XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.philosophy, sci.logic
XPost: alt.talk.creationism
From: Esque"@gmail.com
On 5/21/2016 11:41 PM, mur@. wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2016 23:30:57 -0400, "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Try to explain how you would like anyone to think that could possibly be
the
> case.
>
I have no idea! That's for those who believe this way.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
