Amazon will be busy with my orders.
2 Likes
The human being is a tripartite being unlike other animals and living things. Itās not necessarily what makes us greater but it makes us in the image of God, triune. Every human being is made up of spirit, soul and body.
Like three circles or like in geography, the earth has an inner core/circle in the deepest part, then the outer core before coming to the earth surface that we all see. In similar vein, the spirit of man is the innermost, followed by the soul. The body is the outside physically seen part. The body is more prevalent in the physical realm and i guess you are already at a disadvantage asking for purely physical objective proofs of another realm. Letās see what can be done though not promising much. So far so bad, what part is confusing in the explanation?
We have examined this planet earth and through many disciplines have been able to identify and study the different payers on this planet. If someone demands proof that there is an inner core, it can be proven by the appropriate scientists, with data and facts. Those results were determined by observation, the layers were revealed as science progressed.
You cannot prove in any way this triple layer human proposition. You are not working with facts and data.
Please prove empirical evidence. If you are unable to do so, you have simply made an unsupported claim.
Iām aware that a believers are not accustomed to using either reason and facts. That this is because religious beliefs are based on faith. That is to say, belief without evidence. A one word description is superstition.
Normally I couldnāt care less about your personal superstitions you understand. However, when such nonsense is presented as fact, I tend to get a little testy .āEspecially when the same drivel is regularly presented on this atheist forum. On average, about once week .
Now I donāt mean to be unkind, but kindly put up or shut up and stop wasting my time.
One bullshit, inane assertion after another. How fucking ignorant are you. Define āspirit.ā Define āsoul.ā Define āgod.ā Demonstrate that human beings are made up of three parts. Where in the fuck did you get your biology degree?
Like three piles off shit stacked on top of one another, your assertions just pile up and stink. No one needs, purely physical or objective proofs. First because there is no such thing as a physical proof. That does not even make any sense. Most people would settle for āEVIDENCE.ā VALID, EMPIRICAL, REPEATABLE, OBJECTIVE, EVIDENCEā¦ anything at all that can stand up to critical inquiry or analysis. ANYTHING!
You have not given an explanation at all. You have asserted that there is no physical proof. Okay fine. That is our starting point. There is no physical proof. We all agree. Next you make a bunch of inane assertions with no evidence supporting them at all. Demonstrate that you know anything at all about what you are talking about WITHOUT physical evidence.
There is nothing at all confusing about your explanation. Bullshit can be rejected for no reason at all. If you can assert something without evidence it can be rejected without evidence. Demonstrate your claims or admit that you donāt know what the fuck you are talking about.
3 Likes
Iām leaning towards the Aztec deity of gluttony.
I donāt see any less evidence for that one than any of the others, nor are any of the arguments less valid for this one, than all the others.
Not at all, itās clearly your assertions that are disadvantaged by your inability to demonstrate any objective evidence for them.
There is no explanation, just an endless list of unevidenced claims. Itās no more compellingly valid than Harry Potter.
Try offering a single piece of evidence that isnāt just another subjective and unevidenced assertion.
Uncle Shelly, between you and I, you know Nothing About Evidence, the Nature of Evidence and the Law of Evidence, How, Evidence is Obtained, The Types of Evidence that Exist etc
So, You Do Not know what Evidence Is and How it Works and therefore you are not in a position to contend with me on Evidence.
(Now folks, do you know the Sheldon style of argument? he shall divert from the main issue and move into the streams of the main issue like a bull shark leaves the ocean to go into rivers).
Uncle Shelly can argue forever, Come and present your knowledge of Evidence if you have more knowledge about Evidence than I, let us see, if not, hold your cojones ! 
(That was a joke, if not I know you must talk about cojones till the thread finishes)
The only thing of interest to me here is your knowledge of Evidence, bring it that we may Examine (I know you will Dodge it though)
Sigh, another tedious list of subjective unevidenced assertions, littered with random capital letters, pretty ironic as well, under the circumstances.
Are you Donald Trump? You have offered no evidence, none, so there is nothing to contend with. Though if you believe the nonsense youāve posted here is anything but vapid ad hominem, then you really are embarrassing yourself.
How is asking you to evidence your endless subjective assertions distracting from them? Again though itās a pretty ironic claim, given thatās your third paragraph that doesnāt have anything to do with the topic, and just lists more unevidenced assertions and puerile ad hominem. Iāve also offered no argument for anything, just asked you to evidence your claims, your hysterical ad hominem speaks for itself.
Iāve made no claims, the claims were yours, and that imbecilic red herring of a post is fooling no one here, it couldnāt be clearer you have no evidence to present for your beliefs in archaic superstition.
Not that there ever was much doubt. Iām sure no one has missed the irony that youāre back to making unevidenced claims for archaic superstition, after you pretended to switch to being an atheist.
Seriously seek help. I donāt claim to be an expert on epistemology, but good grief woman you have never tried to evidence your superstitious claims, ever. The random capital letters are hilarious and embarrassing in equal measure.
Try offering the most compelling piece of evidence you claim to have for any deity or anything supernatural?
I canāt dumb it down for you anymore than that Iām afraid.
2 Likes
What other realm? What in the fuk are you talking about? You just open your mouth and spew bullshit. Can you demonstrate any evidence at all, anything at all that will qualify as supporting evidence, for āanother realm,ā (whatever the fuck that is?)"
I think heās got some sort of side bet with Joylessgirl, to see who can talk the most shite.
All I can say at this point is thereās nothing in it.
All the shit you say is hinged on what you know Evidence is Vs. what I know, what Evidence to be.
So present your knowledge of Evidence here,.what Evidence is? itās Type and Nature, The Laws of Evidence, What things amount to Evidence and what things do Not!
When this is settled, then you can rightfully dispose one way or the other, the evidence I have given in this case.
For You Must Know What Evidence is, For You To Know What Is Not Evidence!
So, show your knowledge of Evidence, if you can and this is my second demand to you, else it clearly proves You Know Nothing On Evidence, The Types of Evidence, The Nature of Evidence, The Laws guiding and guarding the use of Evidence. And therefore all you say is sewage.
And of course this is the first time That You Realised That You Did Not Know What Evidence Truly Meant!
Another unevidenced claim, with more random capital letters, sigh. Youāre embarrassing yourself.
Evidence
noun
- the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Fact
noun
- a thing that is known or proved to be true.
You have offered none to support your assertion about spirits. Just asserted that a known natural phenomenon, death, and medical terminology indicates your assertion to be valid. Itās not evidence for your claim, and as is always the case you refuse to explain rationally your assertion, and resort to irrelevant non sequiturs and ad hominem .
Itās perfectly adequately defined in any dictionary dear, and since you have not presented anything beyond bare assertion, there is nothing to examine. So again no one is falling for this asinine evasion. Do you even remember what your claim was in all your irrelevant thrashing about?
Itās settled by a simple dictionary definition, and you have presented no evidence, just bare claims, so your bluster isnāt going to fool anyone.
Ring any bells? If you think there is any evidence in there then please point to it?
Itās infantile rhetoric, and the fact you seem to genuinely think any of that is evidence for the claim says it all really. Iām embarrassed for you.
What a pithy little tautological piece of nonsense. Again evidence is defined in any dictionary, I suggest you look it up. Then present someā¦
Another unevidenced claim.
I am happy for others here to decide if my posts suggest your childish gibberish has any validity, in the mean time look up evidence in the dictionary and explain how your quoted claim about spirits, is evidenced in the infantile and irrelevant rhetoric you attached. Death is a natural phenomena, nothing we understand about it evidences spirits. Itās also now clear you donāt know what objective means. āLaws of evidenceā is clearly a legal term, and has no direct bearing here, to put it as simply as I can for you, no court of law would accept your vapid claim as valid evidence.
1 Like
Well - at least āUncle Shellyā knows English (the written word). The fact that heās articulate is a step towards his credibilityā¦
As for you, ācapitalsā here and there- a mishmash of non-senseā¦ hahahaha - Iām pretty confident that SHELDON has a better grip of what empirical and demonstrable evidence is - the various levels required for convincing (determined by the claim itself), etc.
2 Likes
What youāve offered there is a subjective opinion. If it were an objective fact thereād be a global scientific consensus to validate it, since what youāre describing are natural phenomena. As are medical events that cause the brain to start dying from oxygen deprivation. None of that is objective evidence for anything supernatural, why would it be.
1 Like
Iām pretty sure my dog has a better grip of what constitutes evidence than Joygirlās posts suggest she has.
ā¦and that poor fucking dog has been dead for 15 years.
3 Likes
The claimant is the one who must provide evidence. That is you. All Sheldon has been continually doing is request evidence or proof.
Yes, he is tenacious and the tone of his questioning may be rough, and obviously, it is getting under your skin. But all you have to do to shut him up is simple, just backup your assertions with proof.
@Joygirl You are attempting to reverse the burden of proof, a dishonest debating tactic. If you cannot prove your god, why should we believe you?
1 Like
@Joygirl: There are many types of evidence; however, all evidence is accepted or rejected based on itsā appropriate level.
-
High : High confidence that the evidence reflects the true effect. FURTHER RESEARCH IS VERY UNLIKELY to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
-
Moderate : Moderate confidence that the evidence reflects the true effect. Further research āMAYā change our confidence in the estimate of effect and āMAYā change the estimate.
-
Low : LOW CONFIDENCE that the evidence reflects the true effect. Further research is likely to change the confidence in the estimate of effect and likely to change the estimate.
-
INSUFFICIENT : Evidence either is unavailable or does not permit a conclusion.
There is absolutely nothing you have said that has risen above this insufficient category. NOTHING!
1 Like
And this is where you are Completely Out of your depths and out of your league, sir!
All you know about Evidence is the Definition of Evidence? 
And your knowledge of Evidence is Limited Only to the Definition of Evidence for Toddlers and then you present it as your Overwhelming Knowledge and Understanding of Evidence?
And based on the definition of Evidence for babies you fancied yourself a judge of Evidence?
The Scope, the Nature, the Types and the Law Restricting the Use of them, you know Not?
Yet, you thought to consider yourself a Judge of Evidence?
Shall you submit yourself to a carpenter to perform an appendicitis operation on you?
Respectfully sir, your Jurisdiction lies in the Confines of the Toddlers Classroom and Any where else you may have precedence, BUT you have No Place in Judging what Amounts To Evidence here!
You know Nothing On Evidence and since the Only Thing you know about Evidence is to Supply the Definition for Toddlers, You Are Immediately Disqualified From Passing A Judgment Over The Admittance Of Evidence, for Being Evidence. You Are A Fake Judge!
And Fake Judges Have No Jurisdiction Over Any Matter, Anywhere, Neither is their Judgement ever Valid and Acceptable
So enough playing Judge, go plant your little pert butt over there, While The Real Judges of Evidence, Come In!
Thank you!