An unorthodox belief in God.

[mickiel]

I is disappoint!

Stimbo! its not your fault! We seemed to get the saddest group of newbies thusfar, lately.

I consider my views as refreshing, not sad.

They have refreshed me.

---

Uh-oh, I think I broke him...

You did not break me, you threatened me. When a mod tells you, " For the second time stop trolling these people", it means whatever you did, if you do it a third time; you're done! Now what I do is post my views, back them up with the information I accept , and post my disagreements; IF that is considered trolling, then I am doomed here and am out of place.

This place is not going to " convert me to atheism", and I hold no interest in converting anyone to my views. If you want only scientist to post here who have generally accepted professional papers , then I am course am not welcome.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that the vast majority of the Universe, including significant proportions of the Earth, are uninhabitable without techonological aid -- or at all.

In other words, you're practing selection bias.

The puddle is always amazed at how well the hole has been shaped to fit its water.

Why would god want any wherelse inhabitable, when his focus is on us here on earth? You miss another evidence of him right there. If life is random chance, how come no other area in this vastness got so lucky?

So your answer is egotism of the highest level combined with (another) bare assertion.

Evidence there is no life anywhere in the universe?

---

I is disappoint!

Stimbo! its not your fault! We seemed to get the saddest group of newbies thusfar, lately.

I consider my views as refreshing, not sad.

They have refreshed me.

It's just a shame they're all entirely fallacious and thus fail to contribute to anything beyond a personal level.

[JesusHChrist]

Hey mikiel,

God doesn't exist. Jesus and friends is historical fiction and you're full of shit.

I can make bare assertions too.

[Mister Agenda]

The question is why do I continue to argue?

The answer is I got nothing better to do.

The question is why you careen blithely on without showing the slightest indication you understand replies to your posts.

[mickiel]

Why would god want any wherelse inhabitable, when his focus is on us here on earth? You miss another evidence of him right there. If life is random chance, how come no other area in this vastness got so lucky?

So your answer is egotism of the highest level combined with (another) bare assertion.

Evidence there is no life anywhere in the universe?

---

I consider my views as refreshing, not sad.

They have refreshed me.

It's just a shame they're all entirely fallacious and thus fail to contribute to anything beyond a personal level.

No its not that they don't contribute or is not evidence, its really my evidence is not accepted HERE! I can list books as evidence, websites, but if they are unaccepted here, then you can label it anything you wish. I can't give you scientific papers that agree with me, because most scientist don't.

I can give things like this;
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/cosmoconstant.html

To show earth was suited for man; Or this;

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/see-why-earth...-for-life/

This is not going to be accepted here; hey just reject it, disagree with it, but don't accuse me of trolling, I believe everything I post. Don't try and intimidate me.

[Silver]

its really my evidence is not accepted HERE!

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So your answer is egotism of the highest level combined with (another) bare assertion.

Evidence there is no life anywhere in the universe?

---

It's just a shame they're all entirely fallacious and thus fail to contribute to anything beyond a personal level.

No its not that they don't contribute or is not evidence, its really my evidence is not accepted HERE! I can list books as evidence, websites, but if they are unaccepted here, then you can label it anything you wish. I can't give you scientific papers that agree with me, because most scientist don't.

I can give things like this;
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/cosmoconstant.html

To show earth was suited for man; Or this;

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/see-why-earth...-for-life/

This is not going to be accepted here; hey just reject it, disagree with it, but don't accuse me of trolling, I believe everything I post. Don't try and intimidate me.

With respect, Mick, I disagree entirely.

The reason they're not accepted as 'evidence' is because they're not, either because they're demonstrably not evidence (fallacious reasoning, bare assertions etc) or because the evidence is demonstrably false (Earth being uniquely set up to accommodate life. This is false on two grounds, one being that no time frame is set [habitable for life in which period? Which life?] and 2 because the vast majority of the Earth is in fact very inhospitable to life).

And please, sir, do not accuse me of trying to 'intimidate' you. I am doing no such thing, rather just voicing my objections and attempting to explain to you why using a logical fallacy does not equate to a sound, evidenced argument.

[mickiel]

The question is why do I continue to argue?

The answer is I got nothing better to do.

The question is why you careen blithely on without showing the slightest indication you understand replies to your posts.

I completely understand them, and mostly disagree with them. You get that: DISAGREE with them. Not ignore them; hey, just because a person disagrees with you, does not mean they are stupid or ignorant; I get treated here exactly like I do at Christian forums; the mods intimidate and threaten you, you get called a troll for disagreeing, your evidence is completely dismissed as no evidence, you get cursed at, ridiculed and they want you gone.

No difference at all between the two; theist and atheist will persecute you if you do not join their thinking.

That's just how it is.

[Mister Agenda]

Are you telling us you think Abraham was buried there?

I think its possible , but they are not letting anyone in to examine it.

If they let someone in to examine it, how do you think they would be able to determine if it was really Abraham?

[mickiel]

No its not that they don't contribute or is not evidence, its really my evidence is not accepted HERE! I can list books as evidence, websites, but if they are unaccepted here, then you can label it anything you wish. I can't give you scientific papers that agree with me, because most scientist don't.

I can give things like this;
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/cosmoconstant.html

To show earth was suited for man; Or this;

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/see-why-earth...-for-life/

This is not going to be accepted here; hey just reject it, disagree with it, but don't accuse me of trolling, I believe everything I post. Don't try and intimidate me.

With respect, Mick, I disagree entirely.

The reason they're not accepted as 'evidence' is because they're not, either because they're demonstrably not evidence (fallacious reasoning, bare assertions etc) or because the evidence is demonstrably false (Earth being uniquely set up to accommodate life. This is false on two grounds, one being that no time frame is set [habitable for life in which period? Which life?] and 2 because the vast majority of the Earth is in fact very inhospitable to life).

And please, sir, do not accuse me of trying to 'intimidate' you. I am doing no such thing, rather just voicing my objections and attempting to explain to you why using a logical fallacy does not equate to a sound, evidenced argument.

It was not you who intimidated me, it was another Mod.

Yet notice how vastly differing our minds are, our discernment. The fact that the majority of earth, even the universe , is not hospitable for life shows me that life had to be designed and limited to areas; its like a parent telling a child, you can go in the back yard and play, but you cannot go outside of the yard. They can do what they want inside the yard, but that's it, no further.

Man is limited, life is confined, both signs and evidence of a limiter. A confiner. If nature designed life, WHY did it limit it? WHY? The bible at least EXPLAINS WHY god limits it, nature does not. Science does not.