What is "FAITH"

[genkaus]

Still, one more problem.
An apple, under white light, is red.
Water, under white light, is blue? Not exactly. If the water is deep enough, yes, and, depending on how deep the water is, some samples of water are bluer than others. To say 'water is blue' is an assumption based on certain samples of water. If we have a shallow pool, the water remains colorless.

This isn't a good example of the whole being different from the parts because it is not a definite attribute of a particular whole.
It would be if you could say, "When water comes together, is becomes 90% blue."
What we have is, "When enough water is arranged deep enough, it becomes a particular shade of blue based on how deep it is."
That would be like saying, "Bricks are short, but when they are piled on top of one another, they become tall."

Your unending stupidity is getting a bit tiring. You have given no new arguments but are simply parroting the same thing over and over again without even realizing that it does nothing to undermine the facts.

So, let's keep going, shall we?

The pool, under white light, is blue. The water is not. A good example of whole not having attributes of its parts.

Bricks are short. Wall made of bricks is not. Another good example of whole not having attributes of its parts.

Salt not sharing the attributes of sodium or chlorine - another good example.

A machine made of unbreakable parts is breakable - another good example.

If you can't even recognize a simple and obvious logical fallacy,how do you expect to engage in a rational debate? Or if you have recognized it and are simply repeating the same pointless evasions over and over again simply yo avoid admitting that you're wrong - again, what's the point of debate?

You are using the fallacy of composition to justify that universe has a cause. You assume that everything within it is caused - not necessarily true and certainly not true for all aspects - which means universe itself was caused. That is a fallacy of composition. It is known and accepted. And rather than acknowledging that well-known fact, you have led this thread into a long-winded pointless side-debate by inanely repeating what causes water to be blue.

But then, you are the one trying to prove that the universe had a cause. If you want to waste your time in side-debates - I'll humor you. And since you are simply repeating what you've said many times already - I'll do the same.

Under white light, water is colorless. Under white light a pool - which is a body of water made entirely of water - is blue. The whole does not have the attributes of parts. Ergo, fallacy of composition.

Now, go ahead and tell me once more exactly why the pool is blue.