Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

It is only yesterday ed that you said you were offering no more contributions to this thread.

Perhaps if you tie a knot in your handerchief when you make such resolutions it will help you keep them.

Perhaps you should indulge in a turd sandwich, dude.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

I label theism supersition because it is not an attemp to explain the unknown, it is an unnecessary appeal to the unknowable. Theism introduces the supernatural, and, having done so, asserts that as evidence is not there for the supernatural, one must "have faith"--and that is what makes it a superstition. I understand that those whose intellectual tool box is largely empty don't get the distinction.

Tool boxes are not needed to get such a simple distinction.

What do Setanta mean by "unnecessary"? He's back on tautologies again. I'm okay that faith involves superstition but not that a superstition is unnecessary.

0 Replies

Set says:
You have assumed the burden of an explantion for the existence of a god, of anygods, and provided no explanation. You fail.

Anybody who wants me to believe there "may" be a god has got to give a plausible reason. After hundreds of posts, Frank has yet to come up with a single one. His slavering pet, spendi, has yet to say anything at all.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

When I get the answers to those questions and a chance to discuss those answers, we can move on.

You'll never move on like this Frank. There's nowhere to move to. Unless you deal with the entrails reading problem you are stuck in a circle.

That goes for all of you. It is emblematic of all religious institutions and easy to understand.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Ill have you know that the Pastafarians are a real religion.

Not without tomato sauce surely?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

None of those definitions of superstition, which we all know anyway, says anything about them being unnecessary.

The table settings for a posh Thanksgiving dinner are included in all of them. They are a form of mumbo-jumbo.

0 Replies

@spendius,

the natural response of the PAstafarians is that whenever the Sacred Flying Spaghetti Monster's name is mentioned
the proper responce is "Sauce be upon him"

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe said to spendi:

Quote:

Perhaps you should indulge in a turd sandwich, dude

I distinctly recall spendi say that he is allergic to bread

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

His slavering pet, spendi, has yet to say anything at all.

I doubt Frank will agree with that ed.

I have said it many times in different ways. Not only a plausible reason. A pragmatic one. It is good for you.

1 Reply

@igm,

Here is where we stood last:

Quote:

So before we get on to other questions from you…allow me these few:

What evidence do you see that gods exist?

What evidence do you see that gods do not exist?

That way we can both evaluate the evidence and see if a reasonable guess can be made based on the evidence available. Of course, it would be reasonable to discuss and evaluate the evidence…and see if it justifies making a guess in either direction…before going on to any follow up questions you may have for me.

Now...you do not need any other information to answer those questions, igm. If you answer them and we discuss your answers, we can move on. Until then, we are not.

So answer them or do not answer them as you see fit.

0 Replies

@spendius,

150 views in an hour. Somebody is taking notice.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

... a plausible basis for your contention that there may be gods.

If you are making the contention there is no possibility there are gods...I would love to hear your defense of that contention.

Try to do it as unemotionally as possible...if you can.

1 Reply

It is so simple. Somebody told Frank there are gods. Frank said, Well I can't prove there are not any. His first and greatest mistake. In the absence of any basis for making the assertion, he ought to have said, flying spaghetti monsters. Instead, he let his innermost insecurities take over and make of him a crusader for the "I don't know." He was and remains lost in a mire of his own making. Don't let it drive you mad, Frank. It's okay to let it go.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

That's a big 'if," and one upon whichyou desparately rely. I have made no such claim, and am uninterested in examining silly propositions. If someone say to me that there is a god, i say i don't believe that. I'm under no obligation to disprove anyone's claim, and people who make such claims are difinitely under an obligation to support them.

In your post #4860084 . . .

You wrote:

In any case, I am asserting that there may be gods just as there may be no gods…and that is not superstition…it is axiomatic, actually.

You avow that as an assertion. If you assert that there may be gods, you have the burden of proof. If you assert that there may be no gods, you have the burden of proof. You have done both--you've really twisted yourself in a knot there--good luck.

I see you're still attempting you use an inferential claim of emotionalism on my part as one of your crutches. Sad, really sad . . . tell me again about civility, i could use a chuckle.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

It is so simple. Somebody told Frank there are gods. Frank said, Well I can't prove there are not any. His first and greatest mistake. In the absence of any basis for making the assertion, he ought to have said, flying spaghetti monsters. Instead, he let his innermost insecurities take over and make of him a crusader for the "I don't know." He was and remains lost in a mire of his own making. Don't let it drive you mad, Frank. It's okay to let it go.

None of that was necessary, Edgar...and it was not funny or clever. It was a try...but not an especially nice try.

I do not know if there are gods; I do not know if there are no gods.

You apparently think you do know.

Hey, that part IS funny.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Do you dispute Frank that if there is no God we are all clockwork oranges? If so will you explain why?

1 Reply

What evidence do you see that gods exist?
None

What evidence do you see that gods do not exist?
The complete non-necessity for them to exist.

Joe(Okay. That wraps that up. What's next?)Nation

2 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Quote:

What evidence do you see that gods exist?

None

Okay, we agree there.

Quote:

What evidence do you see that gods do not exist?

The complete non-necessity for them to exist.

“The complete non-necessity for them to exist” is not actually evidence that gods do not exist…anymore than the complete non-necessity for sentient beings to exist on any planet circling the nearest three suns to Sol is evidence that no sentient beings exist on any of those planets.

There is no evidence that gods exist…and there is no evidence that gods do not exist.

The existence of a GOD is an entirely plausible explanation for existence—not a necessity, but a possibility.

And we have no evidence in either direction on that issue.

But thanks for paraticipating.

1 Reply

@Joe Nation,

Turn it up Joe. We all knew that at 10.

There is no necessity for our sort of Christian society to exist either.

2 million, maybe 4, of human existence and a mere 2000 years of our God's existence and look at the difference.

Have you an explanation for this dramatic change coming from any other source.

Your silly argument was just as true in all that 2 million years. Imagine it being heeded.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I can't help noticing Frank that Joe requesting your favourite record be played again has distracted you from answering the question I asked you and, if applicable, the rider.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know