If

[Surgenator]

Shifting of the burden of proof and argument from ignorance. Your lack of understanding of the physical world is not evidence for a spiritual world.

Wait a minute sur.
You are totally changing the subject.

I'm going back to the original topic. The abstract vs physical conversation is happening lower in the post.

You're not choosing the good and cutting the bad. You're choosing with what you agree with and ignoring what you don't. It's called dishonesty, a pigeon tactic.

If you really think so you should show me something that i choose that doesn't make sense.

It "doesn't make sense" because it doesn't agree with your conclusion. That is where your dishonest lies.

You mean how I point out that testimonials are not evidence and give the UFO's as an example. So the testimonials coming from NDE's, magic crystals, or UFOs are all the same, they are NOT EVIDENCE.

Wrong again sur
It is by selecting the good that got some value and rejecting the bad that we can advance in our progress.
You can well please yourself and carry on the way you like.
That's your life after all.

As stated above, your 'good' is what agrees with you, and your 'bad' is what doesn't agree with you; even though, the 'evidence' is of the same flavor, testimonials. Dishonesty at its finest.

I never declare that NDEs are real.
I always said that i believe that NDEs are real and that make a big big difference.

So stop referring to NDE's when I ask for evidence. Where is your evidence?

The reason why i say........I BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE REAL instead of saying THEY ARE REAL is because materialistic people pretend physical evidence about something that is not physical.

You believe them to be real because YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND how the physical world can explain it. It is the definition of ignorance. Your lack of understanding is not evidence for something else.

And like the religious people you despise, you don't show any evidence for your belief. So I reply that your belief is unjustified.

Just answered above.

Adding another claim to explain hide your ignorance is not an explanation. Where is your evidence that the physical world cannot explain non-physical objects? Did you consider the non-physical objects are just an abstraction of the physical objects, i.e. the physical objects create the abstract objects? No? ... But you think abstract objects can cause physical objects, why?

You admit that computers cannot exist without microprocessors. Your only objection is that tools (computers are tools) are used by someone. Well duh. However, you still cannot build a tool from the top-down, you cannot build a house from the top-down. What can you build from the top down? Where is your evidence for it.

Changing argument again.
What this has got to do with what we were talking about only Santa knows.
Typical of someone who can not admit his failing.

Is this your new strategy, claim I change the argument without realizing that I'm trying to maintain the original argument. Please, try to follow.

So you know for sure that analogies are only related to theories and not to practice?

Actually, neither

Actually both.

The dictionary is your friend. You should use it more often.

Silly again sur.
Analogies are comparisons.
You take two similar things in order to see how they compare one another.

Silly pigeon, your missing the imitation part which is very important.

Imitation comparisons and improvement are all part and parcel of coming up with something better.

And that doesn't make them analogies but models, pigeon.

Silly 3 times now.
You are just declaring that in the past they were practicing intuitional science.
Sorry pal but your declaration need EVIDENCE.
Without evidence your statement is the usual pile o'crap.

They definitely weren't practicing physical science. How would you know that they didn't practice intuitional science? Because they didn't come to the same conclusions as you? Please, elaborate on more on your dishonesty.

You allege that i did say that they were not practicing intuitional practices.
I never said that.
I said to you.........how do you know that they were practicing intuitional science?
They may they may not.
We do not know that is why i suggest you to stop speculating whether they did or did not.

Congratulations, you started to understand one more thing, "you cannot claim something happen because something else didn't happen." Now lets try to apply this concept to your bullshitalogy. If you don't know how the physical world can do something, that doesn't mean a spiritual world is needed. If someone says they don't fell pain when they stick sharp objects in their mouths, that doesn't mean consciousness is outside the brain. etc...

Dictionaries are like cars or any other physical-material-mental thing.

No they are not like cars. They tell people the meaning of words society has agreed upon. If you want to communicate within society, you have to use the words correctly. Otherwise, you only sound like an idiot.

Fool.

Back at you.

All this bullshit of yours does not answer the question.
I did ask you in which way you expect the burden of prove about something abstract.
In a physical way?
In a abstract way or in which way?

The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. You make lots of claims and provide terrible if any justification for them. Plus, your follow up questions don't make any sense. Most likely, you assumed something thinking I assumed the same thing.

Aren't you sick to recite the same rosary about the burden of proof and answer the question instead.

Yes, I'm almost sick of always addressing your lack of understanding basic logic.

I already gave two examples where this statement of your is false. Please stop repeating it. You're becoming boring.

False statement?
What is false?
It sound like the usual way to avoid answering my questions?

Your false statement, "According to the laws of this universe if you insert a knife into your flesh you are bound to feel pain."
It is false because it doesn't account for the possibility of dead nerve endings or the people are just ignoring the pain. You'll be a moron to claim you cannot kill nerve endings, but I wouldn't be surprise if you do. You'll be a moron to claim people cannot ignore pain because I ignored headaches, knee scrapes, back aches, etc... So your argument is invalid because it ignores there obvious explanations.