Incredulous Logic

[Statler Waldorf]

I happen to live near the south downs which are hills made of chalk, you know what that is right?
its the tiny skeletons of billions upon billions of tiny creatures that sank to the bottom of a sea over millions of years.

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalk

---

Wikipedia? Ugh.
Sure they are billions and billions of skeletons, but they do not have to be deposited over millions and millions of years. A flood could deposit them very quickly and rapid fossilization is the only process ever scientifically observed to happen so it is the better explanation than gradual fossilization.

The physical laws are used because they work. If they suddenly stopped working then that would be interesting and the laws would need revision.
They are only descriptions of the physical world and are only as good as the predictions they make.

I am not talking about whether they have worked in the past or not, I am pointing out that you live your life as if you believe they will continue to work in the future even though you cannot justify or logically prove this position given your atheistic worldview. Then you turn around and say you do not believe things without evidence or proof, I have pointed out that this is a false statement.

[The Grand Nudger]

You don't feel that a pattern of consistency over any given time frame we care to look is reason enough to apply provisional certainty to tomorrow. This requires magic?

You're right, they didn't have to be deposited over millions of years, but unfortunately for your argument they were. You would have to argue against more than fossilization to even come close to a workable theory.

[Statler Waldorf]

You don't feel that a pattern of consistency over any given time frame we care to look is reason enough to apply provisional certainty to tomorrow. This requires magic?

Nope, that would be begging the question because in order to justify that position you would have to use the premise "It has worked in the past therefore it will work in the future." which assumes the very thing you are trying to prove to be true. Tsk tsk.

You're right, they didn't have to be deposited over millions of years, but unfortunately for your argument they were. You would have to argue against more than fossilization to even come close to a workable theory.

Stop assuming the proof and demonstrate they were deposited over millions or billions of years.

[The Grand Nudger]

Again, provisional certainty makes no such claim. Things could indeed not work the same way tomorrow as they do today. That human knowledge is fallible is built into the system. That they do work the same way today is proof that at least for today, the laws of physics haven't changed. Tomorrow is a new day though. Still waiting for satellites to fall out of the sky.

Burden of proof amigo. That these fossils have been deposited over millions of years is well demonstrated, and you know that. If you wish to propose a different theory that's your baby. I don't make it my business going around educating people who claim to have already been educated. I'll just link you a bunch of wiki articles, you know this.

[Statler Waldorf]

Again, provisional certainty makes no such claim. Things could indeed not work the same way tomorrow as they do today. That human knowledge is fallible is built into the system. That they do work the same way today is proof that at least for today, the laws of physics haven't changed. Tomorrow is a new day though. Still waiting for satellites to fall out of the sky.

That’s the correct answer given an atheistic universe, however you do not live your life consistent with what you said right here. If you woke up in the morning and your car was missing you would certainly not just assume, “well the laws of physics must be different today and my car ceased to exist overnight.” Rather you would assume your car was stolen because given the principle of induction you can believe your car will not pop out of existence tomorrow because the laws of physics do not change like that. You just cannot justify this belief given your worldview. Anytime someone is forced to live their life differently than their stated worldview it is not a good sign for that worldview.

Burden of proof amigo. That these fossils have been deposited over millions of years is well demonstrated, and you know that. If you wish to propose a different theory that's your baby. I don't make it my business going around educating people who claim to have already been educated. I'll just link you a bunch of wiki articles, you know this.

More smoke I see. That’s not how the burden of proof works my friend.

Well demonstrated? You can actually demonstrate skeletons being laid down over millions of years? Wow, that’s quite a long laboratory experiment. The only explanation that has actually been empirically demonstrated is that those layers are laid down very quickly by flood waters. So I actually hold to the more scientific position than your faith based one. You believe in things that have never been observed to happen.

I know you would only link up a bunch of Wiki articles, that’s why I call you a poser. You act as if you know a great deal about topics that you actually have to type into unscholarly sources such as Wikipedia.

[The Grand Nudger]

You should probably scroll down to the "resources" link in the wiki pages I link, since that's where the meat is. I'm not a fan of misrepresenting things I learned in the seventh grade due to faulty memory. I also like the accessibility of wiki. I suppose I could instead say "This paper I'm holding in my hand that you don't have access to or would have to purchase" or "My god told me so" would be preferable? Criticize the information, not the source. Something tells me that if wiki said "goddidit" you'd be 100% onboard.

[thesummerqueen]

ahahaha, that's just what I was going to sarcastically write about.

[Napoléon]

ahahaha, that's just what I was going to sarcastically write about.

I was also inclined.

[thesummerqueen]

Obviously, by your avatar, you are down to business, Napster.

[Napoléon]

Obviously, by your avatar, you are down to business, Napster.

You only just noticed that? I feel so insignificant...