(June 15, 2013 at 5:08 pm)Maelstrom Wrote:(June 15, 2013 at 5:01 pm)Pandas United Wrote: Yes, clearly I am just making these things up.
From what I can understand after perusing the argument, it is merely a con job upon which the crux is that the existence of necessary things do not require explanation.
I love how quickly you overlooked those peer-reviewed articles I attached. Now jumping to the next objection.
"the existence of necessary things do not require explanation." Uhhh.. yes, clearly. Otherwise they wouldn't be "necessary." Have you ever studied metaphysics? This is very basic stuff.
All generalizations are false.