(November 17, 2018 at 12:01 pm)Everena Wrote:

(November 17, 2018 at 11:30 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Obviously how you found yourself in such a hilarious position to begin with.

False, prima facie.  



93% of the world doesn't claim to have had your experience.  Yet another example of your bottomless penchant for dishonesty and fallacious argumentation.

Maybe it's just you?  Maybe you're the only delusional believer?  The rest aren't..and atheists are wrong..but so are you.  Womp womp.7

49% of the United States has had a spiritual experience that proved God to them. That is 160 million people just in the US and I think everyone has these experiences at different points in their life.  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/200...periences/

b-mine...didn't see any reason to type it out again since it applies just as well to this shitpost as the last.

(November 17, 2018 at 11:29 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Everena, you think God will make us in to his eternal pawns?

Never. Can't happen. We are god too, just imperfect.

(November 17, 2018 at 12:01 pm)Everena Wrote: 49% of the United States has had a spiritual experience that proved God to them. That is 160 million people just in the US and I think everyone has these experiences at different points in their life.  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/200...periences/

You think many things. That the things you think are true is what is in great dispute and, at a minimum, far from obvious.

Your insistence that the little gods of men can't be responsible for all of this food, then, becomes even more inexplicable than it already was, in light of that statement...which is a damned impressive lift.  

: slow clap :

(November 17, 2018 at 12:22 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(November 16, 2018 at 11:58 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: If DNA is proof of a deity then it's a mad god. The genome reads like a bookshelf that was tipped into a wood chipper and then fed through a cement mixer. Genes are scattered everywhere, mixed with pseudogenes, endogenous retroviri, and a thousand other flavours of non-coding rubbish. The genes themselves are littered with introns that have to be excised for them to make any sense. It all looks suspiciously organic.

85 percent of DNA serves a function as non-coding DNA.

The majority of non-coding DNA doesn't appear to be conserved, so it's hard to imagine it serving any function beyond randomly evolving in the background.

Even if you're right, it doesn't help your case any. The genome is still a nightmare to read and no intelligent designer would have built it in such a slip-shod fashion.

Everena: God is the ONLY logical assumption anyone can make.

(November 17, 2018 at 11:38 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Still false.  It's not even clear that meat fairies are among the many logical assumptions or conclusions that one could make.  It's certainly true, otoh, that the meat fairy you've described is demonstrably non existent.  

Everena: Well, you certainly cannot demonstate that God is non existent and no one else in the world can demonstrate that God is non existent so....

(November 17, 2018 at 11:38 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Still missing any math.

Here is some math:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1_KEVaCyaA

Human DNA has a piss-poor designer, apparently. 
Elephants had their DNA "designed" by the elephant gods.
These gods at least knew how to design them some decent DNA. 
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-n...180969993/

(November 17, 2018 at 12:10 pm)Everena Wrote: Everena: God is the ONLY logical assumption anyone can make.

You do realize that something isn't made true by saying it over and over again....right?  

Quote:Everena: Well, you certainly cannot demonstate that God is non existent and no one else in the world can demonstrate that God is non existent so....

So what?  I don't have to prove your meat fairy false to have arrived a logical conclusion....as the many examples of my showing you how some thing x is true or false regardless of the existence of meat fairies demonstrates.  Besides, I've left you to prove that your meat fairy is non-existent...and am continually surprised at how willing you are to do so.

Quote:Here is some math:

Can you describe the effect that multiple concurrent trials would have on those numbers?

(November 17, 2018 at 11:55 am)Everena Wrote:

(November 17, 2018 at 11:29 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: As someone who has been delusional I have to ask the rather obvious question.  If you were delusional, then how would you know?

Do you mean when I was 4 years old and pulled out of my body during abuse? Or do you mean when he and I had the mutual/shared experiences? Very unlikely that we would both be delusional at the same time and even if we were, it is even more unlikely that we would have the exact same delusion. And that is not even what has me totally convinced, although it got me 90% of the way towards knowing. The other 40 plus unexplainable signs pushed me to 100% and these are not things that can even be delusions. Some force grabbed my steering wheel and pulled me back on the road when my car drifted into oncoming traffic and saved me from a head on collision with a truck. I have had dreams that I wrote down and years later the things I had dreamed actually happened. When my mom was dying of cancer, a presense woke me up at 4:02 am the morning she died  and I found out later that day that that was exactly the time she passed away. I do know none of these were delusions and I also know none of the signs were delusions.

I will add, as a side note, while not directly the answer to the question I asked, your answer does seem an attempt to answer my prior request for inexplicable and improbable experiences that you have had. While I appreciate your sincerity, the list you have provided so far is laughably explicable in mundane terms and leads me to the conclusion that, if the rest of the experiences which you think are inexplicable or improbable are of a similar character, your interpretation of these events is more strongly influenced by what you want to believe than it is justified by the facts of what you have experienced. Thus recalling my earlier point that if your experiences are not so inexplicable as you say, or that there are more probable explanations for your experiences than that which you embrace, then you are simply being irrational and your conclusions as such, are demonstrably unreliable and can be dismissed on that account. The Humean objection to miracle accounts seems particularly relevant here, though I would be the first to say that the problem may not be as simple as Hume surmised.

"God is the ONLY logical assumption anyone can make" ....

Well she just said we are all parts of this "god thingy" ... and I had nothing to do with her woo.
But thanks for playing, sweetie, (and for the perfect example of the fallacy of the excluded middle) ... LOL ... she actually uses a fallacy in claiming her logic.
Daaaa-um. This one is stoooooopid.