XPost: alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic, talk.politics.guns
XPost: sac.politics
From: me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net
"Wile E. Coyote" wrote in message
news:XnsA85A98AB145A6Wereofftoseethewizrd@85.214.115.223...
> bilgat@m.nu wrote in news:390b4d96se915mngtpqi7kv1vmbcob4mja@4ax.com:
>
>>>> So absence of evidence is evidence of absence? Which science method is
>>>> that?
>>
>> First of all the is the most retarded thing I have ever heard of......
>> Absence of evidence is not evidence of everything.
>> But IF YOU CANT SHOW SOMETHING is there then that is proof that it is
>> not there, if you think about it you may figure it out. But you are
>> theist so I would say that you will not
>>
>> Evidence is usually stated as something left behind to show a fact
>> that was. You can not show that a god ever existed that currently
>> exists or will ever exist. So evidence is a moot point. Show me a god,
>> and I will show you why it is not a god, and why you are a moron
>>
>>
>> Belief and faith are evidence of fear and stupidity not of a harry
>> potter.
>>
>>
>
> Your abusiveness reveals your fear. Why can you not tolerate other views?
You note how he demands evidence even though he has no idea what the
evidence showing god(s) exist would be like?
He's like the person asserting there is no evidence of anything that has not
yet been discovered as proof that everything has been discovered.
Until you know the exact nature of the what the evidence would be, how can
you even look for it?
I've already postulated a theory in which god is literally the universe, and
as such the evidence would be literally everything we know including
ourselves....but until we know that is the evidence we need to look for it's
not going to have that meaning for us.
Until you know what a god would look like, how can you say you've not seen
one?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
