Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[Mister Agenda]

I have absolutely zero obligation to respond to everything you say or anything you say. Limiting what I respond to is a mercy I grant to the rest of the forum to prevent our interactions from becoming book-length. I have a life to attend to and the more of your posts I read, the less of them I want to respond to.

I don't get the suddenly rude tone. Trying to save face?

But if you're used to quick chit chat about the big questions, or mistakenly think that biased, superficial thoughts, while sitting comfortably in your sofa, about sweet people thinking that god loves us all, are going to have any kind of weight in these discussions, just say it.

Go. Run. You're free.

The message I had hoped you would receive was that you have no say in how I choose to respond to you, unless I violate the rules of the forum, in which case you can inform a moderator.

If I respond to anything you say, please take it as a compliment: either you've posted something I think needs to be addressed or something interesting enough to warrant a comment, or you've amused me. We're still at a point where I don't find your posts completely not worth the time it takes to read them, I'm hoping we don't get there; but you're not making it easy.

---

No, I need you to say : Thomas Jefferson would be in prison, just like you did with Muhammad.

Of course Thomas Jefferson would be in prison for owning slaves if he were alive today (and owned slaves). Why on earth would you need someone to say something so obvious?

---

Bring it on and pick your most vicious moral objection regarding Islam

Well it does seem to inspire a lot of misogyny and hate. Look at ISIS that is what at least some Islamic thought goes to.
Killing homosexuals, repressing other religions and ethnicities including mass rape in the name of their religion.

Any Islamic country you care to point at takes it to an oppressive place where the ladies are forced to cover up. 

I'm sure it has some nice bits, but that isn't what we're complaining about.

There are about 50 Muslim-majority countries. Not all of them require women to wear traditional Arab clothing. The hijab is banned in public schools, universities, and government buildings in Azerbaijan, Kosovo, and Tunisia. Algeria, Cameroon, Chad, Morocco, and Tunisia have banned burqas and full-face veils. Many other Muslim-majority countries neither require nor enforce wearing the hijab, though in some of those cultural pressure to wear them is high.

[LadyForCamus]

Seems we’ve drifted a long way away from Klorophyll demonstrating the existence of his god.

[R00tKiT]

'Ocean (n): A body of water occupying about two thirds of a world made for man, who has no gills.' - Bierce

Boru

You have an awful fallacy right there, ocean guy. Since when size mattered? Think of the microchip in your computer, it's the main reason why we can safely assert the computer is fine tuned.

And if you think a fine tuned universe is equivalent to drops of wine falling from the sky, you're kindly asked to review the literature on this question.

"Sense of wonder" is appeal to emotion.  "OMG this is so cool!  Therefore God."  I'm okay with that.

Emotion matters, you know. Would a deity reveal itself by making its existence "overwhelming", that is, its creatures can feel the sense of purpose in their everyday life, or, give them pages of rigorous proofs refuting every line of thought any skeptic has about why god isn't there?

Mocking our innate tendency towards belief is ridiculous, and you should feel ashame of yourself for reducing it to some kind of"common logical fallacy", as if ordinary people -who deserve to know god too- can follow sophisticated arguments in the first place.

We have an innate instinct of survival so that when a predator is around, we run. When we feel the innate curiosity to explore, we learn. When we feel strong emotions towards a person, we marry them. And when we feel overwhelmed with our sense of wonder, we fucking believe.

I wish religious apologists would simply lead with that.  Skip the pseudo-critical thinking and dime store philosophy. 

Ah, I should then presume you have some serious, detailed refutations of the arguments for a first cause out there. More interestingly, that you reached some objective moraliity without our outdated theology.

Trying to argue rational belief in the unseen and unsound makes one appear to have lived in a cave the last 18 centuries.

Okay, would you believe in god if a huge entity descended from the sky and said with the loudest voice ever : " I am god" ?

Well, that is amusing. You are stealing a christian apologist argument for Islam. But I guess that is the islamic MO. It can discover nothing, and so must rely on stealing the concepts of it's betters. Sorry, but islam had it's golden age long ago. It was the repository of learning once upon a time. And it threw it all away. And that was a tragedy

Aw, touching Islam story. So.. where is your answer to the argument I just stole?

The message I had hoped you would receive was that you have no say in how I choose to respond to you, unless I violate the rules of the forum, in which case you can inform a moderator.

The message I had hoped you would receive, on the other hand, was not to be an ass, that is, not to flush my answers down the toilet simply because you have the right to do so. Yeah, sure, you can ignore everything and walk, but please don't bother going into details if you're not prepared to hear/answer objections.

We're still at a point where I don't find your posts completely not worth the time it takes to read them, I'm hoping we don't get there; but you're not making it easy.

I'll make it easy this time : Stick to chit chat comments and go to another thread. Only long, detailed, boring answers are allowed here.

[LastPoet]

I'll make it easy this time : Stick to chit chat comments and go to another thread. Only long, detailed, boring answers are allowed here.

Even those are met with ignorance. I also suppose you can't allow or disalow anything.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

'Ocean (n): A body of water occupying about two thirds of a world made for man, who has no gills.' - Bierce

Boru

You have an awful fallacy right there, ocean guy. Since when size mattered? Think of the microchip in your computer, it's the main reason why we can safely assert the computer is fine tuned.

And if you think a fine tuned universe is equivalent to drops of wine falling from the sky, you're kindly asked to review the literature on this question.

I'm not really understanding what you're driving at.  The quote from Bierce is intended to point out that the Earth clearly wasn't made for Man, since we can't live on more than a small percentage of it. If you don't understand why this is important, you might take it up with Mr. Bierce (if you can find him).

Boru

[Belacqua]

I'm not really understanding what you're driving at.  The quote from Bierce is intended to point out that the Earth clearly wasn't made for Man, since we can't live on more than a small percentage of it. If you don't understand why this is important, you might take it up with Mr. Bierce (if you can find him).

Boru

I wonder if modern ecological science supports Mr. Bierce's point.

As I understand it, if the oceans die the people die too.

[R00tKiT]

The quote from Bierce is intended to point out that the Earth clearly wasn't made for Man, since we can't live on more than a small percentage of it.

A small percentage is irrelevant to whether the Earth is fine-tuned to us or not, fine-tuning also includes giving men the tools to deal with these limitations, we obviously are handling the two thirds of the unliveable ocean pretty well.

And your Bierce guy unfortunately died a long time ago, so you might wanna stick around to respond on his behalf.

---

I wonder if modern ecological science supports Mr. Bierce's point.

As I understand it, if the oceans die the people die too.

They don't give a toss about what ecological science has to say. People drowning is enough a reason for these guys to make a case against any possible deity.

[The Grand Nudger]

Either of you two god botherers ever wonder why the god who made us by magic from clay would need to make oceans to support us?

In any case, it is absolutely ridiculous to be amazed or surprised by the fact that everything a creature needs to exist, exists, when we observe that the creature does, in fact, exist. It would be more wondrous, and more indicative of something unknown, if we found fish living on a planet with no oceans, no water. Same goes for man.

Not that it matters, in the end, since a persons rejection of a religion isn't actually an argument over which superpowers a god does or doesn't have. Let's just assume that Tinkergod busted out his wrenches and twisted all the things just so.

So what?

[The Architect Of Fate]

A small percentage is irrelevant to whether the Earth is fine-tuned to us or not,

Actually it is 

 fine-tuning also includes giving men the tools to deal with these limitations, we obviously are handling the two thirds of the unliveable ocean pretty well.

Nah humans figured all that out and again if it were fine tuned for us we should be able to breathe underwater and drink sea water .This is just ad hoc nonesense as you will declare anything a result of fine tuning .

And your Bierce guy unfortunately died a long time ago, so you might wanna stick around to respond on his behalf.

Yeah so did your pedo prophet so it's irrelevant

---

Either of you two god botherers ever wonder why the god who made us by magic from clay would need to make oceans to support us?

In any case, it is absolutely ridiculous to be amazed or surprised by the fact that everything a creature needs to exist, exists, when we observe that the creature does, in fact, exist.  It would be more wondrous, and more indicative of something unknown, if we found fish living on a planet with no oceans, no water.  Same goes for man.

Not that it matters, in the end, since a persons rejection of a religion isn't actually an argument over which superpowers a god does or doesn't have.  Let's just assume that Tinkergod busted out his wrenches and twisted all the things just so.

So what?

The fact said god put so much extra effort into creating "tools" to deal with hostile environments when he simply could have made us perfect for them is absurd . The religious mind will conjure any excuse no matter how out there to deny reality.

---

I'm not really understanding what you're driving at.  The quote from Bierce is intended to point out that the Earth clearly wasn't made for Man, since we can't live on more than a small percentage of it. If you don't understand why this is important, you might take it up with Mr. Bierce (if you can find him).

Boru

I wonder if modern ecological science supports Mr. Bierce's point.

As I understand it, if the oceans die the people die too.

Yes they do 

Once again aside he point we still can' live in the ocean which makes no sense if earth is fine tuned for us rather then fish

---

You have an awful fallacy right there, ocean guy. Since when size mattered? Think of the microchip in your computer, it's the main reason why we can safely assert the computer is fine tuned.

Nope no fallacy if your analogy worked we would have gills and the ability to drink salt water and the ocean is not safe for us try living under water . 

And if you think a fine tuned universe is equivalent to drops of wine falling from the sky, you're kindly asked to review the literature on this question.

No he thinks a world that was fine tuned for us would mean he whole thing is and nothing in the literature supports your nonesense 

Emotion matters, you know. Would a deity reveal itself by making its existence "overwhelming", that is, its creatures can feel the sense of purpose in their everyday life, or, give them pages of rigorous proofs refuting every line of thought any skeptic has about why god isn't there?

More excuses for your feels ove facts 

Mocking our innate tendency towards belief is ridiculous, and you should feel ashame of yourself for reducing it to some kind of"common logical fallacy", as if ordinary people -who deserve to know god too- can follow sophisticated arguments in the first place.

So more excuses and it is a fallacy no matter how butthurt you get about it .

We have an innate instinct of survival so that when a predator is around, we run. When we feel the innate curiosity to explore, we learn. When we feel strong emotions towards a person, we marry them. And when we feel overwhelmed with our sense of wonder, we fucking believe.

All aside the point 


So you just rambled a lot to cover your fallacy

---

They don't give a toss about what ecological science has to say

Yes i do and i don't support your crap 

 People drowning is enough a reason for these guys to make a case against any possible deity.

Your last pats a strawman and yes drowning makes no sense if the earth was made for us and no" tools" aren't a counter there is no reason we should need said tools .

---

In the end it's all ad hoc you can invent any excuse to make the world fine tuned no matter how out there, And the fact this absurd theory includes "tools" makes it even more so .

[R00tKiT]

Either of you two god botherers ever wonder why the god who made us by magic from clay would need to make oceans to support us?

You can keep wondering about all kinds of stuff being not the way you think it should be if we were indeed fine tuned. It all boils down to : fine tuned universe = heaven. And that's absolutely wrong because one can't justly live in heaven without deserving it, that's what a just God would do, and that's exactly what you have.

A just God wouldn't give one heaven a priori, he would give a reasonably flawed world. The next thing depends on one's performance in it

In any case, it is absolutely ridiculous to be amazed or surprised by the fact that everything a creature needs to exist, exists, when we observe that the creature does, in fact, exist.  It would be more wondrous, and more indicative of something unknown, if we found fish living on a planet with no oceans, no water.  Same goes for man.

Everything is surprising, we just get used to stuff, and that's the real issue. The clever thing to do is to continue to wonder despite the fact that we figured out how certain things work.

---

Seems we’ve drifted a long way away from Klorophyll demonstrating the existence of his god.

This topic is not about the existence of God, nevertheless I already answered your request pages ago.

@Klorophyll

Why should I believe a god exists? What are the reasons that should persuade me, or any other rational adult?

I think what we know so far about the universe being tuned for us, makes anyone who claims we came here by chance absolutey dishonest. If I remember correctly, you already seem to agree that something can't come from nothing. Since we are mortal beings, and there has to be always something, doesn't that warrant then an eternal cause, at least, whose properties can be inferred from its effects?