Enemies of Reason P1

Thomas said:
But they have.


But they have.


But they have.

Do I have to make a list of scientists, philosophers, etc., who are highly regarded by their peers, who profess a religious belief? Are you saying they're all deluded?


OK, but that does not mean my answer is 'wrong', or your response is 'right', it's just a measure of credulity.
Click to expand...
Provide an existing analogy for God. On your mark...get set...Go!

Describe God, explaining how you developed your description. On your mark...get set...Go!

Describe how God accomplished what is claimed. How did you get that information. On your mark...get set...Go!

Yes, your answer is wrong because you did exactly what you attempted to criticize me of doing. It was wrong when I was doing, but not if you do it. Heads you win, tails I lose. How convenient.
 
Naturalist said:
Your answers are either fallacious...the fallacy of personal experience for example.
Or you provide questions for answers, so you can avoid an answer (intellectual cowardice).
Or you are simply wrong.

See my comment #31.
Click to expand...


yawning-face-emoji-2005x2048-npui9qri-1.png


Troll ...
 
You are like the math student who insists an answer is 17, when the answer is 4.

You had a personal experience that tells you the answer is 17.

You say, it could be 17.

You say 17 and 4 are equally valid answers.

YOU WOULD BE WRONG.
 
No. I don't need anything. Your universe, your call ... childish troll
 
RJM said:
No. I don't need anything. Your universe, your call ... childish troll
Click to expand...
Yes, like in the math analogy where the teacher insists the answer is 4, and tries to explain why.

You insist the answer is 17, and won't listen to the teacher's explanation.

Like a little child, you say the teacher is like talking to a brick wall, she's a troll on the other students.

You're just a narcissistic, willfully ignorant, spoiled brat.
 
RJM said:
I disagree with you -- you mean 🥱 C
Click to expand...
No, another straw man fallacy. You just can't stop!

This quote sums it up" “Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon—it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.”

There is no disagreement when in math the answer is 4, and you say 17.

You have to follow the rules of arithmetic to get the right answer. You have to follow the rules to play chess. You have to follow the rules to have a rational conversation.

You put yourself above the rules, even after having been told the rules, because you.
 
You make the rules.
All good
 
Naturalist said:
No I don't, I wasn't born when the rules were made.

Another straw man fallacy.

17! 17! 17!
Click to expand...
Snooker is a game of skill, but still them balls roll where they go. Even the most powerful computer cannot predict -- you like it all fixed and laid out sure to reason -- be my guest -- got bigger thoughts
 
RJM said:
Snooker is a game of skill, but still them balls roll where they go. Even the most powerful computer cannot predict -- you like it all fixed and laid out sure to reason -- be my guest -- got bigger thoughts
Click to expand...
The balls don't simply roll where they go, they follow the laws of physics.

It takes supercomputers to predict the weather, and they don't do it very well or for very long. But the weather follows the laws of physics, too.

You can't handle these facts.

Thoughts are easy, understanding complex phenomena not so easy.
 
Naturalist said:
The balls don't simply roll where they go, they follow the laws of physics.

It takes supercomputers to predict the weather, and they don't do it very well or for very long. But the weather follows the laws of physics, too.

You can't handle these facts.

Thoughts are easy, understanding complex phenomena not so easy.
Click to expand...
No. Quantum mechanics is random. There's no computer that can lay out the universe. It's all localized. You're a flea pronouncing about the dog you're on.
 
Removed
 
Last edited:
Don't feed the troll
 
Naturalist said:
“Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon—it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.”
Click to expand...
@RJM and I are not "creationists".

We both believe that evolution has its part to play ..
I also believe that the "billions of years" we measure, has no particular significance.
For example, do we assume that time has passed in a linear fashion from beginning of universe
until now?
 
muhammad_isa said:
@RJM and I are not "creationists".

We both believe that evolution has its part to play ..
I also believe that the "billions of years" we measure, has no particular significance.
For example, do we assume that time has passed in a linear fashion from beginning of universe
until now?
Click to expand...
I didn't say you were, but RJM & you are playing the same bird brained game. He won't follow the rules of logic and ethics, and neither do you.
 
Don't feed the troll
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top