Proof that God exists

[Amarok]

What?!?  Problems with logic?  Dispense with the illustrations or can the allegations.   You're talking out your backside and doing a mighty poor job convincing me to hang around with this unsubstantiated indictment and slanderous censure.

You have trouble with logic, Agnosty. 

All of us do, really. Our brains are programmed with type 1 thinking, and we have to LEARN logic. I still commit fallacies. Even G.E. Moore, a famous philosopher has been accused of fallacious reasoning. 

When you said holding the position "2+2=4" was not "objective" because one is not open to other possibilities, I knew that you both misunderstood logic and had an eccentric definition for the word "objective." 

The good news is, it's fixable. If you manage to stick around, I will personally do my best to show you where your logic fails--not to be a dick... to help you.

More unsubstantiated conjecture.

You accused science of confirmation bias because "it uses empiricism to prove empiricism." I told you that was false: one uses logic to arrive at empiricism. I even recommended Locke's "Essay Concerning Human Understanding" which explains the process from the ground up, and you were like "I read Locke once; he didn't impress me much." Or something like that. Well, obviously that's your loss.

These aren't insults. These are not conjecture. You need to work on logic. You need to read up on the foundations of empiricism. I was really exited to see that you were posting stuff arguing for a sort of "true agnosticism" rather than "atheist leaning" because it's an interesting position. If you learned some basic logic like burden of proof among other things, you could really add to the discussions.

And stop taking things so personally.

To be fair empiricism proves itself by consistently demonstrating itself . or 

---

I think the better question is how agnosty comes up with these brilliant objections to our dogmatically religious scientism.  Did somebody accidentally CC him on the conspiracy mailing list?

Indeed using logic and empiricism to object to logic and empiricism.