On another forum this fellow kept trying to get me to respond to his cheesy ontological arguments. I sarcastically called his arguments "little limericks". This week I have pondered this and realized ontological arguments are as valid as limericks. So I wrote one and invite you all to do the same.
With Ontology a god is proposed
Using logic that is loosely composed
Replace but one word
With one more absurd
And a Teapot is easily imposed
This may be the worst thing I have ever posted so I expect some rotten eggs.
With Ontology a god is proposed
Using logic that is loosely composed
Replace but one word
With one more absurd
And a Teapot is easily imposed
This may be the worst thing I have ever posted so I expect some rotten eggs.
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
