|
WLC on why Einstein is wrong
|
He says that there is no such thing as einsteins relativity and lorenztianism rocks. And gods frame of reference is the right one while all other ones is an illusion. Why is that so?
Because god exists. Kalam supports gods existance. Relativity conflicts with kalam and kalam has to be right because god exists. 
Wow, he is the perfect illustration what can happen if you give a psychopath with an agenda a rhetorics class. What a lying piece of shit, it's astonishing.
(March 22, 2014 at 11:50 am)tor Wrote:(March 22, 2014 at 11:49 am)Alex K Wrote: Wow, he is the perfect illustration what can happen if you give a psychopath with an agenda a rhetorics class. What a lying piece of shit, it's astonishing. The way he acts as an apologist for genocide and violence in the bible without so much as to raise an eyebrow is very chilling, including his insistence that animals are non-feeling mechanisms. Something is wrong with the guy. 
WLC should stop sniffing glue.
I've always felt that there's nothing special or unique about Craig and his arguments. He looks and looks for things that support what he already believes to be true. In other words, he isn't looking for truth. He's looking for validation of a worldview that God has already told him is the right one.
Other than being better read and knowing words like 'cosmological', how is Craig's approach any different from that of a 5th century Welsh peasant with garlic on his breath and pigsty on his feet whose reaction to uncomfortable notions is to stick his fingers in his ears, squinch up his eyes and shout, 'I'M NOT LISTENING! NEENER NEENER!!' (he'd be compelled to shout it in Welsh, of course, but you get the gist) WLC is a boil on the buttocks of philosophical inquiry. Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
 (March 22, 2014 at 10:08 am)tor Wrote: I lold at 3:49 The "A Theory of Time" has a 1984 Orwellian ring to it. I remember where Winston was being tormented at the end of the book. The primary point of the dialog was that the past wasn't a place where previous events were still being acted out. The past therefore didn't really exist. Therefore, the past could be anything that The Party claimed it was. History could be written to suit the needs of The Party. It would not be a lie because the past wasn't really real anyway.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too." ... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept "(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question" ... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist (March 22, 2014 at 11:14 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If the past, present, and future all exist at the same time...wouldn't that mean free-will is an illusion? You've already made the future choice, your just not conscious of it yet.  RE: WLC on why Einstein is wrong
March 22, 2014 at 2:58 pm
(This post was last modified: March 22, 2014 at 3:02 pm by Mudhammam.)
(March 22, 2014 at 2:30 pm)Heywood Wrote:(March 22, 2014 at 11:14 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If the past, present, and future all exist at the same time...wouldn't that mean free-will is an illusion? What? The "future" already exists? I'm not going to pretend that I have a firm grasp on Einstein's theory of relativity but I have a creeping suspicion that this is not a correct (or coherent) conclusion. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
