(January 7, 2010 at 9:57 pm)Pippy Wrote: I did not make a claim about wich I carry the silly burden of proof.Statement declaring certain expectations and rules do not apply to such without giving specific counter examples. Resolution - ignore and deal with the arguments presented.
(January 7, 2010 at 9:57 pm)Pippy Wrote: And it's funny to see both of you misunderstand my point entirely.Not certain how we got to declaring in a reasonable manner that an entire work of literature can be assigned a binary statement. Your fondness for straw man attacks is impressive - and tiring.
I'm not talking about god's existence, I am only describing what I see as the 'the bible is wrong, so there is no god' fallacy.
(January 7, 2010 at 9:57 pm)Pippy Wrote: I got the number 6,000,000,000 not from my ass, but my head. It means that there can be up to and including one idea of god for every soul on the planet, and therefore disproving the bible does not mean there is no god, only no biblical god.Only in your simplified world could every thinking being on this planet have roughly one idea of a deity, while redefining deities to be included in set deity, and defining human beings to have a set state at any point in time (no compartmentalization here folks).
It doesn't have anything to do with the flat earth, or with universal truth being measured in mass appeal, I am not sure where you got that.
I (attempted) to show you the argumentum ad populum fallacy you made by spuriously running a test case, in which the (vast) body of human beings to ever exist at one point may have somehow assumed the world was flat at any point in time, even though the Earth is /not/ flat. No matter how many variations of that idea or sheer numbers of raw ideas believing in the flatness of the Earth, the Earth remained round.
(January 7, 2010 at 9:57 pm)Pippy Wrote: It is fallacious if the only reason you are an atheist is because Christians bug you, and the Bible is silly, and your 15 and sullen. I am not saying that any of you fit that bill, but that someone somewhere does, and their choices are based on fallacy. A+B does not equal C.
You asked me to explain the fallacy I referenced, and I have now twice. Thank you.
Non sequitur - your statement does not make sense. By those reasons alone, there is no cause for a human to change because their emotions or decisions may not be sound. Once again, a simplified view of human nature.
