EvF, you know that example of the law of gravity you gave a couple of weeks ago; throw a ball up and it comes back down, throw it a million times more and one of those times it could do anything . . .

Does your example of this include other things which aren't meant to change either? Can it be applied to say opening a bible to a certain page any number of times and one of those times might there be a pop up book or some other difference in the content?**

**clearly not in the literal sense, I have more reasoning capacity than that; I mean with the analogy of truth and givens, etc.

I don't remember giving that example a few weeks ago....

If I did at all talk about something like that it seems like a year ago when I was new to the forums.

Are you referring to like David Hume's principles involving cause and effect? About how just because so far they have been observed to be consistent doesn't mean that in the future there will never be exceptions.

I will discuss this more but I need to get ready to go out for a walk with my bro and sis now, cya.

EvF

Truthworthy,

I believe that was Adrian who brought up that example. It was used to express a scientific principle that past experience does not dictate future results. Well, that was how I interpreted it.

Rhizo

I think it was Chatpilot, and Adrian corrected him actually. But I'm too lazy to check.

CP brought up the baseball example as an example of absolute truth and Adrian used that example to expound on the idea that past experience does not dictate future results thereby negating the absolute part.

Post 141 in this thread:

http://atheistforums.org/thread-2643-pos...l#pid51472

Now if only our search engine saw things in quotes as term and term and term instead of a character string with quotes as part of the search term.

Rhizo

Ok so according to the future not being governed by the "past" (lol) I can reopen a book at any page and it's possible that something will be different which couldn't be explained besides by memory lapse or something.

(January 27, 2010 at 7:36 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: The more fr0d0 states he has no evidence and then comes across with so-called arguments occasionally later on the more I really wanna laugh my ass off.

If any arguments are valid for God then they are evidence!!

EvF

It's just you Evie you numbskull who has no idea when people are _obviously_ talking about different things.

You've got mud on your face . . .

Big disgrace . . .

We will ...