(August 16, 2016 at 12:19 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Okay I'll play serious for once. Do you think there can be knowledge of God, Steve?

Steve ignored this completely.

But I forgive him.

(August 16, 2016 at 9:55 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: And you would just believe these scientific writings?

What if the cow died after 10 months (eaten by a crocodile).  Would you believe that this cow existed?  Based on what???

LOL! Reverse reductio ad absurdum. That's a good one. Comparing a cow, or it's death to your sky guy story. Too rich.

(August 17, 2016 at 8:36 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 12:19 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Okay I'll play serious for once. Do you think there can be knowledge of God, Steve?

Steve ignored this completely.

But I forgive him.

Christ would be so proud. [emoji41]

Quote:LOL! Reverse reduction ad absurdum.

What is that?! 'Splain it to me!

(August 17, 2016 at 8:44 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(August 17, 2016 at 8:36 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Steve ignored this completely.

But I forgive him.

Christ would be so proud.  [emoji41]

Of me

(August 17, 2016 at 8:46 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(August 17, 2016 at 8:39 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 9:55 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: And you would just believe these scientific writings?

What if the cow died after 10 months (eaten by a crocodile).  Would you believe that this cow existed?  Based on what???

LOL! Reverse reduction ad absurdum.[\quote]

What is that?!  'Splain it to me!

It's when you realize that reversing the reduction of Ads, or in other words increasing Ads, would be absurd because then it would mean I would advertise my mayo-making less on AF.

Less mayo-making makes baby Jesus cry. This is why Steve realizes that I must throttle myself on a regular basis and his silence is confirmation that he's not ungrateful every time I do it. He'd let me know if he did not approve.

LMAO. Much clearer now! [emoji13][emoji848]

(August 17, 2016 at 7:07 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: RR,

You can conflate science and religion; data and scripture all day long.  You can do it with your thumb up your ass while singing Yankee Doodle for all I care.  It's still a logically fallacious argument

It was a bad argument the last six times you tried it, and if you left and came back here in ten years, guess what?!  It would still be a BAD fucking argument.  Science and religion are different.  That's why one is called "science" and the other is called "religion".  They are not synonyms.

I'm done wasting my time arguing against fallacies.  This is the problem with you guys.  People get so fed up with the willful ignorance that they say, "fuck this assclown, I'm done," and the Christian walks away Feeling as though they've accomplished something.

Congratulations, you've accomplished making yourself look like a stupid asshole for five pages.  I'll get started on your trophy.

I agree, that science and religion are not the same. I also agree with you, that these are bad arguments. That was my point from the beginning. I don't believe that the differences in science and religion change the principles, of how we acquire knowledge, and justify our beliefs. This would be special pleading, and unjustified.

Before you go; however, could you do me the courtesy, of explaining what you believe is fallacious, and why my reasoning is incorrect here, that calls for the above post.

(August 16, 2016 at 11:26 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I find it unlikely to be able to invent a story, and gather followers from the area where the story allegedly took place, who devoutly believe that story in the face of persecution, and little to gain by it.

Little to gain?! Oh, except the promise of eternal, blissful life in the warm, fuzzy embrace of an all-loving entity. Lol.


BTW...ever heard of Heaven's Gate?

I prefer the Stairway to there.