Hypothetical for Scientists

[Tomk80]

...and, to make the analogy complete, you then fabricated evidence for a completely different series of events occuring.

Like putting beer and wine bottles everywhere in the house and adjusting the time of the alarm to make it seem that there was a big party the previous night and you couldn't possibly be up early in the morning to drink milk.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Tomk80: Who says you spilled milk in the first place. That's the real question here. You not just cleaned up after you, you went through an enormous amount of trouble to make it seem the milk wasn't there at all ever. You destroyed the coupons proving it was bought. You poured the remaining milk in the bottle down the drain and subsequently disposed of the bottle to make it seem that there was never any milk in the house at all. You not just cleaned up after yourself, you did a minute swap of every little place present to make it seem that you never spilled milk, even if someone looked very closely. You went way beyond just cleaning up after yourself. You very carefully removed any and all traces that the event ever happened.

...and, to make the analogy complete, you then fabricated evidence for a completely different series of events occuring.

Like covering the floor with many layers of dust including dust from a dust storm two weeks earlier and putting some footprints in the dust from someone who has been out of town for a week to make it look like nothing had ever been spilled or cleaned up.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Was this even a sentence?

Oops, sorry! I was punning on the ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT for the existance of God. But since that was a Church Father (Anselm) you might not have ever heard of it.

My bad. I forget my audience at times. I always assume when I'm talking to a person of faith that they know something about the history of their faith or how their faith came to them.

Still in all, you might do well to study the history of Christian thought. It really is interesting. Too bad many ultra-literalists are busy defecating on the greater minds who came before.

But such is the nature of true Christian faith.

I need to keep saying it because sometimes the ancients were very perceptive:

"the following are the rules laid down by them. Let no one come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent (for such qualifications are deemed evil by us)...

 

[thaumaturgy]

Wow --- LOL --- I just said there is none.

None --- zero --- He didn't bother to document it.

He didn't have to.

If I spilled milk all over the floor, and an hour later it's cleaned up, and I'm the only one at home:

• Who cleaned up the milk?

The circularity is just getting tighter and tighter! Soon AV's argument will vanish in a singularity.

I'm looking forward to it.

 

[thaumaturgy]

It's easier for you atheists to make jokes than it is to turn on a light bulb, isn't it?

Actually AV, ask any comedian and they'll tell you that the best comedy comes from stuff that is already absurd.

You can't "make up jokes" when the starting material you are discussing is already pretty funny.

 

[tanzanos]

It's easier for you atheists to make jokes than it is to turn on a light bulb, isn't it?

Actually the shortest joke took me 34.6 seconds to tell, whereas it only takes me 0.79 seconds to turn on a light bulb.

 

[PacificPandeist]

I'll say this, Pan --- you're a deep thinker!

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Wow --- LOL --- I just said there is none.

None --- zero --- He didn't bother to document it.

Is that so.

Sure, but that would make god deceitful.

Not if He left us a note detailing what He did.

Get your story straight, please.

He didn't have to.
If I spilled milk all over the floor, and an hour later it's cleaned up, and I'm the only one at home:

• Who cleaned up the milk?

Is there some mathematical term for something more circular than a circle?

 

[FishFace]

Is there some mathematical term for something more circular than a circle?

Well, thaumaturgy already suggested, "That circle than which none more circular can be conceived" which sounds good to me.

(Just in case it makes you feel better, thaum, I recognised it as a satirisation of the Ontological Argument!)

 

[thaumaturgy]

(Just in case it makes you feel better, thaum, I recognised it as a satirisation of the Ontological Argument!)

Of that I had no doubt the second I posted it. It's always the freethinkers who get the religious stuff!

 

[PacificPandeist]

Is that so.


Get your story straight, please.

Is there some mathematical term for something more circular than a circle?

How about a sphere? That's a circle in every direction!!

 

[Split Rock]

You needed S.E.T.I. to confirm what the Bible already says exists?

You needed a Hubble Telescope to "know" the universe is expanding?

Christians who take a literal view of Scripture are lightyears ahead of you "scientists", and are getting bored waiting for you to catch up.

Do you even believe the stuff you post here?

If Christians are lightyears ahead of scientists, why did none of them work out the universe was expanding before it was discovered by science, I wonder? Could it be because it's only through ridiculously contorted interpretation of the Bible that such a ludicrous reading of it can be made? Naa, couldn't be!

BINGO! Nailed AVET right on his head!

 

[AV1611VET]

We know there might be alien life out there, but we haven't drawn our conclusion.

That's about right. The only thing they really wanted drawn was their next paycheck from our taxes.

 

[AV1611VET]

...and, to make the analogy complete, you then fabricated evidence for a completely different series of events occuring.

Just keep adding to my very simple question until it's distorted beyond its intent.

(Don't forget to pout afterward that it doesn't make sense.)

And you guys call God a deceiver???

 

[AV1611VET]

If, by "turn on a light bulb," you mean, "hold a reasonable discussion with a creationist," then yes. Yes it is.

I don't believe an atheist can, in my opinion. As I have said before: I eat atheists for breakfast.

 

[AV1611VET]

Too bad many ultra-literalists are busy defecating on the greater minds who came before.

.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is there some mathematical term for something more circular than a circle?

Is there some linguistic term you can use to answer it?

Like "yes" or "no"?

 

[FishFace]

I don't believe an atheist can, in my opinion. As I have said before: I eat atheists for breakfast.

No you don't - but you can convince your niece you do, so I suppose that's good enough for you.

Your theology, and your philosophy is so facile I'm not surprised child would "understand" it. (If, indeed, your niece is a child, as we've been assuming.)

 

[FishFace]

Just keep adding to my very simple question until it's distorted beyond its intent.

(Don't forget to pout afterward that it doesn't make sense.)

And you guys call God a deceiver???

Well we would if he did what you say he's done. And we also call you a deceiver for trying to make misleading analogies, and imply that God wrote the Bible, and that, furthermore, the Bible tells us that God hid the evidence of the flood.

 

[Tomk80]

Just keep adding to my very simple question until it's distorted beyond its intent.

(Don't forget to pout afterward that it doesn't make sense.)

And you guys call God a deceiver???

No, we call the God you fantasize about a deceiver. We add to your questions because that is the only way they actually apply to what is happening here. Your own questions just don't apply to the reality of the situation.