SHEEPEOPLE

[Davian]

Okay, we'll call it "critically assessing" remarks.
I am a king, the son of a King.

I thought you said you were the Pope?

Don't make be me be critically of your ability to follow along.

Nice personal jab there. Do you talk to people in person like that?

You know, the Tower of Babel story?

Indeed. Are you positing that this story is actual history?

Language has been confused...we all simply define the words different. Remember now?

Sure. Get thee to a dictionary.

Good. History attests that what I tell you is true.

I do not accept your religious opinions as true.

No. A story from history (believed or not) that comes true thousands of years later...is called historical evidence, or prophecy. The story of the Tower of Babel is now a reality right here on this forum, as you have confirmed that the same words from a multitude of sources all mean something different and do not agree.

Or, language evolves and changes with cultures, and isolation brings differences and dialects. Nothing prophetic about it.

Perseverance may indeed result in arguments,

Arguments in support of your claims?

but we're only done if you quit.

I think we were done some time ago. The kids just want to see me drag this out a bit more.

 

[Davian]

Good question. First don't trust what you see (or don't see)...you're doing good so far. Then, look around and see the reaction of others. If everyone reacts the way you do, as if there is nothing to see: You are correct. If millions and millions of people see what you don't, and millions and millions don't see: At the very least, you have good reason to take another look. But...

BUT...if you do the same thing over again expecting a different response: Then...stop questioning others, and question yourself.

Michael has used a variation on this argument from popularity fallacy far more many times than I can count.

My response: Out of those millions, provide the name of one of these individuals that can demonstrate that what they see, that an atheist does not, is not simply a product of their imagination. This person is going to be in the news, if they can do such a thing.

 

[dlamberth]

Does it matter to anyone else that it matters to you?

What matters to me is that I'd like to see further discussion and answer to the question posed in post#685: "... of why you accept one cosmology theory (Lambda-CDM) and reject another (Panetheism)."

That's a great question worthy of an answer. I know folks who have integrated both into how they view the cosmos.

.

 

[Davian]

What matters to me is that I'd like to see further discussion and answer to the question posed in post#685: "... of why you accept one cosmology theory (Lambda-CDM) and reject another (Panetheism)."

That's a great question worthy of an answer. I know folks who have integrated both into how they view the cosmos.

Have them answer the question. It is not my position.

 

[dlamberth]

Have them answer the question. It is not my position.

What is your position?

And Michael, in regards to the cosmology theory of (Lambda-CDM) and (Panetheism) that you brought up, which one do you accept?

.

.

 

[Davian]

What is your position?

I do not incorporate either into my worldview.

 

[ScottA]

Michael has used a variation on this argument from popularity fallacy far more many times than I can count.

My response: Out of those millions, provide the name of one of these individuals that can demonstrate that what they see, that an atheist does not, is not simply a product of their imagination. This person is going to be in the news, if they can do such a thing.

That's because there is only one: Jesus.

(Now...we're done.)

 

[Davian]

Yep, and I'd hand him the results from LHC, LUX, PandaX, those electron roundness tests, and studies that show that 'standard candles' aren't actually 'standard' at all.

Interesting that you would still go with the false dichotomy in that situation, instead of leading with a demonstration of how your electrical universe is real.

 

[Davian]

Jesus.

Off you go then, and get him to a TV station where you two can do this demonstration. It shouldn't be too hard to find an atheist thereabouts. Unless you let him see Jesus, of course. I'm sure you will work that out.

I'll wait to see it hit the news.

 

[Davian]

That's because there is only one:

What happened to the "millions" that you alluded to?

Jesus

(Now...we're done.)

Quitting?

 

[dlamberth]

I do not incorporate either into my worldview.

So how do you look at the cosmology of the universe. This is part of how do we see reality.

.

 

[ScottA]

I'll wait to see it hit the news.

You missed it.

 

[Loudmouth]

Pictures, seen with the naked eye or the most advanced microscopic camera? Not on the same wave-length.

Invisible, then?

But that doesn't make it invisible...that just means you are not looking at it correctly. Why is that so hard to understand?

Then show me an objective method I can use to distinguish your claims from hallucinations.

 

[Davian]

So how do you look at the cosmology of the universe. This is part of how do we see reality.

.

I look at it with awe and wonder. But it does not shape the way I live my life or interact with my everyday world. If it were somehow different (expanding/static/eternal/contracting) I don't see that it would affect the price of milk at the market.

 

[Davian]

You missed it.

I'll play this game.

You can't "miss" anything in this day and age. Except for Bigfoot, and the pesky extraterrestrial aliens that occasionally abduct people, it gets recorded and posted somewhere.

If it just happened, you should have at least recorded it with your cell phone camera.

 

[ScottA]

Invisible, then?

No. Sorry, but your limited vocabulary doesn't have a word for it...well, it does, but you have not learned it.

Then show me an objective method I can use to distinguish your claims from hallucinations.

The world. But your playbook is not the object lesson that produces the truth. You've been duped. By [intelligent] design, that is all just a ploy to draw out the riff raff. If you start with the right playbook, you will end up with the right answers to your questions.

 

[Loudmouth]

No. Sorry, but your limited vocabulary doesn't have a word for it...well, it does, but you have not learned it.

I believe the word is "fantasy".

The world. But your playbook is not the object lesson that produces the truth. You've been duped. By [intelligent] design, that is all just a ploy to draw out the riff raff. If you start with the right playbook, you will end up with the right answers to your questions.

Then your claims are indistinguishable from hallucinations. Thanks for playing.

 

[Michael]

Does it matter to anyone else that it matters to you?

Who cares. The point is that it does matter to me in spite of your facetious commentary.

 

[Michael]

Michael has used a variation on this argument from popularity fallacy far more many times than I can count.

My response: Out of those millions, provide the name of one of these individuals that can demonstrate that what they see, that an atheist does not, is not simply a product of their imagination. This person is going to be in the news, if they can do such a thing.

I have no problem 'seeing' the God that I believe in. What's your problem?

 

[Michael]

Interesting that you would still go with the false dichotomy in that situation, instead of leading with a demonstration of how your electrical universe is real.

I you go back and look, the original comment was about Lambda-CDM and Carl, not EU/PC theory. I'd simply hand him Alfven's book on the topic if he's interested.