|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Peanut Gallery | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2578 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
Chuck77 asks Team bluegenes:
How's it going with the Invisible\Imperceptible Pink Unicorn (IPU)? As RAZD pointed out Modulous has eloquently pointed out long ago that we don't get to decide what experiment the author of the theory must perform. See Message 458 and especially Message 460. The IPU is a dead issue here. - xongsmith, 5.7d
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2578 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
fuplicated
Edited by xongsmith, : Straggler??? this is a reply to Chuck77..don't have have a clue how this got mangled.... Edited by xongsmith, : No reason given. - xongsmith, 5.7d
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chuck77 Inactive Member |
xongsmith writes: I'm not with the Chuck77 camp, or even (GASP!) the RAZD camp! To put me in with those guys means you haven't been reading my stuff very closely. If you're not for RAZD's position and have been debating Modulous, Straggler, even bluegenes here then whos position are you actually arguing in favor of?
You don't seem to realize that I am on your side. No, they don't. Are you trying to polish their arguments for them? If so, what is it that you disagree with based on their comments that you feel aren't properly being expressed? What can you add to their postion that hasn't already been convered? IOW, based on your comments, you are arguing from both sides of your mouth. Which is it? What has everyone here including RAZD and bluegenes so absurdly missed that you are having trouble conveying to everyone?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
X writes: I can fly a plane through some temperature inversion layers without any cloud in the sky and get condensation on my wings which the fall off and to the ground, landing as RAIN. Taaaaddddaaaaaaa!!!!!! This Xongsmith is how the theory that "ALL raindrops are sourced from clouds" would be falsified. You have provided a demonstrable alternative source of raindrops. Now why are you objecting to similar falsification of "ALL supernatural concepts are sourced from human imagination".......? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
I can already see where this is going to go:
Chuck77 says that his evidence is that he 'knows' his god is real. This is exactly the same argument as Iano's argument that he 'knows' his god is real and that 'knowing' over rides all other evidence. I predict that this 'knowing' will become a stumbling point right off the bat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I suspect it will be something of a rehash of the thread, Religious Experiences - Evidence of God(s)?.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I predict that this 'knowing' will become a stumbling point right off the bat. Oh, Straggler can drag this out with continuing to poke and prod around "evidence" and the minutia of other definitions, but, I agree, this Great Debate has quickly hit the ultimate wall. As Sam Harris noted, faith ends all useful discussion. If this debate continues it will just be circular and boring.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
Straggler's mistake I think is to have let it go straight to discussing God. The way forward is to discuss proof in general and the failings of subjective evidence in general.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Straggler's mistake I think is to have let it go straight to discussing God. But it will end up there what ever happens, I think, because of the righteous power of 'knowing'. Arguing the definition of evidence won't affect 'knowing' (at least it did not in all of my conversations with Iano) one little bit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I dunno , I think that
Straggler writes: Exactly how do you know that your friend Joe is real rather than imaginary? Is a brilliant avenue of discussion which will force Chuck to discuss 'proof in general and the failings of subjective evidence in general.'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
AZ writes: Faith-Based Drudgery Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here? My name is Maximus Argumenticus Stragglerus, commander of the EvC beer lovers brigade, General of the late night posters alliance, loyal servant to the cause of truth justice and the EvC way. Father to a neglected son, husband to a EvC widow of a wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here? We have the greatest confidence, My Liege, that you will enthrall us all with your wit, intellect and charm. The name of Stragglerus will live forever in the archives of EvC. Please don't hurt me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Luckily for Straggler he decided to challenge one of the newer fundie believers instead of one of the more long-standing and rational theists.
I suppose it's always easier to pick on the new guy than to actually fight it out with someone your own size. Jon Edited by Jon, : No reason given. Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jon writes: Luckily for Straggler he decided to challenge one of the newer fundie believers instead of one of the more long-standing and rational theists. Huh? I decided to challenge? I just started a general thread on subjective evidence. Chuck wanted to turn it into a Great Debate between him and me. You can ask him why he made that decision. I've offered RAZD a GB before and he declined. At the end of the day I am happy to GB anyone who prefers that format. My only other GB was with a guy called Rob from ages back. I dunno if he qualified as a "long-standing and rational theist" but he certainly seemed so to me back then in my own noobie days.
Jon writes: I suppose it's always easier to pick on the new guy than to actually fight it out with someone your own size. I didn't realise I was a man of "size".... I'm flattered!!! But Jon anytime you want to Great Debate with me (after the current one) just say so. Assuming you consider yourself to be of sufficient "size" of course......
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Hopefully Chuck will learn something from all of this.
Chuck wanted to turn it into a Great Debate between him and me. You can ask him why he made that decision. Yes; the little guy is always eager to prove himself. It's up to the bigger man to turn him down.
But Jon anytime you want to Great Debate with me (after the current one) just say so. Like I said above. No thanks. Jon Love your enemies!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024