So Drew, I think a better question is, why should anyone bother debating you at all, when everyone can just go to the "suppose science proves god exists?" thread and A: Watch you get your ass kicked all around the debating floor, and B: Observe each and every dishonest tactic you seem to pride yourself on using? What would be the point?
Well, okay: how about a metastable universe that existed eternally and had no beginning or an end? You're claiming that it's possible with god, after all.
Or the multiple worlds hypothesis, where our universe would have sprung up as a reaction to a divergence in any number of parallel realities? No random happenstance there, and also no god.
That took me about thirty seconds of honest thought, but as we've all seen, you're more interested in gross simplifications that aid your single interpretation over the actual truth.
Quote:You are under the delusion that because you say something, that makes it so. What are these other options you refer to? If you want to claim I am spouting a false dichotomy then man up and say something other than because I say so.
Well, okay: how about a metastable universe that existed eternally and had no beginning or an end? You're claiming that it's possible with god, after all.
Or the multiple worlds hypothesis, where our universe would have sprung up as a reaction to a divergence in any number of parallel realities? No random happenstance there, and also no god.
That took me about thirty seconds of honest thought, but as we've all seen, you're more interested in gross simplifications that aid your single interpretation over the actual truth.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
