spendius wrote:Wolf O'Donnell wrote:An assertion without proof.
It's the weather round here Wolf. It's pointles complaining about the weather.
Doesn't stop it from being a popular British pasttime.
RexRed wrote:Not irrelevant.
It is irrelevant in the context of the argument, that science only observed things with the five senses. What does it matter if the electron is inanimate, alive or life in the context of the argument?
Quote:That is my whole point is that "life" is not "physical" but it is somewhere between the physical and the spiritual.
You fail to prove it, though. You have failed consistently to do so.
Quote:Life itself is the proof and there is reason to believe life does exists.
Circular logic here.
Quote:There is also reason to believe spirit exists also.
No proof given. You state there is reason and give no reason. How can we believe you? How can we tell you're not lying out of your fanny? (I mean the American term, meaning butt, and not the British term, meaning vagina).
Quote:So the logical theoretical grounds exist to surmise my alternative view.
Because you say it does? Not good enough.
Quote:Nothing blatantly disproves it other than purely biased opposition.
That doesn't prove anything. In fact, nothing blatantly proves your position, so therefore it cannot be as true as you say it is. Not that it's because you cannot disprove it, but because you cannot prove it.
Quote:The opposition supposes that just because there is not a "PHYSICAL" sign that God does not exist. Yet the universe IS ITSELF a physical sign.
No, the Universe itself is a physical sign that the Universe exists. Nothing more, nothing less. You cannot use as a physical sign to prove that God exists, because you can immediately use it as a physical sign that a Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, an Invisible Pink Unicorn exists, Zeus, and all the other deities from the past and new ones that I could fabricate right now, right here.
