(June 9, 2025 at 1:11 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 9, 2025 at 1:08 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: If God, then the universe.
The universe, therefore God.

This is the fallacy of affirming the consequent.

Here is the same 'logic' used to prove something different.

If I am Elijah Wood, I am 5'6" tall.
I am 5'6" tall. Therefore I am Elijah Wood.

The problem with my use of this form of argument is that although it's remotely possible that am actually Elijah Wood, there are many other possible explanations for me being 5'6". Same with your argument of 'look all around' and God.

(Bold mind)

Cool! Can I remotely have your possible autograph?

Boru

Absovirtually!

(June 8, 2025 at 9:34 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote:

(June 7, 2025 at 10:06 pm)Silver Wrote: Theists confuse obedience for love. Thus, they don't always love either.

I agree.

When God tells me to do something... I always question him... as to why, and if I can improve the commission.

I don't blindly obey God.

Sorry to hear about the voices in your head. Have you tried psychiatric care? I’m give to understand that some of the newer meds are pretty effective.

Boru

(June 8, 2025 at 6:54 am)Sheldon Wrote:

(June 7, 2025 at 10:07 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: I like that argument.

but, in the bible, who does God not love?


"those loving violence, my soul certainly hates"

The bible depicts a deity that indulges in, and encourages in its pets, indiscriminate violence, and murder, endorses slavery, and commits global genocide, to name but a few, luckily there isn't a shred of objective evidence any deity exists or is even possible, but the one depicted in the bible is  amoral, barbarically sadistic, and indifferently cruel megalomaniac. 

You're selling a product you can't demonstrate exists or is possible, and that product is morally repugnant anyway.

I agree.

I don't actually worship Jehovah or even universal consciousness. I merely prove their existence.

What I do worship is morality!

(June 9, 2025 at 4:47 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 8, 2025 at 9:34 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: I agree.

When God tells me to do something... I always question him... as to why, and if I can improve the commission.

I don't blindly obey God.

Sorry to hear about the voices in your head. Have you tried psychiatric care? I’m give to understand that some of the newer meds are pretty effective.

Boru

They're not effective at treating religious ideation. If anything, they almost increase it.

(June 8, 2025 at 12:20 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Sucks.  I thought I was going to get to have a discussion with a pantheist and all we get is another magic book worshipper who doesn't know what word do.

I am technically a pantheist... but unfortunately I can prove the global flood, sodom and gomorrah, confusion of the languages after the flood, etc

so that is circumstantial evidence that Jehovah exists


anyway I revere Jehovah and universal consciousness... but I give all my worship to beauty and morality

(June 8, 2025 at 9:51 pm)Astreja Wrote:

(June 8, 2025 at 9:38 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: I realized that I loved everyone from learning about Christ.

intending well-being for all is a fundamental need for mankind

"Intending well-being for all" certainly isn't the exclusive territory of Christianity - it's the core idea in Buddhist metta (lovingkindness) meditations. No gods are required.

Whether or not it's a "fundamental need for mankind" is debatable. It sounds to me as if you're trying to police the emotions of others, telling them what they should or should not feel. That is not cool, not at all; what I feel, for instance, is not for you to decide.

Buddah believed in God... God told him (according to his text) to teach the dharma.

should we force people to 'intend well-being for all'?

that would be difficult to do without synthetic telepathy

but if you could do it so conviently... what is the sin?

(June 8, 2025 at 10:00 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(June 8, 2025 at 9:39 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: the connective tissue found in the fossils are rather meaty and have lots of carbons

Citation? I'm not seeing anything that's large enough for a positive identification as to the type of tissue, or even that the cells are actually cells using very powerful microscopes. They've tried to extract DNA but have had zero success, even when trying to find fragments.

search "connective tissue T-Rex"

(June 8, 2025 at 10:05 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(June 8, 2025 at 9:47 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: how does dating the nearest rock date the fossil?

By basic reason. Raisin bread can't be older than the raisins withn it and can't be younger than the slices that cur it. The same reasoning works for rocks. Fossils that are between two layers of volcanic material must be younger than the lower layer and older than the upper layer. Date the two layers of volcanic material and you have the age of the fossil bracketed. If the two layers are reasonably close together and your deposition rates aren't aburdly slow, the two ages will be the same, within error.

how do you date a volcanic erruption?

(June 8, 2025 at 10:10 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(June 8, 2025 at 9:45 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: how do you know it was that old; can you give a solid deduction axiom for axiom to deduce your claim?

Yes, but the TLDR is that we know the rate at which radioactive isotopes decay and what they decay into. That rate is constant. Measure the rate and measure the amount of decay within a sample, do some pretty rudimentary math, and you get the decay time. There are a few assumptions that you'll need to check for a robust result, but they probably aren't what you think.

How do you know the decay rate for anything besides carbon 14... we know that the carbon 14 is from the radiation hiting the atmosphere but where does the radio isotopes come from from the other processes?