(December 18, 2014 at 10:35 am)ChadWooters Wrote: The call for "testable and verifiable" evidence places your request squarely within the scope of natural science. The god of classical theism is easily deduced from reason applied to common experience.
All you've said here is that you have an argument and it works, you didn't present it. Sorry, but "I'm right, and reason supports me!" is not a position we need to take seriously.
Now, would this "reason" be the same Aquinas, argument from ignorance, prime mover crap you've given in the past, and had debunked over and over? Because, you know, I'm happy to repeat myself on taking that shit through the wringer, if you're desperate to keep clinging to long superseded, unjustified philosophical nothings.
![Dodgy Dodgy](https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/dodgy.gif)
Quote: Science takes as given the things about which philosophy inquires, specifically causality and the recognition of universals.
No, science understands that presuming an answer without evidence merely because there isn't some better answer is an argument from ignorance. Something you've apparently missed out on; "you can't account for this, you just take it as a given, therefore my god claims are true!" is breathtakingly fallacious. And if that's not what you're saying, then why bring this up at all?
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!