|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 02/22/2006 : 11:40:25
|
Ok, now where we before being silenced I mean locked out:
Originally posted by pleco
:-) Buh bye Bill - do your own research. I don't care to discuss it with you anymore. You can call that whatever you want, you won't bruise my ego. I just don't give a shit.
Normally I would just refer you to websites where people much smarter than I discuss such theories, but that has already been done and you don't read them, so what's the friggin' point?
:-) Buh bye Bill - do your own research. I don't care to discuss it with you anymore. You can call that whatever you want, you won't bruise my ego. I just don't give a shit.
(bill) As predicted, P bails on the conversation without putting forth any hypothesis and logic on how pm begins to exist, without an eternal god as the first cause. P was asked numerous times to give his hypothesis on the origins of atheism but of coarse rather then taking the opportunity to put forth a case for his atheism he instead bails on the whole conversation, after all this time. Just because I wanted a hypothesis for the basis of materialistic universe without a eternal creator as the first cause? P just flat refused to address that question and then said he was bailing on the whole conversation? Why? Because I asked to hear in your words a hypothesis for a atheistic existence? I just figured since the "God did it" position was so lame and unimaginative that the atheist must have a strong case to rest on. After centuries of atheistic thought and time to hone a position I expect more then "we don't know". Even if it is just a hypothesis of yours, at this point I will except anything from you on the subject. But of coarse you will not give us your hypothesis, as predicted. I noticed every other atheist claimed up tight as well when asked for their hypothesis on the origin of the materialistic universe? I must say for a group who claim to be so educated in such areas the SFN crew was strangely silent on this one.
Alas dude finally pipes in to break the silence and he responds with:
"I want to know: How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist."
Are you kidding me? This is it? Well what do you know, just as I had predicted. Go back and read my original posts to this site and you will see that my position from day 1 was that the universe was either created or it was eternal. Those are your chooses now take your pick.
On the subject of origins for PM and life my position and the evidence I put forth is refereed to as lame and not very imaginative. I am told the same thing for the diversity we see in life and PM.
So of coarse with a chiding like that I am expecting the atheist to come out with both guns a blazen when I challenge him to give me the leading hypothesis on the origin of PM apart from the eternal first cause. Yes I understand that your official position remains "we don't know" but I expected more then that when I asked for you to just give me a hypothesis then. 95% of the atheist could not even give me a hypothetical atheistic universe. "I don't know:" The other 5% retorted to the default position of : "I want to know: How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist."
When pushed into a cornor they always revert back to the possibility of a eternial universe because that is all they have. The universe was either created or it is eternial, period.
So after centuries of thought and much time to hone a position the atheist goes with:
"we don't know"
and/or
"How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist"
as the biases and foundation for their position.
In all honesty, I thought the atheist would come with more then that, much more then that. After all atheism is supposed to be the thinking man's position. I must say those answers do not seem to require much thought.
dude: How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist
Bill: You don't really hold to that position and are willing to defend it are you?
dude: Well no.
Bill: Then why do you use it?
dude: Well it is a good smoke and mirrors distraction that will usually divert the conversation from where the pesky creationist is trying to take it. But in does not seem to be working on you Bill so I will dream up some more.
Look dude if you want to stick your head in the sand and continue you on your rant "How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist" then knock yourself out with all that. But the majority of your cohorts have faced the facts of reality and fully acknowledge the universe i.e. physical matter is not eternal. Hence the explosion in big bang cosmology starting in the 1950's and rolling on through today. The majority of people, living on plant earth, dude fully acknowledged the universe was not eternal hence the race was on to discover the mechanism behind the big bang. The atheistic scientists went into high gear to discover a mechanism that could cause and drive big bang cosmology, apart from an eternal being. The race is still being ran today and with the answers offered thus far by the SFN faithful it sounds like they have got no where in the last 50+ years.
Bill: Any progress yet from the past 50 years of studies on the origins of big bang?
95% of atheist: We still don't know.
5% of atheist: Bill how can you know for sure the universe has just not always been here and that it did not have a point in time where it began to exist? I realize that this flies in the face of cause and effect theory and that nobody, from planet earth, holds that position anymore, but besides that bill?
Normally I would just refer you to websites where people much smarter than I discuss such theories,
(bill) Yeah, well then I would just refer you to a website with people that are smarter then the people on your website. That makes for a real interesting conversation on a forum when people throw links around like they are water. *sigh*
Originally posted by trogdor
I have heard the argument comparing god to invisible pink things before, but it has always rubbed me the wrong way. How can something be invisible and pink? HOW?!?
(bill) Invisible just means you can't see it, it does not mean that the object does not exist. A black stealth bomber is invisible to radar. That does not mean the bomber does not exist, or that it is not black.
Originally posted by Dude
So, basically, you don't know jack shit, you have no theory of your own, and to fill in your knowledge gap you drop in your deity.
(bill)Umm, wrong dude. I have explained numerous amounts of time cause and effect theory. I have demonstrated that a eternal deity logically explains the existence of PM, complex life, and the diversity we see in the PM and life etc... etc... etc...
The atheist blows that up as lame and unimaginative based on his imaginative and un-lame theory regarding the existence of PM apart from any first cause, I would have assumed. When pressed to offer more on their worldview and the logic of their origins theory, or even to offer a hypothesis for that matter, they clam up tighter then Fort Knox and for once in the entire history and civilization of man they have nothing to say. When pressed even further finally you pipe in with:
"How can you know for sure the universe did not always exist"
So after a forum full of atheists are asked over and over for their best *hypothesis* on the origin of PM the best they can come up with to support their worldview is:
"prove the universe did not always exist Bill"
Their whole foundation for atheism relies on Bill proving that the universe is not eternal. How sad!....
Go back to your sandbox.
(bill) Why? I am sure I will just find you there with your head buried in it...
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
 Posted - 02/22/2006 : 11:57:01 [Permalink]
|
There is no foundation for atheism except life without theism, thats it.
Note my sig please. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:04:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
(bill)Umm, wrong dude. I have explained numerous amounts of time cause and effect theory. I have demonstrated that a eternal deity logically explains the existence of PM, complex life, and the diversity we see in the PM and life etc... etc... etc...
hahaha!
You haven't demonstrated anything except your own ignorance. I'll say that you have done that quite well.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:19:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
There is no foundation for atheism except life without theism, thats it.
Note my sig please.
Just what I have been saying all along. The atheist has nothing to offer in support of an atheistic universe and worldview. Well expect for the fact the fact that they are 99.5% sure that is was not a god.
Bill: Well if a eternal God is not the first cause then let me here some of your ideas on the atheistic universe and it's origin of PM?
atheist: We don't have any...
Bill: Then how are you so sure it was not the result of eternal creator?
atheist: We just are.
Note my sig please.
(bill) Very cleaver, pretty sharp as well. I have never heard that one before *sigh*
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:23:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
There is no foundation for atheism except life without theism, thats it.
Note my sig please.
Just what I have been saying all along. The atheist has nothing to offer in support of an atheistic universe and worldview. Well expect for the fact the fact that they are 99.5% sure that is was not a god.
Bill: Well if a eternal God is not the first cause then let me here some of your ideas on the atheistic universe and it's origin of PM?
atheist: We don't have any...
Bill: Then how are you so sure it was not the result of eternal creator?
atheist: We just are.
Note my sig please.
(bill) Very cleaver, pretty sharp as well. I have never heard that one before *sigh*
Bill, we aren't sure. That's the whole beauty of it. We aren't sure it wasn't a creator. We'll never be sure. The main point is that, we will never be sure that it wasn't your God, Allah or the Vedic gods. We just prefer to go with the honest answer and say, "I don't know" rather than assume it was your or anyone's God for no particular reason.
I don't believe it was a god; but I'll never be sure it wasn't a god, either. You don't believe life, the universe and everything were generated at random; but you can't prove it wasn't, either.
We're in the same boat. You just don't want to see. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
| Edited by - Siberia on 02/22/2006 12:27:06 |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:31:59 [Permalink]
|
I think the Universe is a delicious toasted bagel, we are but a mote of yeast, yet Ive no evidence.
So if the creator is a pimply human teenager running a laptop, are you still going to worship him? Edit: This is why I dont play the game black and white, little digital creatures that worship me, creep me out. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 02/22/2006 12:33:25 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:33:20 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: quote:
(bill) As predicted, P bails on the conversation without putting forth any hypothesis and logic on how pm begins to exist, without an eternal god as the first cause. P was asked numerous times to give his hypothesis on the origins of atheism but of coarse rather then taking the opportunity to put forth a case for his atheism he instead bails on the whole conversation, after all this time. Just because I wanted a hypothesis for the basis of materialistic universe without a eternal creator as the first cause? P just flat refused to address that question and then said he was bailing on the whole conversation? Why? Because I asked to hear in your words a hypothesis for a atheistic existence? I just figured since the "God did it" position was so lame and unimaginative that the atheist must have a strong case to rest on. After centuries of atheistic thought and time to hone a position I expect more then "we don't know". Even if it is just a hypothesis of yours, at this point I will except anything from you on the subject. But of coarse you will not give us your hypothesis, as predicted. I noticed every other atheist claimed up tight as well when asked for their hypothesis on the origin of the materialistic universe? I must say for a group who claim to be so educated in such areas the SFN crew was strangely silent on this one.
Alas dude finally pipes in to break the silence and he responds with:
"I want to know: How do you know that there was ever a time when physical matter didn't exist."
Are you kidding me? This is it?
No, that's not it. Apparently you skipped over all of my answers. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:34:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
(bill)Umm, wrong dude. I have explained numerous amounts of time cause and effect theory. I have demonstrated that a eternal deity logically explains the existence of PM, complex life, and the diversity we see in the PM and life etc... etc... etc...
hahaha!
You haven't demonstrated anything except your own ignorance. I'll say that you have done that quite well.
(bill) What's wrong dude? Having trouble even dreaming up a hypothesis and some logic for the origins of an atheistic universe? I have noticed that you seem to be rather quite on this as well. Well you did offer "prove the universe is not eternal Bill" so that is better then most have offered. But once it is looked at in light of cause and effect theory and big bang cosmology you end up right back with the others dude, you have nothing to offer. How sad considering all the centuries that have went into atheistic thought to think that in 2006 all they still have is nothing.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 12:38:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
Bill: Well if a eternal God is not the first cause then let me here some of your ideas on the atheistic universe and it's origin of PM?
atheist: We don't have any...
Bill: Then how are you so sure it was not the result of eternal creator?
atheist: We just are.
Gosh Bill, how come you have to make up fake dialogues in which you win the argument (***gasp***...surprise surprise), instead actually responding to the literally hundreds questions asked of you?
Could it be because you are a cement-headed jackass? Nahhh, that can't be true! |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:06:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
There is no foundation for atheism except life without theism, thats it.
Note my sig please.
Just what I have been saying all along. The atheist has nothing to offer in support of an atheistic universe and worldview. Well expect for the fact the fact that they are 99.5% sure that is was not a god.
Bill: Well if a eternal God is not the first cause then let me here some of your ideas on the atheistic universe and it's origin of PM?
atheist: We don't have any...
Bill: Then how are you so sure it was not the result of eternal creator?
atheist: We just are.
Note my sig please.
(bill) Very cleaver, pretty sharp as well. I have never heard that one before *sigh*
Bill, we aren't sure. That's the whole beauty of it. We aren't sure it wasn't a creator. We'll never be sure. The main point is that, we will never be sure that it wasn't your God, Allah or the Vedic gods. We just prefer to go with the honest answer and say, "I don't know" rather than assume it was your or anyone's God for no particular reason.
I don't believe it was a god; but I'll never be sure it wasn't a god, either. You don't believe life, the universe and everything were generated at random; but you can't prove it wasn't, either.
We're in the same boat. You just don't want to see.
Bill, we aren't sure. That's the whole beauty of it. We aren't sure it wasn't a creator. We'll never be sure. The main point is that, we will never be sure that it wasn't your God, Allah or the Vedic gods. We just prefer to go with the honest answer and say, "I don't know" rather than assume it was your or anyone's God for no particular reason.
(bill) Fair enough.
I don't believe it was a god;
(bill) What do you base that belief on? If you truly don't know how can you give atheism 99% of the doubt and give an eternal creator 1%? On what basis do you make this decision?
And if you do not believe it was a god then give me an atheistic converse hypothesis on the existence PM. I know the official position is "we don't know" but if you have made a choice that it was not god, or you do not believe it was god, then what hypothesis do you believe "did it"?
We're in the same boat. You just don't want to see.
(bill) I don't see us in the same boat. I am willing to offer my beliefs and my conclusions on the first cause of the material universe to skeptics for them to ridicule and lambaste my position. I can handle their criticism, their taunting, and their insults on the foundation of my worldview. But when it come to the atheist giving up some details on his worldview and backing up some of his/her logic for atheistic origins theory they shut up tighter then a clam and won't even give out a hypothesis on origins for the creationist to sink his teeth into.
It seems as if they want to jump right past the origin of physical matter and life and go straight into evolution. Why? That is easy. Because once on the topic of evolution they will default to: "evolution is an explanation of the species that we see and has nothing to do with origins so if you want to go back past Charles Darwin's "warm little pond" we will just brush you off as leaving the topic of evolution." If the topic is atheism then they just shut up and say nothing on the topic of origins. Or they try to get the conversation back to evolution ASAP.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:18:36 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: 5% of atheist: Bill how can you know for sure the universe has just not always been here and that it did not have a point in time where it began to exist? I realize that this flies in the face of cause and effect theory and that nobody, from planet earth, holds that position anymore, but besides that bill? (my emphasis)
Dude asked you how you know there ever was a time when physical matter didn't exist. The universe is a specific, intact arrangement of physical matter. No, nobody claims that the universe has always existed in its present form. But the idea that the fundamental matter that makes up the current universe has always existed in some form is perfectly logical, and not disputed by any science.
It isn't proven either by science because that hypothesis isn't falsifiable. But neither is yours. We say “We don't know.” because we don't have enough information to come up with a falsifiable hypothesis. And when you don't have enough info, no amount of thinking real hard about it is going to produce a right answer.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/22/2006 17:01:29 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:22:14 [Permalink]
|
Also, I would have liked a response to this post of mine, Bill: quote:
It occurs to me that the law of cause and effect is a philosophical, not scientific law. So let's fight fire with fire:
From Wikipedia's entry on "Causality" (this applies to BOTH our debate over the existence of god and absolute morality):
The deterministic world-view is one in which the universe is nothing but a chain of events following one after another according to the law of cause and effect. According to incompatibilists holding this worldview there is no such thing as "free will", and therefore, no such thing as morality. However, compatibilists argue that determinism is compatible with, or even necessary for, free will.
Learning to bear the burden of a meaningless universe, and justify one's own existence, is the first step toward becoming the "Übermensch" (English: "overman") that Nietzsche speaks of extensively in his philosophical writings. Existentialists have suggested that people have the courage to accept that while no meaning has been designed in the universe, we each can provide a meaning for ourselves.
In light of the difficulty philosophers have pointed out in establishing the validity of causal relations, it might seem that the clearest plausible example of causation we have left is our own ability to be the cause of events. If this is so, then our concept of causation would not prevent seeing ourselves as moral agents.
To sum up, the same philosophical law that Bill is trying to use to prove the existence of god with has been used by nihilists to prove that life has no meaning, and there is no absolute morality, but only the morality that humans make for ourselves.
Oh the delicious irony!
I made this post partially to bring the conversation back to the topic of absolute morality vs. relative morality, but also because it is a legitimate question: if you use causality to prove the existence of a supernatural entity that caused physical matter to come into existence, how do you refute nihilistic claims that life is ultimately meaningless, which are also based on causality? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/22/2006 13:22:50 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:22:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
(bill) What's wrong dude? Having trouble even dreaming up a hypothesis and some logic for the origins of an atheistic universe? I have noticed that you seem to be rather quite on this as well. Well you did offer "prove the universe is not eternal Bill" so that is better then most have offered. But once it is looked at in light of cause and effect theory and big bang cosmology you end up right back with the others dude, you have nothing to offer. How sad considering all the centuries that have went into atheistic thought to think that in 2006 all they still have is nothing.
Again, your utter ignorance shines through.
Surely you cannot be unaware that EVERY single "logical" argument presented to support the existance of your deity has been logically flawed? Especially your idiotic amature rehash of the cosmological argument.
Get back to us when you have something new and original.
quote:
Bill: Any progress yet from the past 50 years of studies on the origins of big bang?
95% of atheist: We still don't know.
5% of atheist: Bill how can you know for sure the universe has just not always been here and that it did not have a point in time where it began to exist? I realize that this flies in the face of cause and effect theory and that nobody, from planet earth, holds that position anymore, but besides that bill?
And how long have your crowd had to come up with something? 3000+ years?
And the best you can do is a flawed argument from 500 years ago?
Get over yourself Bill.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:26:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
I don't believe it was a god;
(bill) What do you base that belief on? If you truly don't know how can you give atheism 99% of the doubt and give an eternal creator 1%? On what basis do you make this decision?
I have no compelling reason to believe there is a force outside this universe (as most, if not all, god hypothesis seem to claim). It's too untestable a claim to my palate. Too unreasonable and quite anthropocentric a claim.
I have a compelling reason to believe the universe (and life in particular) either ever existed (what is time, anyway?) or was created at random (say, the crashing of branes); the fact there is nothing pointing to something truly supernatural existing, and that random things happen all the time, is compelling reason enough, to me, to not believe. Notice I say believe; I don't dismiss the possibility, I just prefer to care for more measurable hypotheses.
I say it is a mystery; an enigma. I waste my free time trying to solve it, rather than assume there is a god who did it and leave it at that. I find it sad that some people ignore the universe's majesty and dismiss it as just some bored entity's play. But, that's just me. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
| Edited by - Siberia on 02/22/2006 13:28:36 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:33:32 [Permalink]
|
See, the universe is so complex to Bill that something must have made it.
So it is "logical": Everything is complex, and complexity requires intelligence, therefore soemthing called god did it. It is not possible that it could have occured any other way becuase of what was just said. Why? Because....rinse and repeat.
Is that a decent summary Bill of your "theory" of everything?
Hmmmm, I think I'll stick with "We don't know yet". I won't feel like I'm lying if I say that.
You know why I won't discuss this further with you Bill? Because you want to employ the standard creationist trap. I will state some theory which is very incomplete and still being worked on. You will take all the holes in the theory and exploit them, since the only way you can "prove" your ideas is to show the weaknesses in others.
BTW, you noticed that no one said you were necessarily wrong, Bill? You could be right! Isn't that a great thing about intellectual honesty?
|
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 02/22/2006 13:36:10 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 13:34:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
I think the Universe is a delicious toasted bagel, we are but a mote of yeast, yet Ive no evidence.
So if the creator is a pimply human teenager running a laptop, are you still going to worship him? Edit: This is why I dont play the game black and white, little digital creatures that worship me, creep me out.
I think the Universe is a delicious toasted bagel, we are but a mote of yeast, yet Ive no evidence.
(bill) Have you meet dude? You guys would get along great.
So if the creator is a pimply human teenager running a laptop,
(bill) Through cause and effect theory we can deduce that the creator of the universe was not a pizza faced tech geek teenager on his laptop. However if you still insist on holding to that position you might want to strike a conversation up with dude...
are you still going to worship him?
(bill) A pizza faced teenager who did not create the universe, but has a laptop? No.
Edit: This is why I dont play the game black and white, little digital creatures that worship me, creep me out.
(bill) They would me to...
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
