Quick Poll - Do you believe in God?

[Little Rik]

The facts speak for themselves.

Atheists try to say that NDEs are not real.
Total fail.  
Atheists could not explain what philosophy is all about.
Total fail.
Argument after argument atheists fail to win a single argument.
Total fail so why should I be guilty of bias?  

Even if for the sake of argument your judgments above were true, that has zilch to do with whether or not you are engaging in confirmation bias.

"He did it first" or "they do it to" are middle school-level "arguments" that demonstrate nothing.

The question is, do you begin with a conclusion and cherry pick or interpret evidence to support the conclusion, not?

Everything started with a joke when I said that my time is precious.
After that JackRussell wrote.......I don't know 'bout precious, but your time spent here is certainly pointless...........
That was not a joke so if someone can't get my jokes then I have the right to reply the way I feel and that way was..........Not at all Jack.

It is like hitting the center most of the time.
That is a real satisfaction..........

If from here you need to turn all in a serious intellectual lesson then I am afraid I will leave the last word with you.
Just not worth to continue.  

Beside is more likely that a crowd of people that say the same thing is more reliable then a single person

No. It's a data point, of course, but only a minor one. And most people have been wrong about many things throughout history. Flat earth. Bleeding and leeches. Any number of things. You are engaging in argument from popularity here.

Sure, that however doesn't always apply.
As I already said in most cases when more people follow a certain way the more is likely that that is the best way to follow.
Likely doesn't mean 100% sure.
It just mean that the probabilities are stronger.  


There always are exceptions to the rule.
Winning against the odds bring a fortune but fortunes are a rarity.  

---

Please stop feeding the troll (and you're being far too charitable calling those arguments 'middle school level'). This is a human being incapable of understanding the infinite regress problem of 'who created the creator'. Like, they literally cannot even comprehend that this presents an issue with the logic they're saying we are ignoring.

             

Hhhhhhmmmm, someone talking about logic?

It sound like the guy who failed again and again with all the arguments that he presented.