Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 01:32 am
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
One day frank might just realize that a lack of evidence can , in fact, constitute evidence.
What a traumatic day that will be for him.


Right!

Like lack of evidence of sentient life on the planets circling the 60 nearest suns to our Sol...

...is evidence that no sentient life exists on those planets.

Shyt for brains!!!!!

I said can frank, can.
Your contrived example is evidence only of your inability to budge even an iota from your position to hear reason.
Sad really.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 03:26 am
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
One day frank might just realize that a lack of evidence can , in fact, constitute evidence.
What a traumatic day that will be for him.


Right!

Like lack of evidence of sentient life on the planets circling the 60 nearest suns to our Sol...

...is evidence that no sentient life exists on those planets.

Shyt for brains!!!!!



I said can frank, can.
Your contrived example is evidence only of your inability to budge even an iota from your position to hear reason.
Sad really.


What is sad right now is a post from you that is goddam near unintelligible.

Learn how to write...then think about learning how to reason!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 03:28 am
ossobuco wrote:
And Edgar, if any of us can get Frank to blink, it's you. Keep talkin'.


I suppose "to blink" means...to pretend I know stuff I do not know like you poor saps.

That ain't ever gonna happen.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 04:46 am
No, ossobuco, Frank is not likely to experience any sort of truth revealing revelation. This I have known all along. It is not for the blind, such as he, I participate in this thread. I just do what I do to give a voice to those who might otherwise be bullied into accepting Frank's position, merely because they haven't thought things through clearly enough to know how to resist.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 04:56 am
edgarblythe- Are you talking about me? For years I was an atheist. I still am, in the sense that a god is not a part of my life. Listening to Frank, over the years, I have come to the conclusion (not by being bullied, but by active thought) that human beings have very little knowledge about the origins of the universe. The "big bang" is called the "Big Bang THEORY" for a reason. It is a theory, not a scientifically verified fact. It may very well be true, but we don't know that....................yet.

Do I believe that there is a "master computer programmer" up there in the sky? Absolutely not. I think that that particular concept is one of the sillier of man's theories. I think that human beings derive some psychological comfort in believing in "big daddy", just as kids believe in Santa Claus, and the tooth fairy. But to me, that is all that it is, wishful thinking.

As of now, I just have to say that I really don't know, one way or the other..................................And what's more, I really don't care!!!
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:14 am
Phoenix
I haven't thought about you at all, because you are a strong person who knows her own mind. There are many other possible readers who may or may not even post here, about whom I am speaking.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:20 am
edgarblythe- The reason that I thought that you might be talking about me, is that I can thank Frank for helping me to think through and modify my decades old position on the subject.

It just occurred to me that the reason that my position had not changed in 40 years, was because I never really thought about it during the interim. It was only in discussions on Abuzz, and later A2K, that I began to reevaluate my position.
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:41 am
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
One day frank might just realize that a lack of evidence can , in fact, constitute evidence.
What a traumatic day that will be for him.


Right!

Like lack of evidence of sentient life on the planets circling the 60 nearest suns to our Sol...

...is evidence that no sentient life exists on those planets.

Shyt for brains!!!!!



I said can frank, can.
Your contrived example is evidence only of your inability to budge even an iota from your position to hear reason.
Sad really.


What is sad right now is a post from you that is goddam near unintelligible.

Learn how to write...then think about learning how to reason!

That seems like perfectly clear english to me. Perhaps the problem lies with your reading comprehension?
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:44 am
fer cryin out loud...
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:47 am
snood wrote:
fer cryin out loud...

Just what is it you are trying to comment on here snood? To think, in another thread you just critisized the 'constructiveness' of the input of another member. How ironic.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 05:52 am
I will make one comment, however, Phoenix. In science, a theory is not the proposition that the Big Bang, or evolution, or whatever, may be disproven. Once they have determined that the Big Bang is real, the theory is the body of supporting evidence, which is constantly refined.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 06:01 am
edgarblythe- I understand what you are saying. What I believe is that we, as human beings, have only scratched the surface in terms of what we know, with reasonable confidence, about our universe. Unfortunately, I don't think that we will have most of the answers in our lifetimes, or even in our great grandchildren's lifetimes.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 06:21 am
No, but that's no cause to assume that imaginings without an iota of evidence have to be given serious consideration.
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 09:30 am
edgarblythe wrote:
No, but that's no cause to assume that imaginings without an iota of evidence have to be given serious consideration.

It seems even, reason to give said imaginings less consideration. And by less I mean a passing guffaw over morning coffee.
If our best and brightest minds (science) are barely scratching the surface of what makes the universe tick, how can that which boils down to unsupportable mythology be given any sort of real credibility? The agnostic position is almost as mind numbing as the theistic position on which it hinges.

The argument that 'science doesn't have all the answers, therefore anything, and I do mean anything, should be considered' that frank likes to preach (I'd say support, but preach is a far more appropriate term for what frank does) just doesn't take plausibility into account.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 12:27 pm
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
One day frank might just realize that a lack of evidence can , in fact, constitute evidence.
What a traumatic day that will be for him.


Right!

Like lack of evidence of sentient life on the planets circling the 60 nearest suns to our Sol...

...is evidence that no sentient life exists on those planets.

Shyt for brains!!!!!



I said can frank, can.
Your contrived example is evidence only of your inability to budge even an iota from your position to hear reason.
Sad really.


What is sad right now is a post from you that is goddam near unintelligible.

Learn how to write...then think about learning how to reason!

That seems like perfectly clear english to me. Perhaps the problem lies with your reading comprehension?


If that comment of yours seems like perfectly clear English...you are a lot dumber than even I suspected.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 12:30 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
No, ossobuco, Frank is not likely to experience any sort of truth revealing revelation. This I have known all along. It is not for the blind, such as he, I participate in this thread. I just do what I do to give a voice to those who might otherwise be bullied into accepting Frank's position, merely because they haven't thought things through clearly enough to know how to resist.


What a laugh!

My position is that I do not know the REALITY of existence...and it is my opinion that there is not enough evidence upon which to base the kinds of silly guesses atheists and theists make about that REALITY.

And you are here to "protect" people from that!

Good grief. Atheists do go as far into delusion as theists.
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 12:34 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:


If that comment of yours seems like perfectly clear English...you are a lot dumber than even I suspected.

Try reading it again, slower.

Exactly what part of what i said are you having trouble understanding? english is your first language, right?

As for you trying to take a stab at my smarts..that's a lolzer.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 12:41 pm
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:


If that comment of yours seems like perfectly clear English...you are a lot dumber than even I suspected.

Try reading it again, slower.

Exactly what part of what i said are you having trouble understanding? english is your first language, right?

As for you trying to take a stab at my smarts..that's a lolzer.


Okay, Moron...

...here is the statement cut and pasted:

I said can frank, can.
Your contrived example is evidence only of your inability to budge even an iota from your position to hear reason.
Sad really.


You are telling me that is clear English?

Wake the fuk up!
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 01:19 pm
Ok frank. Since you seem incapable of anything aside from derogatory remarks and namecalling when you are stuck, let me spoon feed it to you.
Here is my post, in context with your post that I was responding to. My notations are to clarify plain english into ever simpler english.
Doktor S wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
One day frank might just realize that a lack of evidence can , in fact, constitute evidence.
What a traumatic day that will be for him.


Right!

Like lack of evidence of sentient life on the planets circling the 60 nearest suns to our Sol...

...is evidence that no sentient life exists on those planets.

Shyt for brains!!!!!

I said can frank, can. -referring of course to my use of the qualifier can, which you seemed to ignore-

Your contrived example- sentient life on 60 nearest blah blah- is evidence- A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment- only of your inability-Lack of ability or means- to budge-To alter a position or attitude- even an iota - A very small amount- from your position to hear reason - A declaration made to explain or justify action, decision, or conviction--

Sad really. -self explanatory - I hope - and all the more true as of this posting.-


The fact that I must break down these simple semantics to someone pretending to be my intellectual superior is making me giggle.
0 Replies
 
Bartikus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jul, 2006 01:58 pm
Look at the bright side. At least you guys are'nt hateful, narrow/closed minded, bigoted jerks with superiority complexes like those zeolot religionists!

doh. Surprised
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
The "atheism" thread locked, yet again, eh? - Discussion by layman
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
@MyFellowAtheists: How Big an Atheist Are You? - Question by Kolyo
Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity - Discussion by XXSpadeMasterXX
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
The Atheist/Theist unity thread (a Discussion) - Discussion by Smileyrius
Can atheists believe in an immortal soul? - Question by neologist
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Agnostic vs Atheist
  3. » Page 18
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 11:07:47
▲ ▼