Esquilax Wrote:So, ladies and gentlemen, this is what we now know: Mickiel doesn't know what evidence is, what claims are, or what the basis of debate and the burden of proof is. He doesn't know what logical fallacies are, and he doesn't care enough to look into any of this.
And so the question we now all must ask is this: why should we continue to argue with a person who literally does not understand how argumentation works, and is perfectly willing to disrespect us by wallowing in his ignorance and pretending that it's superior to logic?
Well I do my best. One poster here said he needs more to accept that god is real, I understand that; its not a simple x=y kind of thing; the evidence is empirical in some areas, more visible by experience or personal observation, such as answered prayer or intervention by unseen things, like you should have died in that accident but came away unscratched; or common sense - things which can be independent of specialized knowledge like science, such as Consciousness only can be derived from consciousness, life from life, humans from human and so on.
But yet Can god be deduced from a mathematical equation? I tried to show yes, by using the common sense that the universe is designed to be just what it is; every position of the planets around earth had to be exact, especially the distance between it and the sun. No closer no further, it had to be arranged by an arranger, a designer who mathematically deduced those distances; that was labeled as no evidence. I disagreed with that as well.
Can god be proven by laws? Well yes, gravity, transmutation, polarity, cause and effect, vibration or gestation; all laws we agree exist, yet the common sense of understanding that laws are formulated by a law giver, even the laws of man, is ignored and even those great laws are being transferred over to being created and put in place by random unorganized occurance and senseless nature, as if those things have creative minds.
The question is why do I continue to argue?
The answer is I got nothing better to do.
