Sup, im a christian

[fr0d0]

Then your definitions are BOLLOCKS until such time as you can demonstrate a means by which you can validatably differentiate your god from something that doesn't exist!

Haha LMAO Yeah right. Unrefutable logic isn't enough for you is it

Not when the very same system of logic justify almost anything you want! That's the fucking problem! That's why empirical evidence is NECESSARY!

So you're scared to consider logic because you're afraid of the unknown? Is that your logic for denying it?

Thought is NOT non-physical for the reasons I have already given primarily because thought is UTTERLY reliant on infrastructure (nerves/brain) and can be shown to change significantly when that infrastructure is damaged. To claim thought is somehow un-physical is exactly the same crap those metaphysical twat-heads claim when they insist min d is separate from body ... ALL the available evidence indicates otherwise!!!!

Oh yeah - because the brain is physical the yes OF COURSE thoughts are physical too - how didn't I see that? .....erm... because IT'S A COMPLETELY IDIOTIC CONCLUSION TO DRAW perhaps??? Hmmm... MAYBE!!!

Or maybe ... you just prefer to believe the usual bollocks you theists always fucking believe!

Come on then brainache ... YOU tell me why it is that there is never any real, validatable evidence for any of these things you like to claim? You tell me why it is (and this is the question you constant side-step) why the things you claim exist, the things that you claim are non-evidential and cannot be proven by the usual methods show such a consistent correlation with things that DON'T EXIST!

Kyu

Well just to consider logic would be a start Kyu. After that you can start thinking what your opinion is on the questions at hand.

Want testable and reliable evidence, that satisfies the rigourous standards of the scientific method?

They are in consistent correlation with things that don't exist but the logic of them distinguishes them as rational conclusions. Simples.