Proof of God

[Tao_Equus]

lol, I suppose you do not see that aggressively stating I had not read the OP is an insulting impertinence, a spoiled juvenile impertinence at that. My guess is that you are an over cosseted child.

As far as I see you have no idea of what quantum theory implies, you struggle miserably with it and even go on later to contradict yourself. Your theory as stated, was not even worth reading. So why the hell would I indulge you on your demand that I interpret it through the narrow vacuum of your pre-determination? Grow up kiddo... you are a long long way from genius.

 

[c0de]

Enlightenment + NewDawn



You know you both talk alot (and say the same things)
without actually saying anything important. I asked you
to provide a rebuttal to the arguments stated in post #1
on this thread.

As far as I see you have no idea of what quantum theory implies, you struggle miserably with it and even go on later to contradict yourself. Your theory as stated, was not even worth reading. So why the hell would I indulge you on your demand that I interpret it through the narrow vacuum of your pre-determination? Grow up kiddo... you are a long long way from genius.

Please point out the contradiction. Where is it?
Also, if you feel that I misinterpret QM
then provide a correction. Show me exactly
how I misinterpreted it.

Go ahead... both of you... I am waiting.

 

[Resigned]

lol... then why did resign accuse me of plagiarism?
He basically thought that it was so well thought out,
that he couldn't believe that I even wrote it

Not true. In fact, I found the post to contain bad analogies and false
assumptions in a hoped-for attempt (and abject failure) to prove god(s).
To suggest otherwise is a desperate attempt on your part to convince
yourself otherwise. I’m not a party to your falsifications.

You still have offered no proof of your claims.

 

[c0de]

Not true. In fact, I found the post to contain bad analogies and false
assumptions in a hoped-for attempt (and abject failure) to prove god(s).
To suggest otherwise is a desperate attempt on your part to convince
yourself otherwise. I’m not a party to your falsifications.

You still have offered no proof of your claims.

Just saying I offer no proof doesn't actually prove your point either.
You said that it is full of bad analogies? Then show me where those
analogies lie. Go ahread, point them out. You have repeated this same
claim many times without actually pointing them out... I wonder why
that is...

Also, for you to claim that I am making false assumptions is very
ironic, considering your own ideas which you have posted on this
thread thus far.

 

[enlightenment]

Go ahead... both of you... I am waiting.

Your attempts at using science and maths and then offer that as PROOF, that is what we are waiting on!

I don't know how many times I have to say that I have read through the OP, and as far as I can see, there is nothing there that shows proof of god.

Case pretty much closed, as far as I can see.

*shrugs*

 

[enlightenment]

Just saying I offer no proof doesn't actually prove your point either.

No.

But it shows that you have still not provided any proof, as per the title of this thread.

Btw, elsewhere you stated that since writing the OP, you had actually amended your stance.

Just curious.

What did you amend it to?

 

[Tao_Equus]

Enlightenment + NewDawn



You know you both talk alot (and say the same things)
without actually saying anything important. I asked you
to provide a rebuttal to the arguments stated in post #1
on this thread.


Please point out the contradiction. Where is it?
Also, if you feel that I misinterpret QM
then provide a correction. Show me exactly
how I misinterpreted it.

Go ahead... both of you... I am waiting.

When you actually write something that makes any sense I will respond. When you provide actual proof I will respond. In fact I will post response to anything except your petulant demand that I see through the tunnel vision of your own infatuation with yourself. Can you understand that? Is it too difficult for you to get? Some of the early posts amply demonstrated some of the weaknesses of your # revelation # and there are more. But you are incapable of accepting any critic. I cannot help you.

 

[c0de]

Case pretty much closed, as far as I can see.

So... in other words, you are refusing to post a rebuttal
to post #1... Fine by me. I never really expected one...

you know, at least Tao tried to tackle the issue... he always failed
(miserably)... but at least he tried... you people are just... useless.

Btw, elsewhere you stated that since writing the OP, you had actually amended your stance.

The amendment is not a cancellation of this argument.
To discuss it with you is not even necessary since you
cant even deal with it in its current state.

 

[c0de]

When you actually write something that makes any sense I will respond.

LOL so basically you are saying that you didn't get it?
And because you didnt get it, you assumed that it didnt make any sense?

And thats your entire reason for not posting a rebuttal...

lol now that's klassic...

 

[enlightenment]

So... in other words, you are refusing to post a rebuttal
to post #1... Fine by me. I never really expected one...

you know, at least Tao tried to tackle the issue... he always failed
(miserably)... but at least he tried... you people are just... useless.


The amendment is not a cancellation of this argument.
To discuss it with you is not even necessary since you
cant even deal with it in its current state.

You really have something of an inflated ego, right? Has it perhaps crossed your mind that I, and others, we have read what you wrote, and all the comment it merits is to say that it is some weak attempt to mix in branches of science with the existance of a supernatural god, and pass it over as proof.

Like the Jedi mind trick, it will only work on the most simple.

Haven't you noticed that for a forum full of theists, you have v few running to your aid here?

Want to know why? Because you are coming over as arrogant, aggressive, and petulant. Take ten mins out. Breath deeply. Then try again. You might find people more willing to engage, if you cease throwing your dunmmy out of the pram anytime someone challenges you.

If you did not wish quite the response you got here, then perhaps you should not pass some half assed theory of as PROOF, in the future?

Just a thought.

 

[enlightenment]

lol now that's klassic...

Classic.

Anyway, since you mentioned Tao twice now, and since you started wringing your hands when you claimed someone has accused you of 'plagarism', may I ask, did you play a part in his apparent ban?

Just that you seem the sort that would start a flame war, then mock getting offended, before running off, like a kid with a bloodied nose?

 

[c0de]

You really have something of an inflated ego, right? Has it perhaps crossed your mind that I, and others, we have read what you wrote, and all the comment it merits is to say that it is some weak attempt to mix in branches of science with the existance of a supernatural god, and pass it over as proof.

Like the Jedi mind trick, it will only work on the most simple.

Haven't you noticed that for a forum full of theists, you have v few running to your aid here?

Want to know why? Because you are coming over as arrogant, aggressive, and petulant. Take ten mins out. Breath deeply. Then try again. You might find people more willing to engage, if you cease throwing your dunmmy out of the pram anytime someone challenges you.

If you did not wish quite the response you got here, then perhaps you should not pass some half assed theory of as PROOF, in the future?

Just a thought.

yea.... no actual rebuttal here either... still waiting.

btw, your personal attacks on me fit very nicely in the post
which claims that I am the one being aggressive and hostile.

Keep it up

 

[c0de]

Classic.

Anyway, since you mentioned Tao twice now, and since you started wringing your hands when you claimed someone has accused you of 'plagarism', may I ask, did you play a part in his apparent ban?

Just that you seem the sort that would start a flame war, then mock getting offended, before running off, like a kid with a bloodied nose?

LOL ... if you only knew what really happened.

but I rather not beat a dead horse...

p.s. I just realized that was a pun!

p.p.s. Resigned actually accused me of plagiarism.
Another proof that you don't actually read or pay
attention to anything, do you?

 

[enlightenment]

p.p.s. Resigned actually accused me of plagiarism.
Another proof that you don't actually read or pay
attention to anything, do you?

*Ding a Ling*

Here's what I said, fella.




"since you started wringing your hands when you claimed someone has accused you of 'plagarism"


Did you or did you not assert that someone accused you of this?

If the answer is 'yes', then I read it right, and you should have gone to specsavers.

 

[c0de]

*Ding a Ling*

Here's what I said, fella.




"since you started wringing your hands when you claimed someone has accused you of 'plagarism"


Did you or did you not assert that someone accused you of this?

If the answer is 'yes', then I read it right, and you should have gone to specsavers.

err... you said that I >CLAIMED< that someone accused me of plagiarism.
Implying that it was still an unfounded assertion that I had made.

You know what the word "claim" means?

to assert and demand the recognition of

This applies to the statement of Resigned when he CLAIMED that
I had plagiarized. My actual claim was that his claim was false. However,
me saying, that he said, that I plagiarized, was not a claim, it was a FACT.

See the difference?

btw, still waiting on that rebuttal (which is sure never to come)

 

[enlightenment]

err... you said that I >CLAIMED< that someone accused me of plagiarism.
Implying that it was still an unfounded assertion that I had made.

You know what the word "claim" means?

Yes. Do you know what the word 'context' means? Hey, if you were hiyt by a bus, you could reasonably have claimed that event happened, and be right, it might be a fact. Claiming can mean the same thing as asserting. You asserted that someone had accused you of plagarism, then got all high and mighty with them, into the bargain.

Now, since I have answered that, were you part of why Tao got suspended? Be honest please...

This applies to the statement of Resigned when he CLAIMED that
I had plagiarized. My actual claim was that his claim was false. However,
me saying, that he said, that I plagiarized, was not a claim, it was a FACT.

Yes, okay dear, if it makes you feel better.

See the difference?

Crystal. What's not to understand?

btw, still waiting on that rebuttal (which is sure never to come)

That is because I am so amazed that you have finally figured out that god is real, as the title of your thread says.

What more is there to say....

 

[c0de]

That is because I am so amazed that you have finally figured out that god is real, as the title of your thread says.

What more is there to say....

nope... no actual rebuttal here either. Just more unfounded "claims"
by Mr. "enlightenment" ... by the way, speaking of insightful thread titles,
have you figured out whether Israel is a superpower yet or not?

 

[enlightenment]

nope... no actual rebuttal here either. Just more unfounded "claims"
by Mr. "enlightenment" ... by the way, speaking of insightful thread titles,
have you figured out whether Israel is a superpower yet or not?

What does that have to do with this? What's that....another diversion tactic.

Hey, first of all you continually dodge the fact that you have brought no proof to the table, as the title indicated, not unless you count your OP, which you have since changed your positon on, in some way, yet won't say what way...

Tao..?

 

[c0de]

What does that have to do with this?

wait... so only you can accuse me of posting stupid titles?

Hey, first of all you continually dodge the fact that you have brought no proof to the table,

Post #1

If it is indeed no proof of anything, then refute it.
Show me how it is not. Back up your claim.
You think just saying "its not" is good enough
in a debate? Do I just take your word for it?

as the title indicated, not unless you count your OP, which you have since changed your positon on, in some way, yet won't say what way...

I changed my opinion regarding the statement of "Alpha" and "Omega"
And what I thought it means for the idea of time. But since it is not
important to our discussion and you actually rebutting that argument,
I did not bother with it.

 

[enlightenment]

wait... so only you can accuse me of posting stupid titles?

Well at least you finally concede that the title of your thread was stupid, as in misleading.

Well done for that.