XPost: alt.philosophy, sci.logic, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: alt.atheism, sci.skeptic   
   From: sylvia@not.at.this.address   
      
   On 25/03/2016 1:49 PM, Evil Roy Slade wrote:   
   > Sylvia Else  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 25/03/2016 12:35 PM, Evil Roy Slade wrote:   
   >>> Sylvia Else  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 25/03/2016 12:13 PM, Evil Roy Slade wrote:   
   >>>>> Sylvia Else  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Theists don't test their beliefs.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Bullshit.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The existence of God is not testable.   
   >>>   
   >>> That's beside the point, and it depends entirely on how you define   
   >>> testable, plus your unstated criteria for what constitutes evidence.   
   >>>   
   >>> I was once a theist and tested my beliefs, consequently I tossed all   
   >>> gods of all religions. So much for your emphatic declaration and the   
   >>> unthinking assumptions you support it with.   
   >>   
   >> You may have decided that there was nothing to support your beliefs.   
   >> That's not the same as testing them.   
   >   
   > You presumptuous fuckwit. How dare you make up bullshit and try to paint   
   > me with it in order to cover your lame ass merely because some thing is   
   > unfathomable to you.   
   >   
   >> There is no conceivable way to distinguish the existence of God from the   
   >> non-existence of God, because the "theory" of God does not make testable   
   >> predictions.   
   >   
   > So, what is the 'the "theory" of God'?   
   >   
   >> It is reasonable to take the view that there's no better reason to   
   >> believe in God than to believe in undetectable Unicorns, or anything   
   >> else that could be believed in but not demonstrated. A thinking person   
   >> might decide that there's no point believing in God therefore.   
   >>   
   >> Most theists don't get that far, because they were too well   
   >> indoctrinated when they were children (a kind of child abuse, IMHO).   
   >   
   > Hahahahah! I made you move your goalposts. First it was an all   
   > encompassing statement, now it's just 'most'.   
   >   
   >> Sylvia.   
   >   
   > You're not smart by half. I hope you don't include yourself in the set   
   > of thinking people.   
      
   You do seem to be taking this rather personally.   
      
   Sylvia.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)