(February 23, 2013 at 4:28 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Thats your line of bullshit. If you don't believe the universe was designed and engineered then you believe it came about by happenstance. The crap atheism is just no belief in god is just a debating tactic.

How dare you tell us what it is that we believe. Atheism is by definition the lack of belief in a god or gods, and you or anyone else assuming what we believe beyond that without consulting us as to our individual beliefs is disingenuous, and frankly I would personally say a premise for building a strawman fallacy.

(February 28, 2013 at 2:52 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: You guys are comical, you are so duped into the atheist orythodoxy you've lost the ability to think critically. If I told you, you can't prove God doesn't exist you'd launch into a diatribe about how you can't prove a negative. Why would I have to prove something that we have no evidence exists, doesn't exist? Try getting off the script you have memorized and try to do some freethinking.

Alright then, smart guy, I'll make this simple for you: prove to me that the conditions that life has currently come to exist within are the only conditions within which life can form. Because that's the claim you're making. If you're so sure of your narrow band, then prove it. If all other possibilities are merely hypotheticals, then it should be easy for a super genius like you, right?

Or is it just that you're swapping out an actual argument for smugly demanding that we all just accept you're right without proof?

Quote:Boo hoo hoo...

Because, gotta tell ya, it's really starting to seem like the latter...

Quote:I don't have to account for what ifs, you can manufacture what ifs from now until eternity. What happened to the atheists who told me they are only persuaded by facts? They're hiding under their desks now until is safe to come out. Whenever I go to an atheist board I am always told atheists they don't believe a Creator exists or lack belief in a Creator because supposedly there is no evidence. Yet when I supply evidence, they immediately counter not with evidence, but with hypotheticals. They sometimes counter with hypotheticals they don't even think are true.

So please show us where your argument is a fact, and not just an assertion on your part. Forget the hypotheticals: prove your shit, then.

Quote:Do you not get I don't give a rats ass what my opponent in a debate thinks of my arguments or evidence I present. Do you think if I was making a case in a courtroom I'd ask for my adversaries approval?

Then why the fuck are you even here? Seriously, where do you think you are, in some kind of cosmic courtroom to prove your god exists? You're in a fucking forum debating cosmology, your sole purpose here is to try and persuade others around to your way of thinking, and part of that is arguing against the points that others make. Unless- and this is beginning to look increasingly likely- you're just here to make shit up and cause trouble.

I won't bother responding to the rest of what you wrote, because it was nothing but aggressive cries of "nuh-uh!" in the face of a real, genuine concern. Since you couldn't even show me the basic respect of actually providing a cogent argument, I won't even bother with the effort of responding further.

Prove your points, or you're done.

---

(February 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm)Question Mark Wrote:

(February 23, 2013 at 4:28 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Thats your line of bullshit. If you don't believe the universe was designed and engineered then you believe it came about by happenstance. The crap atheism is just no belief in god is just a debating tactic.

How dare you tell us what it is that we believe. Atheism is by definition the lack of belief in a god or gods, and you or anyone else assuming what we believe beyond that without consulting us as to our individual beliefs is disingenuous, and frankly I would personally say a premise for building a strawman fallacy.

Thank you! I've been trying to tell him that for the better part of a week, but facts seem to flow off of him like water off a duck.

Hypotheticals that you don't even think are true are the best!




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdL9IhQcsOY

(February 28, 2013 at 3:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(February 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm)Question Mark Wrote: How dare you tell us what it is that we believe. Atheism is by definition the lack of belief in a god or gods, and you or anyone else assuming what we believe beyond that without consulting us as to our individual beliefs is disingenuous, and frankly I would personally say a premise for building a strawman fallacy.

Thank you! I've been trying to tell him that for the better part of a week, but facts seem to flow off of him like water off a duck.

Aye, it's most aggravating. Not to go grassing on anyone, but someone else pulled that on me recently on here. I think you know whom I mean since you gave them a piece of your own mind too.

If there's one thing that annoys me more than another in a debate though, it's when the other side refuses to answer one's questions whilst making unreasonable demands of the other, and they've certainly tried you very hard on that score here.

(February 28, 2013 at 11:52 pm)Question Mark Wrote:

(February 28, 2013 at 3:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Thank you! I've been trying to tell him that for the better part of a week, but facts seem to flow off of him like water off a duck.

Aye, it's most aggravating. Not to go grassing on anyone, but someone else pulled that on me recently on here. I think you know whom I mean since you gave them a piece of your own mind too.

If there's one thing that annoys me more than another in a debate though, it's when the other side refuses to answer one's questions whilst making unreasonable demands of the other, and they've certainly tried you very hard on that score here.

Yes indeed. If it's kept up, I might just have to remind him that turnabout is fair play and dictate to him what he believes. It'll stop the debate dead in its tracks, but it wasn't really going anywhere with Drew at the helm anyway. And I guarantee I can come up with a much more imaginative set of beliefs for him than he could hope to do for me.

Quote:Actually, it is not an established fact that they have to be within an astounding degree of tolerance - something that has been refuted over and over again and yet you keep bringing it up.

No one has refuted the fact, they just object to it or make a hypothetical counter argument and demand I prove thier hypothetical isn't true. A hypothetical is a manufactured assumption to begin with, it doesn't need to be proven false. Of course your going to say as an atheist that any objection you raise to a line of evidence in your opinion refutes the evidence. That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.

Quote:Pretty much the same way you keep bringing up the false dichotomy between happenstance and design. Let me be clear - I do not believe it was by plan and I do not believe it was by happenstance.

Good I have reduced you to incoherent babbling and proposing a situation that can't be articulated or for which there is no example you can present. Oh an for which you can't submit any facts that support your far flung hypothesis. But please do try.

Quote:Here's what we do agree on - the universe exists, 'mindless' natural forces operate within it and they eventually led to the existence of life. I'm not the one adding anything new to this set - you are. You are positing a) a cause of the universe, b) that the cause had a plan and design and c) that it is personal and transcendent. All those are positive claims which require to meet the burden of proof.

Exactly, its your contention that mindless, lifeless forces without plan, design or knowledge or desire caused something to exist totally unlike itself, life and mind. And I am submitting (for now) just one line of evidence in support of my claim. Atheists typically insist that there contention should be some sort of default position unless proven otherwise. Why should I believe your extraordinary claim minus any evidence mindless forces can bootstrap themselves into existence and cause sentient humans to exist? How is that proposal any less a miracle than the counter proposal it was designed and caused to happen by plan?

Quote:How dare you tell us what it is that we believe. Atheism is by definition the lack of belief in a god or gods, and you or anyone else assuming what we believe beyond that without consulting us as to our individual beliefs is disingenuous, and frankly I would personally say a premise for building a strawman fallacy.

Atheism is by defintion not or without God. Try looking it up. And you're right I do have a lot of nerve.

Quote:Alright then, smart guy, I'll make this simple for you: prove to me that the conditions that life has currently come to exist within are the only conditions within which life can form. Because that's the claim you're making. If you're so sure of your narrow band, then prove it. If all other possibilities are merely hypotheticals, then it should be easy for a super genius like you, right?

I can offer facts that support my contention...not that it will make any difference to you, you'll still whine moan and complain because thats what atheists are trained to do. In our own solar system it is fact that life doesn't exist on the moon, life doesn't exist on Mars and may have never existed on Mars. To the best of our knowledge life doesn't and never has existed on Venus or Mercury. So even in a life permitting universe, in a solar system known to contain life it appears (from the facts) that life requires certain conditions to occur. I don't have to disprove a supposition on your part that life may occur under different circumstances. Offer evidence it did or does.

Quote:Then why the fuck are you even here? Seriously, where do you think you are, in some kind of cosmic courtroom to prove your god exists? You're in a fucking forum debating cosmology, your sole purpose here is to try and persuade others around to your way of thinking, and part of that is arguing against the points that others make. Unless- and this is beginning to look increasingly likely- you're just here to make shit up and cause trouble.

I came to this forum to make my case in favor of theism, not to get approval of my case from advocates of atheism or to persuade them of anything. At any given time there are lurkers viewing our responses who are not convinced of either side of this debate. Those are the people who can read our debate and decide for themselves who has made the better case. So far in my opinion you are getting your head handed to you.

(March 1, 2013 at 2:51 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: No one has refuted the fact, they just object to it or make a hypothetical counter argument and demand I prove thier hypothetical isn't true. A hypothetical is a manufactured assumption to begin with, it doesn't need to be proven false. Of course your going to say as an atheist that any objection you raise to a line of evidence in your opinion refutes the evidence. That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.

Do you even read the arguments? Apo has refuted your notion quite a few times. That you still believe it to stand is a testament to your own ignorance.

(March 1, 2013 at 2:51 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Good I have reduced you to incoherent babbling and proposing a situation that can't be articulated or for which there is no example you can present. Oh an for which you can't submit any facts that support your far flung hypothesis. But please do try.

Try what? Argue against your nonsensical ideas or acknowledge your idiotic dichotomy?

(March 1, 2013 at 2:51 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Exactly, its your contention that mindless, lifeless forces without plan, design or knowledge or desire caused something to exist totally unlike itself, life and mind.

That much is known to be true.

(March 1, 2013 at 2:51 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: And I am submitting (for now) just one line of evidence in support of my claim. Atheists typically insist that there contention should be some sort of default position unless proven otherwise. Why should I believe your extraordinary claim minus any evidence mindless forces can bootstrap themselves into existence and cause sentient humans to exist?

Because the theory of evolution has explained how it happened.

(March 1, 2013 at 2:51 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: How is that proposal any less a miracle than the counter proposal it was designed and caused to happen by plan?

Because it uses naturalistic explanation, which, by definition, is non-miraculous.

---

(March 1, 2013 at 4:04 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: I can offer facts that support my contention...not that it will make any difference to you, you'll still whine moan and complain because thats what atheists are trained to do. In our own solar system it is fact that life doesn't exist on the moon, life doesn't exist on Mars and may have never existed on Mars. To the best of our knowledge life doesn't and never has existed on Venus or Mercury. So even in a life permitting universe, in a solar system known to contain life it appears (from the facts) that life requires certain conditions to occur. I don't have to disprove a supposition on your part that life may occur under different circumstances. Offer evidence it did or does.

Those facts don't support your contention. Life is known to exist in some pretty extreme conditions as would be found on mars or moon. That shows that the absence of life there is non-indicative of there being any mythical specific conditions.

(March 1, 2013 at 4:04 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: I came to this forum to make my case in favor of theism, not to get approval of my case from advocates of atheism or to persuade them of anything. At any given time there are lurkers viewing our responses who are not convinced of either side of this debate. Those are the people who can read our debate and decide for themselves who has made the better case. So far in my opinion you are getting your head handed to you.

Lurkers disagree. Clearly they see that you are the one getting his ass handed to him.

(March 1, 2013 at 4:04 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Atheism is by defintion not or without God. Try looking it up. And you're right I do have a lot of nerve.

Alright, fine. You've been told long enough. You believe in a giant clown who shits rainbows, and cartwheeled across the heavens to create the universe while singing showtunes with his faithful sharktopus companion, and you mock my belief system?

What's that? Misrepresentation? Do you fucking get it now?

Quote:I can offer facts that support my contention...not that it will make any difference to you, you'll still whine moan and complain because thats what atheists are trained to do. In our own solar system it is fact that life doesn't exist on the moon, life doesn't exist on Mars and may have never existed on Mars. To the best of our knowledge life doesn't and never has existed on Venus or Mercury. So even in a life permitting universe, in a solar system known to contain life it appears (from the facts) that life requires certain conditions to occur. I don't have to disprove a supposition on your part that life may occur under different circumstances. Offer evidence it did or does.

All this means is that life is rare. It certainly doesn't mean that life can exist only within your narrow band. And if you'd kept your claim reasonable we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Instead, you made an additional claim, namely that any other possibility is merely a hypothetical and thus not worth discussing. Since you're so arrogantly dismissing this out of hand, surely you must have some proof that your claim is exclusively the right one, else why on earth would you refuse to even entertain the possibility that you might be wrong?

Quote:I came to this forum to make my case in favor of theism, not to get approval of my case from advocates of atheism or to persuade them of anything. At any given time there are lurkers viewing our responses who are not convinced of either side of this debate. Those are the people who can read our debate and decide for themselves who has made the better case. So far in my opinion you are getting your head handed to you.

Oh look, another by fiat declaration with nothing backing it up...

Quote:No one has refuted the fact, they just object to it or make a hypothetical counter argument and demand I prove thier hypothetical isn't true. A hypothetical is a manufactured assumption to begin with, it doesn't need to be proven false. Of course your going to say as an atheist that any objection you raise to a line of evidence in your opinion refutes the evidence. That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.

Okay, I'm about to blow your tiny fucking mind: your proposed claim is a hypothetical too, by your own model. You are making an assumption- that life can only exist within a narrow band- as the hinge of your argument, yet you've been unable to prove the exclusivity of this. Which would be fine, if you then accepted the possibility that other conditions could lead to other forms of life. But you're dismissing those, which means one of two things: either you have some evidence to show that your position is the only correct one and ours cannot be, or you're an arrogant dick who thinks dismissing a claim counts as refuting it.

Multiple times in this thread you've had the flaws in your argumentation pointed out to you, and you refuse to so much as acknowledge that it's happened, all the while proclaiming victory at every turn, demanding unreasonable standards of evidence from everyone else while expecting we take you on faith, and dictating to us what we believe in order to strawman us. Put simply, your conduct thus far has been incredibly dishonest, rude, and poorly thought out. Now, either actually debate with us, which would include refuting our points instead of ignoring them, or admit that you have no evidence that yours is the only possible answer, you just don't have an answer for our valid reasoning.

Because those are the two options, here. There's no third option where you can continue asserting bullshit and ignoring any argument made against you while still maintaining credibility. Prove yourself, or admit you can't.

But whatever.