I don't think any of my opponents in this debate actually subscribe to the notion the universe had to be as it is, there isn't a shred of evidence to support that belief but my detractors only demand evidence of things they don't believe, theories that support their belief as in this case, don't require a shred of evidence. They also would like the triers of this case to believe that alternate theories minus any evidence and which they don't subscribe to somehow refute the theistic theory.
You'll have to get your arguments straight. You can't argue that the universe may have to be as it is and at the same time deny it must be compatitble with conscious life. If it has to be the way it is...then it would have to be compatible with conscious life. But I suspect somehow you're going to say that's wrong.
Of course it would be up to those listening to our respective arguments to decide who has the best of it. I know you wish it was just up to you; we already know your opinion, it comes with the label atheist. The lines of evidence I have submitted comport with the belief we are the result of a Creator. Your rebuttals at best only hope to show how such things might have come about apart from a Creator. These rebuttals would be great for fellow atheists totally convinced no God exists. Not sure how persuasive impartial folks would find them to be.
Your refutations are a pathetic joke to me. There just a sop to your own ego.
I have been in IT for over 20 years and I have taken apart hundreds of laptops (and put them back together)
No comment...it speaks for itself.
Quote:Except, there is plenty of evidence for that the universe had to be what it is, not the least of which is the fact that we do not know of any other way to could've been. Your theistic theory is refuted by your very own logic - you don't have any shred of evidence to support it.
You'll have to get your arguments straight. You can't argue that the universe may have to be as it is and at the same time deny it must be compatitble with conscious life. If it has to be the way it is...then it would have to be compatible with conscious life. But I suspect somehow you're going to say that's wrong.
Quote:Your so called evidence supports all other theories equally - so there is no reason for us to pick yours over the others.
Of course it would be up to those listening to our respective arguments to decide who has the best of it. I know you wish it was just up to you; we already know your opinion, it comes with the label atheist. The lines of evidence I have submitted comport with the belief we are the result of a Creator. Your rebuttals at best only hope to show how such things might have come about apart from a Creator. These rebuttals would be great for fellow atheists totally convinced no God exists. Not sure how persuasive impartial folks would find them to be.
Quote:I thought this was supposed to be new evidence, but you are simply repeating refuted arguments over and over again.
Your refutations are a pathetic joke to me. There just a sop to your own ego.
Quote:When was the last time you opened your laptop?
I have been in IT for over 20 years and I have taken apart hundreds of laptops (and put them back together)
Quote:Nope. A conclusion doesn't necessarily have to be true to be valid.
No comment...it speaks for itself.
