Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What they mean by "fined tuned" is not what you think it means. You keep erroneously using the word "need." Why are you doing this?Now this to me is saying that you deny that the universe is fine tuned even though the consensus among scientists in the field claim it is. Why do you deny it?
The universe to come into existence needed very precise elements from the very beginning. So explain why you are denying this?
You tell me what they mean by "fine tuned".What they mean by "fined tuned" is not what you think it means. You keep erroneously using the word "need." Why are you doing this?
Hitch what this is saying to me and perhaps even to those that use rational argumentation rather than ad hominem arguments, is you have nothing to bring forward that counters what is being presented so you have to resort to this type of tactic to distract and muddy the conversation.Classic Once response.
Good stuff.
Provide one time I ever claimed that the scientists that I have quoted or presented in any of my arguments that scientists mean "Goddidit". Again, you will have NOTHING. This is really sad actually.They mean "Goddidit," of course.
Lol.![]()
Actually that is not necessarily true. There are scientists that while not believers themselves think it is a valid argument, just not one they personally believe.Read any of your posts where you insinuate these scientists are flummoxed, and that they mean anything more than amused or credulous of the cdesign proponentsists claims of goddidit.
Then you are misrepresenting what they are saying and not me.Basically that the universe is a very complex system that works.
This is just such a bizarre thing to say.I agree with AirPo. It's you who are flagrantly misrepresenting what they say to feed your own ego.
What other reason would one have to misrepresent another's position, if not to serve their own needs. If I were to venture a guess, looking for "scientific" evidence to bolster your religious views. Perhaps you think that if you can convince yourself that all these really smart individuals actually believed as you make them out to, then your beliefs are justified? But I'm just an armchair psychologist, what do I know.This is just such a bizarre thing to say.What would it all have to do with my ego?
Well you get what you pay for so.....What other reason would one have to misrepresent another's position, if not to serve their own needs. If I were to venture a guess, looking for "scientific" evidence to bolster your religious views. Perhaps you think that if you can convince yourself that all these really smart individuals actually believed as you make them out to, then your beliefs are justified? But I'm just an armchair psychologist, what do I know.
Even intelligent people aren't immune to confirmation bias.Well you get what you pay for so.....$0.00
There are some very intelligent individuals who do believe as I do, they however, are not the ones that I have used in my argument.
I most certainly believe that considering the denial I am seeing here.Even intelligent people aren't immune to confirmation bias.
Listen to any neurocog. scientist, and they'll tell you the brain is very good at some things, and very bad at many things, and chief on the list is our ability to fool ourselves.