(August 31, 2015 at 2:36 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: To my best recollection, none of his points struck me as good when he made them.

What points did he make? He copy pasted what others said and that was about all.

(August 31, 2015 at 3:18 pm)abaris Wrote:

(August 31, 2015 at 2:36 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: To my best recollection, none of his points struck me as good when he made them.

What points did he make? He copy pasted what others said and that was about all.

Ah, but the gotcha was whether the copy pasted contained any good points.  Cause you know, good points are good points.

What he missed, and I hope he's listening here, points widely published yet not convincing are probably not good points.  Just saying. 

Randy, the thing is this, your arguments are all arguments that make believers feel better about believing, but they aren't proof.  Even you admitted that they aren't scientific proof.  Believing in god appears to require the will the believe in god.  Well, sorry, if proof isn't obvious, requiring not exertion beyond weighing the evidence (even if the evidence is counter intuitive) then there's no evidence. 

I probably will go on being respectful and nice when you come back.  I'm built that way.  But you still lack any real demonstrable evidence.

I don't believe in anything I must want to believe in in order to believe in.  It saves me from a lot of isms, a lot of pseudo science, and so far, all religion. 

Every so often you've suggested I'm a cut above this forum.  That's not so.  I'm politer to you, no more.  Don't mistake that for agreement.  The facts however, remain the facts.  And they aren't with you.  There is no evidence of god that brings him anywhere even close to a 50/50 proposition.  God remains many hundreds if not thousands to one.

Yay Randy was banned, what happened?

(August 31, 2015 at 4:36 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Ah, but the gotcha was whether the copy pasted contained any good points.  Cause you know, good points are good points.

But to make good points you have to know your sources. You have to make an educated selection based on source criticism. You also have to present more than one author. And most of all, you don't cherry pick that one author to make him confirm your preconceived notion.

What he does is the dishonest approach and certainly not in any way, shape or form, making a good point.

(August 31, 2015 at 4:43 pm)Dystopia Wrote: Yay Randy was banned, what happened?

It's just a two-week vacation.

(August 31, 2015 at 4:43 pm)Dystopia Wrote: Yay Randy was banned, what happened?

He had a 25% warning for plagiarism, which he tried to justify because you know plagiarism for a good cause is ok.  He had just recently had a 25% warning for copy pasta.  Then he copy pasta another OP.  It's clear he understood the rules, he just felt privileged to violate them anyway. 

The mods bend over backwards for theists.  Had he been an atheist he would have been banned months ago.

I better convert then!

(August 30, 2015 at 10:25 pm)Stimbo Wrote: He's just in timeout on the naughty step. He'll be back. Thus spake the prophet.

I hope you gave him a towel to sit on, pretty sure that naughty step was still wet from the last time I had to sit on it