Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,922 Year: 4,179/9,624 Month: 1,050/974 Week: 9/368 Day: 9/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pseudoskepticism and logic
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2137 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 6 of 562 (524872)
09-19-2009 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Straggler
09-19-2009 6:37 PM


Ending now?
...then this disussion will be ill tempered and pointless and may as well end now.
Great! Thanks, guys.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Straggler, posted 09-19-2009 6:37 PM Straggler has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 09-19-2009 6:49 PM Coyote has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2137 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 198 of 562 (526464)
09-27-2009 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by onifre
09-27-2009 2:04 AM


Not sure who's missing something
I'm not bothering to read most of these posts--they're too long!
If you want them read shorten them up to a few pithy points. On these threads, extreme length in a post does not add to the discussion no matter how good the material might be.
All I need to show is that the word "god" is a meaningless word (especially when used by a deist) that lacks any description or characteristic.
Rather, there are too many descriptions and characteristics; virtually all are contradictory, and none are supported by empirical evidence.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by onifre, posted 09-27-2009 2:04 AM onifre has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024