Into the Night
Contributor
Cliche fallacy. No argument presented.
Archaeology of the New Testament
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
ZenMode
Well-known member
Denial of logic fallacy.
Into the Night
Contributor
Denial of logic. Inversion fallacy.
You're a moron!
Into the Night
Contributor
So you have no point. Typical.
My point is you're a moron!
IBDaMann
Probably the worse human in the threads
How many of the people you wish to claim are dead or are brain dead? Let's see.
Brain Dead
Dead
Dead
Dead
Dead
Dead
Dead
You don't speak for dead people, so the only other people who agree with you are brain dead, and that would happen to be you.
I notice that you still haven't provided a single test of randomness that the universe fails.
How many of these people are living, rational adults? Let's see.
Why, all of them. Amazing.
IBDaMann
Probably the worse human in the threads
Can humans examine all nails that are hammered, all screws that are driven, all circuits that are metered, etc?
Would it defeat the point, or is it fully expected?
Nope.
Correction: like libertarian fascist technocratic humanity hating bitcoin globalist spooks.
I'm spot on. You are gibbering the absurd.
This doesn't even make sense.
IBDaMann
Probably the worse human in the threads
Nope. Science is atheistic and requires no beliefs.
Nope. In fact, the universe is a completely random dust ball, as you are aware, that passes every single test of randomness. By now you have researched this fully and discovered it to be true, and are in complete anti-science denial.
It must suck to be you.
The universe's randomness is globally understood and science exists.
Nope. Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking are officially registered on my team; I speak for them, sorry.
Neither is able to find a single test of randomness that the universe fails.
You stand alone in your padded cell.
ZenMode
Well-known member
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
the overleverage of all the AI bullshit is heading us to a war
yes.
you just want to take all the humans out of the silos, so you can kill everyone, don't you dabney Coleman?
Will anthropic learn peace through tic tac toe?
don't bet your dick on it.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking do not believe in any Abrahamic or personal god, but they still agree with me that the universe is organized and rationally intelligible.
A universe that can be described with the pure logic of math, is predictable, and obeys consistent universal laws can only be described as organized.
It is you who is using emotion and a predetermined belief system to force yourself to think the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary.
The first big clue you are wrong is that the nutjobs IntoTheNight, IBDmann, and Jerry Mathers agree with you.
ZenMode
Well-known member
Ok. That is also their opinions.
The organization or disorganization of the universe plays absolutely no role in my views about gods.
Again, you see what you want to see because of what you want to believe. This is how religion works in the absence of true evidence for a god. You find other reasons to believe. A relative survived stage 4 cancer - God did it. You narrowly miss a flight that goes down in flames - God did it. You just happen to buy a lottery ticket, which you never do! and win $10,000 - God did it.
The universe exists (and it's SO amazing!)- God must have done it.
You are acting like IntoTheNight. The opinions of history's most preeminent physicists and astronomers about the nature of the physical universe carry an extraordinary amount of weight.
It doesn't have to. Steven Hawking and Richard Dawkins are both basically atheists, but both have the scientific integrity to state that the universe taken as a whole appears organized, rationally intelligible, and lawful.
I became acutely aware of the order and organization of the universe when I was an agnostic/atheist studying physics, chemistry, and astronomy in college.
It has nothing to do with cancer.
The question is whether or not the best explanation for a lawful, logical, and rational universe is that it was caused by irrational, inanimate random chance. That's just a question of pure logic anyone can answer by inference or abstraction.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
you can't speak for them.
you're an idiotic fool trying to perpetuate Scientism, a religion based on not understanding science and pretending you know what famous scientists thought.
I posted their own words, and more importantly you can't even do science unless you believe the universe as a whole is rationally intelligible, organised, orderly.
I'm the only poster on this thread who uses a medley of science, deduction, history, reason, inference to support my ideas.
Scientism isn't science. It's philosophy. It's a philosophical worldview. One that claims we can only know truth through science.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
you'r inferences based on their words are overwrought and hallucinatory.
you're the biggest idiot on the thread.
thanks.
Into the Night
Contributor
An insult is not a point. Mantra 1a. Lame.
Into the Night
Contributor
You don't get to speak for the dead.
You don't get to speak for anyone else but you. Omniscience fallacy.
The Universe is unorganized.
The Universe is not logic.
The Universe is not mathematics.
There is no such thing as a 'universal law'.
The Universe is unorganized.
The Universe is not an emotion.
The Universe is not a belief system.
The Universe is unorganized.
Mantra 1a. Lame.
Attempted proof by insult.