What Specific Evidence Should Point To Ex Nihilo Creation?

[AV1611VET]

Just had a thought strike me:

The absence of evidence is the evidence. You can define nothing without it becoming something when it is absent.

Sounds plausible!

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Sounds plausible!

So now the absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

 

[Norbert L]

So now the absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

I was thinking more in terms of a trial when the evidence goes missing. You've got nothing to convict the person with because the evidence becomes absent.

 

[Norbert L]

Actually, it's ridiculously simple.

Can it be explained in a Twitter post of 280 characters or less?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Can it be explained in a Twitter post of 280 characters or less?

Let me try:

"Ex nihilo": has nothing, says nothing, proves nothing, means nothing.

...there you go.

 

[AV1611VET]

Let me try:

"Ex nihilo": has nothing, says nothing, proves nothing, means nothing.

...there you go.

Not bad ... not bad at all.

Now if you could just understand the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia ...

 

[ottawak]

Not bad ... not bad at all.

Now if you could just understand the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia ...

Who says we don't?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Not bad ... not bad at all.

Now if you could just understand the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia ...

I can understand the difference between "ex nihilo" and "hocus pocus": a special pleading fallacy.

The rest is irrelevant doubletalk.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who says we don't?

I do.

If you guys know the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia, I'm Genghis Khan.

 

[AV1611VET]

Let me try:

"Ex nihilo": has nothing, says nothing, proves nothing, means nothing.

...there you go.

Not bad ... not bad at all.

Now if you could just understand the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia ...

I can understand the difference between "ex nihilo" and "hocus pocus": a special pleasing fallacy.

The rest is irrelevant doubletalk.

Thanks for the QED.

 

[ottawak]

I can understand the difference between "ex nihilo" and "hocus pocus": a special pleasing fallacy.

The rest is irrelevant doubletalk.

I am particularly fond of fallacies that are pleasing.

 

[ottawak]

I do.

If you guys know the difference between ex nihilo and ex materia, I'm Genghis Khan.

You've been Genghis Kahn for years, that doesn't signify.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Thanks for the QED.

You had nothing, said nothing, proved nothing, and meant nothing.

Physician, heal thyself.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I am particularly fond of fallacies that are pleasing.

Yeah, I spotted that myself. Darn autocorrect.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I was thinking more in terms of a trial when the evidence goes missing. You've got nothing to convict the person with because the evidence becomes absent.

That's just arguing for a dishonest god who removed evidence. I'm sure AV will object.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's just arguing for a dishonest god who removed evidence. I'm sure AV will object.

Right.

No evidence generated means no evidence removed.

There's nothing to remove.

Unlike the Flood, where the evidence was cleaned up for sanitary and safety reasons, the creation events didn't produce any.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Right.

No evidence generated means no evidence removed.

There's nothing to remove.

Norbert L disagrees. He's saying the evidence has gone missing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Norbert L disagrees. He's saying the evidence has gone missing.

Norbert belongs in that percentage that believes: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD CREATED.

And in that 100% of those who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow, who believe: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

In short, Norbert knows how to prioritize.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Right.

No evidence generated means no evidence removed.

There's nothing to remove.

And nobody to remove it.

Unlike the Flood, where the evidence was cleaned up for sanitary and safety reasons, the creation events didn't produce any.

And here I thought you promoted yourself to "God."
Turns out you demoted God to janitor.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Norbert belongs in that percentage that believes: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD CREATED.

And in that 100% of those who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow, who believe: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

In short, Norbert knows how to prioritize.

He appears to be in the minority percentage (with you) who believe: God is dishonest.