RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < ... 259 260 261 262 263 [264] 265 266 267 268 269 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,04:50   

Quote (Robin @ Mar. 14 2013,21:43)
And, as if on cue, WJM validates my point:

 
Quote
Please note how you phrase your response as if objectively valid “true statements” exist, which is only meaningful if an objective arbiter of “what is true” exist. You statements assume a theistic premise, where “what is true” is not the province of “whatever colliding molecules happen to assert is true”.


But then he gets twisted up in a mistaken strawman soaked in oil of ad hominem "Darwinist":

 
Quote
“Truth” can be nothing more, in essence, than “what views produce the most hardy and prolific offspring”. Theists are, in fact, “better off” when it comes to this issue, because under RMD, “true” can only mean “whatever produces the most successful, prolific offspring”. So, theism – by the RMD measure, is “true”, and materialism – which has produces and currently produces far fewer offspring – is false.


Uggh...so many errors and inaccuracies here. William, just for your own edification, I'm fairly certain that every "Darwinist" (and certainly this "Darwinist") will happily agree that the vast majority of truths we recognize have zero to do with offspring production. But even if that were not the case, let's just examine one situation that falsifies your premise: any group of "Darwinists" who recognize that limiting birth rates is better for human offspring will work to have fewer offspring. Don't you get tired of being wrong all the time?

That you are yet another of the UD/apologist crowd who seems think that individual actions somehow impact evolution is nearly a cliche at this point.

WJM is becoming one of the foremost of knobshiners. The idea that a 'materialist' must hold that 'truth' (the accuracy of an idea with respect to an actual state-of-affairs) is arbited solely by its effect on the production of offspring is ... it's ... well, it's ... words fail me. For an evidently intelligent man, he can be incredibly dumb.

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,05:40   

Further discussion at Sandwalk:

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013.......7685237

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,07:34   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Mar. 15 2013,08:49)
Ptaylor:    
Quote

It's argument E1 - bwahahaha!

Shhhrp shrp shrp

<holds breath>

Phhhhheeeeewwwww............

Oh yeah, that's the hard stuff. <coughs slightly>  That must be at least 30% Tard, not counting the punctuation.

<closes eyes>

Yeah....

Shhhrp shrp shrp ???!!!??

The last one of those really really really small spliffs I had was handed uninvited to me as I was standing on a beach in northern Mozambique after dusk about 4 years ago. The coconut palms on an ivory white sand beach in the distance suddenly seemed inviting. Which contrasted nicely with the fetid subsistance angler mangrove harbor nearby. I handed it back to the tough blond Corsican fishermans daughter after I realised the beach contained no easy chairs. Pink Floyd was popular driving music amonst ex pats who were safe from the local wildlife due to the size of the vehicles and the speed they drove at, except for elephants. It was almost like the 70's again except elephants were much less common. Getting bent at Dar es Salam the next decent city to the north consisted of finding a suitable local with an itchy nose and a wet finger....

Suffice to say Barry and his completely wet bunch of hangers on are savoir fair free milk toast tards.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,08:46   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,06:40)
Further discussion at Sandwalk:

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013.......7685237

The rant of Diogenes is epic.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,09:04   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,05:40)
Further discussion at Sandwalk:

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013.......7685237

Very nice. I appreciate Larry's assessment on the subject. Thanks Larry!

And thanks SS!

I think all this attention is going to my head.  :)

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,09:28   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 15 2013,16:46)
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,06:40)
Further discussion at Sandwalk:

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013.......7685237

The rant of Diogenes is epic.

Indeed Martin Luther had it right all along, anything of value has a price, religion is free except if you want to pay for entertainment at the Sunday service, I'd rather sleep in, those pastors/priests etc are far too selfish with my time. Somehow he mixes value (not values) that is to say the cold hearted exchange of money for factual information (or pleasure) with prostitution. I'd say he was part of the problem not the solution.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,09:44   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 15 2013,08:46)
The rant of Diogenes is epic.

I agree. That is some kind of takedown! Awesome!

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,09:49   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 15 2013,14:46)
 
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,06:40)
Further discussion at Sandwalk:

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013.......7685237

The rant of Diogenes is epic.

 
Quote
wanker lawyer Arrington's presuppository theology,

At least we didn't get his postsuppository theology! :)

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,09:49   

Not my best, but I couldn't resist the urge to tickle Barry's feetsoles. Or was it to needle his Ego?

   
Quote
CabalMarch 14, 2013 at 4:04 am
Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I believe this is a discussion better left to professional philosophers and psychologists.

To me it seems poorly suited for making an argument questioning the validity of the scientifc theory of evolution. Especially since after twenty years, I still don’t know anything about ID except that ID is not in opposition to ToE, it is just the claim that magic (the effort of a mythical “designer”) is a better explanation for some signficant aspects of the evolutionary record of life. Although there are variations on the theme; some say the designer is unknown and according to Behe might even be dead by now, while others are convinced God is the designer. I don’t know if the suggested existence of multiple designers has been ruled out.

Anyway, WRT the subject of beliefs, man’s abiltity to believe in just about anything you might conjure, it is a fact of life we are forced to admit is real.

Beliefs may be held without any relevance at all to whether the belief is ‘true’ or ‘false’.

That becomes clear when we consider the belief in the existence of Bigfoot. Some people believe in Bigfoot, and we understand that the belief is unrelated to the question: Is Bigfoot real, or not?

The argument “No, religious explanations are false. Believing them is just gullibility …” makes an important point. We have to differentiate between the undeniable fact of the religious aspects of man’s mind, and the things that man may believe. Man has a great capactiy for believing: Magic, Voodo, Marxism, alien abductions, angels, miracles, Dec. 2012 end of the world; the list is endless.

Man’s tendency to believe may well be a result of evolution; it has been suggested as a positive trait in being conducive to cooperation within a tribe or population group.
Salesmen are exploiting man’s nature to the best of their ability. The proliferation of religious sects with the most bizarre beliefs, with leaders adopting a postion of absolute authority comes to mind.

Suicide sects are another example.

What would the world look like if we did not have the ability to believe?

Sir, ICBM’s are coming this way.
- Nonsense.

Another aspect of religion is the experience of a power within our mind. Hearing voices is not a modern invention, it is a phenomenon well recorded in the Bible. Is the ‘speaker’ inside a man’s mind, or not? I believe there is a power in our mind. It is also the source of dreams.

According to th book of Job, God is the source of dreams. According to depth psychology, dreams are a product of our subconscious. I prefer to view the subconscious as the superconscious; it knows a lot more about us than our conscious self does, and is doing its best to set us straight by dreams. Messrs. Sigmund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung said something about that.

I don’t know if it has been determined if our awareness of dreams are only a byproduct of mental processes during sleep, with our interpretation of dreams only a lucky consequence?
The liberating effect of dreams properly interpreted is well documented. (KJV Bible, Job 33:14 – 33)

An interesting aspect of dreams is the fact that they speak in symbols. I see a conncetion with the fact that man’s early written languages were symbolic as well. Even our alphabet is made of symbols; each symbol representing a sound.

With all that said, I don’t doubt that a believer may die happier than a non-believer. He may die with a big grin on his face: OMG, I am on my way to heaven to see my loved ones again and we will forever live happily together.


ETA Posted it here because I didn't see it at UD, my mistake.

Edited by Quack on Mar. 16 2013,03:18

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,10:21   

Quote (Quack @ Mar. 15 2013,09:49)
ETA of course down the drain.

Hmmm...seems to be there. I saw it yesterday and I'm looking at it right now. Check post 5.

Very nice btw!

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,10:52   

I think it would be more nearly correct to say that religion (organized faith) is a product of evolution. It is useful to be able to pass experience and conclusions from one person to the group. It is useful to be able to do this without being able to demonstrate and prove everything.

What religious believers fail to note or mention is that faith is actually faith in the testimony of people.

ETA:

The same social faculty that enables lying also enables religion.

There are two religion generating behaviors that are readily observable. One is hallucination and delusion, which if passed on to others becomes the core of religion.

The second is lying or making stuff up for power or profit. Witness Scientology.

Edited by midwifetoad on Mar. 15 2013,11:21

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,12:09   

WJM doubles down on his "Objective Arbiter of Truth" from yesterday in the same thread:

Quote
The problem is that RMD’s not only have a faulty brain (not mind, for an RMD, don’t steal the concept), as you say, they have no presumed means by which to check and correct the output of their faulty brain; they have no presumed non-arbitrary standard by which to evaluate arguments; they have no presumed supervening capacity to evaluate evidence and argument above whatever causes them to think whatever they think with their faulty brain.

(snipped the poetic waxing)

But I’m not arguing about what the world **is**, I’m pointing out – whether you realize it or now, and whether you accept it or not – that there are assumptions that must underlie any argument where you expect someone else to be able to reach a sound conclusion about the truth-value of your argument. RMD’s deny those assumptions, but unwittingly steal them in every argument they make. Because without those assumption, there’s no reason to make an attempt at a “sound argument” in the first place.


C'mon William. Think for just one second about your claim. If "RMDs" (as you refer to us) actually had such faulty brains, we'd have been dead long ago. Now I freely admit that there's no way to be sure I'm not dead, but it gets just a little silly to presume such when it's perfectly easy to make up my own term of "living" and labeling myself as such. And so long as everyone else goes along with that label, guess what? It becomes a standard.

The easiest way to understand this is the King's standard. If I take a given length of string that more or less equals the length of my foot and call that length of string a "foot" and then precede to measure all other lengths by that string and tell everyone else they have to use it too, guess what? We have a standard of measure.

Oh, I can hear your retort now - "but your faulty brain doesn't know what a "foot" actually is and other people's faulty brains may perceive a different length of for the string". While I can't exactly argue against this, it does beg the question of how such hypothetical straw people could ever survive given that such faulty perception would invariably land them at the bottom of a very sheer cliff eventually.

Of course, we do in fact suffer from this perceptual inaccuracy to some degree. Just about everyone knows the old canard about how asking a man to demonstrate six inches will invariably lead to him holding his hands roughly a foot apart. But that sort of inaccuracy is fairly well known to derive from expectation, not lack of a standard. When presented with a one foot ruler, most men blush slightly and acknowledge their error. And much as this sort of estimation may vex us, most of us seem to figure out how far away we should stand from urinal without consulting some god.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,12:14   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 15 2013,16:52)
I think it would be more nearly correct to say that religion (organized faith) is a product of evolution. It is useful to be able to pass experience and conclusions from one person to the group. It is useful to be able to do this without being able to demonstrate and prove everything.

What religious believers fail to note or mention is that faith is actually faith in the testimony of people.

ETA:

The same social faculty that enables lying also enables religion.

There are two religion generating behaviors that are readily observable. One is hallucination and delusion, which if passed on to others becomes the core of religion.

The second is lying or making stuff up for power or profit. Witness Scientology.

The extent to which religion has a genetic basis (if it does) may also be attributable to social selection for 'belonging'; 'agreement'. It is a well-known, experimentally-verified human trait to go along with a group, even when you know they are wrong. And to punish 'dissenters', even when you are taught (by your own goddamned religion!) that that is wrong***

*** Well. some bits of the book say "be tolerant", others say "kill the fuckers". Hard to choose.

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,13:08   

So once again the people least capable of thinking "objectively" insist that the conditions for doing so must have been magically provided.  Explain yourselves, then.

They are right at recognizing that evolution threatens their dogmatic little world, of course.  Evolution doesn't provide the bases for determining "absolute truth" and the rest of their nonsense, but neither does anything else (eta, not counting fictions like IDiocy).  Ask Kant, certainly no atheist, and something of an IDist.

What evolution does is fairly well explain why even reasonably intelligent people can fall for denying honest methods and results when these, particularly the latter, end up threatening both individual egos and group identities.  We clearly are not "designed for truth" at all, more for rationalizing (at least in the social realm--in getting resources, things need to work--which is why scientists can't afford ID, but IDiots can), and it took considerable cultural evolution to get around human prejudices to methods that actually get to honest truths (relative to intersubjective standards), and these are constantly at odds with human tendencies to prevaricate and bend the truth.

What excuse do they have for people not getting "objective truth"?  Just some idiotic "free will" that they can't explain but "must exist," and the fact that we're the "other" that hates the "truth."  It doesn't even make internal sense (wouldn't free will at least tend toward the truth, in their views?), it only really makes sense as a bunch of tribal rationalizers opposed to the methods--and results--that threaten them.  However, that won't make sense to them, so long as they can hold to the fiction that they really are holders of the "objective truth," against the evil-doers who hate God too much to accept it.  

Why such evil-doers should even exist isn't the least bit explained, it just supports their dogmatic position against us.  And that is enough for them.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,13:28   

Quote
It is a well-known, experimentally-verified human trait to go along with a group...


Yes, but observing and copying others is also pretty basic.

"Faith" is not about conforming to the group; it is about believing when the only evidence is the testimony of another person.

One can conform out of fear, but one believes because we are so inclined.

My underlying point is that religion is ultimately the invention of individual people who are able to get others to believe in them.

When someone says he believes in god, what he is actually saying is he believes what he has been told. Only the mentally ill get their information directly from god.

Now believers do not wish to be seen as credulous, so all kinds of rationalizations have arisen. Some very clever people have wasted lifetimes developing philosophical rationalizations proving the existence of god, but ultimately they are trying to justify faith in their parents, friends, peers and such.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,13:30   

When I read their extensive justifications for the incoherence of 'our position', I picture God caught in the existential angst they demand that we acknowledge. "How can I know what's true, moral or just? Do I have free will, or am I just at the mercy of 'spirit-matter'? Waaaaaah!"

They are now deep into arguing over the characteristics and capacities of this ineffable being.

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,13:43   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,13:30)
When I read their extensive justifications for the incoherence of 'our position', I picture God caught in the existential angst they demand that we acknowledge. "How can I know what's true, moral or just? Do I have free will, or am I just at the mercy of 'spirit-matter'? Waaaaaah!"

They are now deep into arguing over the characteristics and capacities of this ineffable being.

Yep. Funny how all those pins remain sharp regardless of the number of angels they try to rationalize dancing away on them...

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,13:48   

Yup, so far it's all science, all the time!!!

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,14:32   

Usual wanking by WJM.  If it's not absolute, it's "arbitrary:"

Quote
they have no presumed non-arbitrary standard by which to evaluate arguments


Uh, yeah, there's nothing like reality against which we might compare our evaluations.  The proof is that they don't compare their claims to reality.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,14:42   

Quote
Uh, yeah, there's nothing like reality against which we might compare our evaluations.  The proof is that they don't compare their claims to reality.


WJM makes his own reality. That's what he means by free will.

I'm not making that up.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,15:02   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 15 2013,14:42)
Quote
Uh, yeah, there's nothing like reality against which we might compare our evaluations.  The proof is that they don't compare their claims to reality.


WJM makes his own reality. That's what he means by free will.

I'm not making that up.

Any reason he's choosing such a poor reality?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,15:17   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 15 2013,16:02)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 15 2013,14:42)
Quote
Uh, yeah, there's nothing like reality against which we might compare our evaluations.  The proof is that they don't compare their claims to reality.


WJM makes his own reality. That's what he means by free will.

I'm not making that up.

Any reason he's choosing such a poor reality?

poor little buddy just has a particularly shitty imagination

that or he's tard

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2013,17:54   

Quote (Robin @ Mar. 15 2013,10:21)
Quote (Quack @ Mar. 15 2013,09:49)
ETA of course down the drain.

Hmmm...seems to be there. I saw it yesterday and I'm looking at it right now. Check post 5.

Very nice btw!

Thank you! Glad to know it made it, guess I didn't look hard enough.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Diogenes' Lamp



Posts: 1
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,02:05   

Quote (Robin @ Mar. 15 2013,09:44)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 15 2013,08:46)
The rant of Diogenes is epic.

I agree. That is some kind of takedown! Awesome!

Well, since I'm apparently banned at UD, perhaps someone non-banned might want to copy and paste, say, just the last two of my anti-Arrington comments from the Sandwalk thread into the anti-Robin UD thread.

Possibly removing a few occurrences of the word "wanker", to avoid getting banned yourself.

--------------
A SCRATCH? Your arm's off!

The difference between Young Earth creationists and ID proponents is that creationists believe that 6,000 years ago dirt turned into the human genome by magic, whereas IDers are just crazy.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,04:07   

Quote (Diogenes' Lamp @ Mar. 16 2013,03:05)
Quote (Robin @ Mar. 15 2013,09:44)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 15 2013,08:46)
The rant of Diogenes is epic.

I agree. That is some kind of takedown! Awesome!

Well, since I'm apparently banned at UD, perhaps someone non-banned might want to copy and paste, say, just the last two of my anti-Arrington comments from the Sandwalk thread into the anti-Robin UD thread.

Possibly removing a few occurrences of the word "wanker", to avoid getting banned yourself.

I would argue the only improvements that should be made might involve a few more occurrences of the word "wanker".

As for being banned, we're pretty much all already banned from UD (though there may be a few socks left in the drawer). They're not our biggest fans over there.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,06:22   

WJM:
   
Quote


Graham2:

1. To prevent infinite regress with a causeless cause
2. To provide a source of free will, without which we cannot hope to deliberately discern truth
3. To provide a source of a perfect arbiter of truth, without which all arguments are subject to arbitrary and subjective conclusions.
4. To provide a source of a perfect, objective good, without which morality cannot be anything other than subjective and arbitrary – “anything goes”
5. To provide a reasonable explanation for the fine-tuning of the cosmos
6. To resolve the problem quantum wave function collapse presents to the formation of a universe prior to the presence of any physical observers

Whether you call the entity that resolves those issues god or donald duck, it’s still a necessary entity.

It is all so clear now. I will get in touch with the perfect arbiter of truth and morality next time I need a definitive answer on something. Maybe he can explain the problem of quantum wave function collapse for Universe formation while he's at it, and why he's the solution. And I can contact him at ... er ... ?

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,07:13   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 16 2013,04:22)
WJM:
   
Quote


Graham2:

1. To prevent infinite regress with a causeless cause
2. To provide a source of free will, without which we cannot hope to deliberately discern truth
3. To provide a source of a perfect arbiter of truth, without which all arguments are subject to arbitrary and subjective conclusions.
4. To provide a source of a perfect, objective good, without which morality cannot be anything other than subjective and arbitrary – “anything goes”
5. To provide a reasonable explanation for the fine-tuning of the cosmos
6. To resolve the problem quantum wave function collapse presents to the formation of a universe prior to the presence of any physical observers

Whether you call the entity that resolves those issues god or donald duck, it’s still a necessary entity.

It is all so clear now. I will get in touch with the perfect arbiter of truth and morality next time I need a definitive answer on something. Maybe he can explain the problem of quantum wave function collapse for Universe formation while he's at it, and why he's the solution. And I can contact him at ... er ... ?



--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,11:50   

If it weren't fer bad luck, I'd have no luck at all.

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,12:33   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 15 2013,13:30)
When I read their extensive justifications for the incoherence of 'our position', I picture God caught in the existential angst they demand that we acknowledge. "How can I know what's true, moral or just? Do I have free will, or am I just at the mercy of 'spirit-matter'? Waaaaaah!"

They are now deep into arguing over the characteristics and capacities of this ineffable being.

I thought they weren't allowed to talk about the designer.

First rule of Design Club: Don't talk about the designer.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2013,13:54   

Midwife toad:  
Quote
"Faith" is not about conforming to the group; it is about believing when the only evidence is the testimony of another person.

Faith is also believing DESPITE the evidence.  Think Young Earth Creationists who believe the Bible despite the evidence of geology, astronomy, biology and just about every other branch of science that exists.

Or think Barry reading his own piece and thinking, "Pretty good!"

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < ... 259 260 261 262 263 [264] 265 266 267 268 269 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]