness. It defies self replicating organisms, when no such organism could possibly exist in the first place.
The difference is that I readily admit that my beliefs are faith based, while it seems that so many of the believers in your faith are incapable of making that admission. You admit that you don't know, you admit that you require no evidence of your belief system, but require evidence from someone else's belief system.
Posted on 12/28/17 at 6:35 pm to troyt37
How is “I don’t know” a “belief system”?
Posted on 12/28/17 at 6:46 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
How is “I don’t know” a “belief system”?
It is when it is followed by "but I believe ________, and not only that, your belief system is based on magic, hocus pocus, and superstition.
You don't know, therefore you believe. I don't know, therefore I believe. But somehow you think your faith is superior to mine.
This post was edited on 12/28/17 at 6:48 pm
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News