XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.philosophy, sci.logic
XPost: alt.talk.creationism
From: Esque"@gmail.com
On 5/19/2016 9:58 PM, mur@. wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2016 17:39:11 -0400, "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> On 5/12/2016 8:19 PM, mur@. wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 May 2016 00:54:35 -0400, "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/30/2016 10:47 PM, mur@. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 05:52:48 +0000 (UTC), Bob Officer
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I guess those scientist which have created self replicating proteins
are
>>>>>> really just gods?
>>>>>
>>>>> Your limitted ability to think about things might restict you to
something
>>>>> so lame. A less infantile way of thinking about it would be that they
may have
>>>>> made one of the first baby steps toward moving in the direction of
developing
>>>>> the technology for some humans to eventually become gods, or at least
god like.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The success of NA and AA programs are false claims, or don't you follow
how
>>>>>> those false statistical claims were made?
>>>>>
>>>>> Your way of thinking about restricts you from considering it for the
>>>>> evidence it is. If you want to say what you want people to think your
escape is
>>>>> then just do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as medical miracles, those are the results of hard working
doctors,
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course any child could cling to that being the only possibility
with all
>>>>> their faith, but I don't even make the attempt like you do, and have no
reason
>>>>> to at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>> not an imaginary sky pixies intercession.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that you can't comprehend why God would not reside on this
planet
>>>>> if he exists clearly reveals the horribly low level you're mentally
capable of
>>>>> "thinking" about the possibility of his existence. It's like on a moron
level,
>>>>> or at "best" a severely retarded level.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Last there are no accepted miracles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your blatant lies can't make people stop accepting them.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Only folkish and stupid people that
>>>>>> out of their ignorance swallow bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have shown yourself to be on a severely retarded level at "best"
>>>>> regarding this topic. YOU have shown it clearly, and without question.
>>>>>
>>>> It's impossible to respond to everything that people claim, but in
>>>> the final analysis the issue always comes down to does God exist
>>>
>>> He tried to ridicule the idea that God would be in the "sky", and
doing that
>>> shows how unrealistic a person's "thinking" is regarding this topic. Any
place
>>> not on Earth is in the "sky" from our perspective, so by attempting to
ridicule
>>> that God would be in the "sky" these people give the clear impression they
feel
>>> that God would be resticted to this planet if he does exist.
>>>
>> Right, just above the clouds.
>
> To YOU, showing how unrealistic your thinking is.
>
>> But not too high since the air would be
>> too rarefied to breath.
>
> To YOU, showing how unrealistic your thinking is. Thinking beyond your
> apparent ability considers that God would be able to exist beyond not only
the
> surface of this planet, but also its atmosphere, gravitational attraction,
and
> even the star we orbit.
>
>>>> and
>>>> where is the proof? But there can be no proof in either science or
>>>> theology.
>>>
>>> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
>>> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
>>> so would change things too much.
>>>
>> Perhaps, God wants to see how people act in his absence. IOW this life
>> is could be a trial run.
>
> Could be. If he provided us with proof of his existence things would be
> completely different.
>
>>>> Proof belongs in math, not science and not theology. But is
>>>> there any kind of evidence for God and creation independent of the
>>>> Bible? There is no direct empirical evidence, however there is
>>>> scientific evidence which can certainly be seen as _indirect_ evidence
>>>> for creation of the universe and life on at least one planet we know of.
>>>> This is totally independent of anything in the Bible or any religious
>>>> material.
>>>>
>>>> Indirect evidence is not unknown in scientific circles. Indeed
>>>> just about everything known about the atom is through indirect
>>>> evidence.
>>>> We don't see electrons, however there is indirect evidence they exist.
>>>> Scientist had indirect evidence for the existence of a particular
>>>> fundamental particle since the 1960 of called Higgs Boson (the god
>>>> particle). It was discovered to be real in 2912 at Cern. There is
>>>> only indirect evidence of the matter in the earth's core. Tracks
>>>> in earth's strata is indirect evidence that some animal pass by
>>>> a certain location in the past. So, in the same sense, there is
>>>> indirect evidence for creation of the universe and life and thus a
>>>> Creator. Such indirect evidence can be seen in astronomy, and
>>>> astrophysicist, the preponderance of stasis in the fossil record and by
>>>> the existence of homeobox genes which are ubiquitous through out the
>>>> animal kingdom..
>>>
>>> That's another basic starting line atheists can't get as "far" as.
>>>
>> Don't know what this means.
>
> It's evidence that there was some sort of intelligent influence involved
> with how things became as they are.
>
I was making fun of idiots who think God dwells in the sky and is
somehow confined to our world.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
