I draughted a response but your post was so purile it seems pointless. I've made my point and you choose to ignore it. Hopefully this will help:-
(February 14, 2010 at 12:10 pm)tavarish Wrote: you: There is a god NO - I believe in God
me: There is no (empirical) evidence to support such a claim YES
you: God doesn't need evidence, he is everywhere and all things There can only be personal evidence
me: Your argument has no basis and cannot be refuted, therefore it is moot. Question begging logical fallacy
you: you can't use science to prove God. we need faith.
me: that doesn't make any sense, if he was in reality, his existence would be abundantly apparent Repeat Question begging logical fallacy
you: his existence is irrelevant, he is transcendent.
me: That doesn't explain anything. You're basically saying anything you say can't be refuted as is doesn't use logic or reason behind it. That is illogical and a void argument. NO. there is logic behind it - just not scientific proof - but you want to limit logic to scientific proof, which is inadequate.
you: You have a logical fallacy because my unfounded and unprovable phenomenon can't be proved. Nope. See above