RE: On the nature of evidence.
October 26, 2014 at 8:05 am
(This post was last modified: October 26, 2014 at 8:08 am by Cyberman.)
(October 26, 2014 at 2:48 am)trmof Wrote: I have specifically asked several times how one would go about testing for the existence of God scientifically and have received no answer. If that's your standard of proof that's your prerogative. It is not shared by me or most people.
Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on this one. Several of us, myself included, have asked repeatedly and specifically for you to give us something about the nature of your god that we can examine. Each time you've dodged around with "that’s not what my god is", constantly moving your god out of the spotlight so it cannot be tested. Worse, you've tried to shut down discussion of these things every time someone's tried to respond to you. That's not going to engender much confidence in any evidence you think you have outside of concluding you don't have any. At least, none that you feel would stand up to scrutiny.
You spoke of miracle claims; fine, let's examine those. Give us some of the miracles that you feel best support the existence of a god and why you think that.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
