(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Objections to a fact are not a refutation.
Shows your incapability to differentiate between objections and refutations.
(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Again its a foregone conclusion that my adversaries in this debate will always claim my facts and arguments are 'refuted'.
Not unless they have actually been refuted - which, as a matter of fact - they have.
(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Its the notion that a series of events or a phenomena could be neither the result of plan or happenstance that is nonsensical.
What's nonsensical is you incapacity to comprehend that that would be the default position.
(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: If we were debating before an impartial audience your belief would get a laugh. But of course none of your fellow atheists will call you out on such a absurd claim.
The only one being laughed at is you. And the only place you won't be laughed at for your moronic beliefs is in the company of similarly deluded theists. So much for impartial audience.
(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: No, its assumed to be true.
Are you now trying to suggest that the forces of nature are sentient?
(March 5, 2013 at 1:27 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Moreover you just contradicted your contention that our existence and that of the universe was neither by happenstance or plan.
No, I haven't.
