RE: Conversational Challenges
November 12, 2015 at 12:26 pm
(This post was last modified: November 12, 2015 at 12:44 pm by robvalue.)
Heya, welcome to the forum
You've come to the right place, we love dismantling theists' arguments here.
No one is claiming "we came from a rock". This is confusing evolution and abiogenesis. We evolved from other life forms. The study of how life originated in the first place, abiogenesis, has not yet totally found an explanation. But they are getting very close. It seems like being "alive" is more of a sliding scale than a binary state, so going from a rock to what we generally consider a life form is not even being proposed. It appears to have happened very gradually. And no one has even said "a rock" is necessarily what it started from either.
Not having the exact answer to a question such as how life originated is not an invitation to make up your own unsupported explanations.
No one knows. Several hypotheses have been put forward, but as yet the evidence has not been found to validate any of them. Again, not having the answer doesn't mean any made up nonsense becomes valid.
Wrong. It wouldn't be called the Big Bang Theory if it wasn't supported by evidence. Your friend has obviously done no research into the subject. Whether you personally can prove it is irrelevant, if that's what he means.
(Edit: as Thump says below, prove is the wrong word to use when dealing with physical reality; you can only demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt with evidence. And logical arguments alone are not evidence.)
You don't. There is no need to. The person who makes a claim, such as "God exists" has the burden of proof for providing evidence for that claim. If no evidence has been presented for or against the claim, all that means is that the answer is unknown. It doesn't mean it's true. Using this method to try and prove that God exists is called the argument from ignorance, the most common logical fallacy (error of thinking). Check out my website here for more details on why it's a terrible argument.
You'll find other awful arguments all over the forum, getting smashed up daily by those versed in logic. If you have any other specific ones, let us know!
You may want to check out the rest of my website for more information on common logical fallacies, which are usually the weak link in theistic arguments.

(November 12, 2015 at 12:08 pm)Oceanian Wrote: "How do you explain how you come from a rock?"
No one is claiming "we came from a rock". This is confusing evolution and abiogenesis. We evolved from other life forms. The study of how life originated in the first place, abiogenesis, has not yet totally found an explanation. But they are getting very close. It seems like being "alive" is more of a sliding scale than a binary state, so going from a rock to what we generally consider a life form is not even being proposed. It appears to have happened very gradually. And no one has even said "a rock" is necessarily what it started from either.
Not having the exact answer to a question such as how life originated is not an invitation to make up your own unsupported explanations.
Quote:"What came before the big bang?"
No one knows. Several hypotheses have been put forward, but as yet the evidence has not been found to validate any of them. Again, not having the answer doesn't mean any made up nonsense becomes valid.
Quote:"You can't proof the big bang occured!
Wrong. It wouldn't be called the Big Bang Theory if it wasn't supported by evidence. Your friend has obviously done no research into the subject. Whether you personally can prove it is irrelevant, if that's what he means.
(Edit: as Thump says below, prove is the wrong word to use when dealing with physical reality; you can only demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt with evidence. And logical arguments alone are not evidence.)
Quote:"How do you proof god did not exist?"
You don't. There is no need to. The person who makes a claim, such as "God exists" has the burden of proof for providing evidence for that claim. If no evidence has been presented for or against the claim, all that means is that the answer is unknown. It doesn't mean it's true. Using this method to try and prove that God exists is called the argument from ignorance, the most common logical fallacy (error of thinking). Check out my website here for more details on why it's a terrible argument.
You'll find other awful arguments all over the forum, getting smashed up daily by those versed in logic. If you have any other specific ones, let us know!
You may want to check out the rest of my website for more information on common logical fallacies, which are usually the weak link in theistic arguments.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum