resistance is futile, you will be assimilated

[SubtleVirtue]

I merely point out that there is a correlation involved.

With a bare claim, again the risible self aggrandising assertion, that you made, about your own intelligence, has absolutely no bearing on any argument you present, and again, the fact you don't seem to understand its irrelevance, or why it is irrelevant, creates an obvious inference.

One example of when appeal to authority is legitimate; there is agreement among experts about the topic under discussion!

[SubtleVirtue]

Are you referring to 11?

No, obviously I was referring to the woo woo conclusion, that you tacked on "as a bare claim".

Are you claiming that the conclusion doesn't follow from the axioms?

[SubtleVirtue]

Does every cause involve energy?

Is energy self-causal?

Is self-causal a synonym for self-deterministic?

Is self-determinism consciousness?

You believe in a deterministic universe.  Stephen Hawking proposed a quantum cosmology in which there are, in fact, very real chance events.  Chance events lead to what he called "frozen accidents," which in turn lead to evolution of the physical universe, then of life, then of consciousness.  Life and consciousness, from that perspective, are not caused by determined forces alone, but emerge from chance events.

In other words, your teleology is far from proven, since I think Hawking qualified as a very smart person.

For reference, see On the Origin of Time: Stephen Hawking's Final Theory.

Actually, I believe (thanks to Christopher Langan) that the universe is self-deterministic.

[Alan V]

You believe in a deterministic universe.  Stephen Hawking proposed a quantum cosmology in which there are, in fact, very real chance events.  Chance events lead to what he called "frozen accidents," which in turn lead to evolution of the physical universe, then of life, then of consciousness.  Life and consciousness, from that perspective, are not caused by determined forces alone, but emerge from chance events.

In other words, your teleology is far from proven, since I think Hawking qualified as a very smart person.

For reference, see On the Origin of Time: Stephen Hawking's Final Theory.

Actually, I believe (thanks to Christopher Langan) that the universe is self-deterministic.

Lots of different people believe lots of different things.  Belief, even strong belief, is not proof.

Scientists wait and see when they don't know.  They may speculate, but they try to avoid jumping to conclusions.

[Angrboda]

I'd be interested in hearing the specifics of what you feel Ron Wyatt and Kent Hovind have contributed in terms of proofs of the divine (assuming the above user is you).

[Sheldon]

With a bare claim, again the risible self aggrandising assertion, that you made, about your own intelligence, has absolutely no bearing on any argument you present, and again, the fact you don't seem to understand its irrelevance, or why it is irrelevant, creates an obvious inference.

One example of when appeal to authority is legitimate; there is agreement among experts about the topic under discussion!

I know what the fallacy means thank you, and when it applies, and your ludicrous hyperbolic and grandiloquent claim about your own intelligence, is there for all to see, and nary an expert was cited. 

And again, even were your risible claim true, it would be utterly meaningless in validating any argument you presented, and again the fact you clearly don't understand that, undermines your risible claim.

[Sheldon]

No, obviously I was referring to the woo woo conclusion, that you tacked on "as a bare claim".

Are you claiming that the conclusion doesn't follow from the axioms?

Which word is tripping you up?

[SubtleVirtue]

Actually, I believe (thanks to Christopher Langan) that the universe is self-deterministic.

Lots of different people believe lots of different things.  Belief, even strong belief, is not proof.

Scientists wait and see when they don't know.  They may speculate, but they try to avoid jumping to conclusions.

You claimed that I believed the universe was deterministic.

You were mistaken.

byw, I did prove that the universe is self-deterministic.

[SubtleVirtue]

One example of when appeal to authority is legitimate; there is agreement among experts about the topic under discussion!

I know what the fallacy means thank you, and when it applies, and your ludicrous hyperbolic and grandiloquent claim about your own intelligence, is there for all to see, and nary an expert was cited. 

I am the expert speaking to you.

Christopher Langan, John Haglin, Baroch Spinoza, and Richard Emerson are experts that agree with me.

[Sheldon]

Lots of different people believe lots of different things.  Belief, even strong belief, is not proof.

Scientists wait and see when they don't know.  They may speculate, but they try to avoid jumping to conclusions.

You claimed that I believed the universe was deterministic.

You were mistaken.

byw, I did prove that the universe is self-deterministic.

You don't believe a claim you made? 

Or you're offering semantic sophistry.

I think I know the answer by now, but can you demonstrate any objective evidence that the "universe is self deterministic", or that any deity exists, or is even possible?