Oh fuck ratty… You are still on this shit? Ho in the hell do you get through life insisting on such ignorance in the face of ‘FACTS.’ Demonstrate this thing you are calling a sould. What solid evidence do you have for its existence?
1 Like
No. But it is pretty obvious that has nothing to do with yourgodofchoice. The burden of evidence is upon you to prove any claim of a magical origin of H2O.
1 Like
- I told you this days ago, and you ignored it, now produce this facile sweeping and irrelevant claim. It is religions and the religious who make ludicrous claims to knowledge they cannot objectively evidence, not science.
- That lol suggests that you’re trolling, so much for your histrionics about respecting your vapid superstitious wares.
- The explanations science has don’t violate Occam’s razor, your unevidenced deity using inexplicable magic does.
- The creation myth in the bible contradicts scientific facts.
Now I asked you last time what your point was, and what you wanted to debate, it seems to me you didn’t answer because you have now resorted to churlish trolling, because your vapid superstitious claims were treated with the contempt your irrational and facile claims deserved.
1 Like
Straw man fallacy.
Experience? At best you mean dream or imagine, unless you can objectively evidence that claim, several posters including myself have been asking you to do this for days now ratty, do you imagine we won’t notice you have failed to even try?
I never said it was common. You see you seem to think you can reel off unevidenced anecdotal claims, then insist others explain them for you, just bizarre. It’s your claim you need to demonstrate sufficient objective evidence to support it, then explain it with rational and compelling arguments. You are of course as anyone can see, resorting to an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, where you are making unevidenced woo woo claims, and insisting others offer alternative explanations, so an irrational argument by definition.
Nope that’s an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy again. I base belief on the demonstration of sufficient objective evidence as you must know by now, clearly as we can see it is you who tries to justify beliefs based on argumentum ignorantiam fallacies, I usually go to great pains to avoid such irrationality. I know the brain exists, I know (what we call) consciousness exists, the rest of the woo woo you’re adding is violating Occam’s razor, unless you can offer something approaching objective evidence, and if you could do so, then it is reasonable that you would have by now.
- The clam is not mine, as it is medical science that accepts the cessation of all brain activity as brain death, I have linked more than one citation, as have others, and this is also a legally accepted diagnosis.
- What objective evidence can you demonstrate that a soul exists?
- Can you offer even a single example of someone surviving the cessation of all brain function? Only medical science might be keen to learn they are wrong.
I don’t believe you, please demonstrate some objective evidence, something beyond your bare claim? NB For both the claim these dreams are ubiquitous, and that they exists outside of the human imagination, stored in brains being deprived of oxygen. If you bothered to read the links I provided you’d might see how silly your strident and unevidenced claims are.
You’re kidding right, is this more of that ratty humour that goes over my head in debate? Dear oh dear…“we can assume” and without a shred of objective evidence, this has to be a joke presented here of all places.
I’m still going to need more than your bare assertions, hubris and hyperbole, your irrational use of logical fallacies, and risible assumptions, before my doubts are allayed.
I note you didn’t actually address my challenges to your previous claims, when you roll past them onto new ones it smacks of dishonesty ratty, in a debate it will always set alarm bells ringing, when someone makes sweeping claims, then evades critically scrutinising questions about them.
2 Likes
And your duplicitous twisting of my post, merely demonstrates once again that like so many other mythology fanboys, you’re not here to learn anything substantive.
You’re obviously here for the sole purpose of propagandising for a fictional mythology, and consider it legitimate to toss the Ninth Commandment from your own mythology into the bin whenever you think it’s apologetically convenient.
What part of “we have DATA informing us of the relevant processes” did you deliberately ignore when posting your snide, condescending summary dismissal?
2 Likes
It’s a rather typical and disingenuous attempt to make sweeping strident but ultimately facile claims, this then is how unevidenced superstitions must try to defend themselves against rigorous and objective methodologies like science. The lol at the end of his facile assertions is simply hilarious, albeit not in the way he intends. If one can laugh at water being affected by gravity, but get churlish when people scoff at unevidenced deities using inexplicable magic, then the only conclusion I can reach is some sort of irony impairment.
.
You have to see the irony… 
Especially when all I did was point out that @rat_spit’s phrase “inactive brains” was the medical and legal definition of brain death, and that no one recovers from this.
2 Likes
Honestly, who cares? Not about the many claims to the many deities invented by humans but about finding out why you believe. We’ve all done it (either argued it with wingnuts or actually believed it at some point). Few (if any) of us accept as credible any claims to the existence of deity but instead spend time refining our answers as to why such claims are flawed and given that you’ve come to an atheist community, I think it more appropriate that you ask US why we don’t believe rather than invite us to ask about your childish beliefs.
UK Atheist
Provide an accurate definition and objective evidence for the god thing you believe in. That should be straightforward, and simple enough. 1 Peter 3:15. I’ve not met a theist yet incapable of obfuscation. I’m betting you can do no better.
4 Likes
Yeah…sure. He’s right, you’re wrong. There, I said it.
1 Like
If gravity was slightly more powerful, one of the possibilities is the universe would collapse into a ball, also if gravity was slightly less powerful, one of the possibilities is the universe would fly apart there would be no stars or planets. Gravity is precisely as strong as it needs to be, and if the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the strong force was not 1%, life would not exist. What are the odds this could be done all by itself? The precision of the universe at least makes it logical there is a creator.
No. Gravity is not as strong as it needs to be, it is as strong as it is.
2 Likes
No one knows. Least of all, you.
3 Likes
The universe is not precise. It just is what it is. Did it have a creator? I don’t know. I doubt it. You, although you claim otherwise, don’t know either.
3 Likes
We have precisely evolved in that gravity, and universe is precisely what it should be in that same gravity.
As opposed to adding inexplicable magic, from an unevidenced deity, you theists make me laugh, fair play you really do.
Occam’s razor…is the problem-solving principle that recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. It is also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony (Latin: lex parsimoniae).
Since that assertion has all the hallmarks of a circular reasoning fallacy, I am fairly dubious. However please offer your argument to support this bare assertion you’ve made, so that we can see if it is in fact rational. Violating Occam’s razor to add unevidenced assumptions is not a good sign.
Why do theists think tacking the word logical onto an unevidenced claim makes it rational?
That aside you seem to have ignored my post entirely, so have another try champ…
Then you should have asked that, and not this…
“Scientists still don’t have a definite answer for the origin of Earth’s water. Several theories exist, including the idea that our water came from comets and asteroids that crashed on Earth. A recent model-based analysis theorizes that early magma oceans interacted with atmospheric hydrogen to create water.”
“Pulled down”? What a spectacularly stupid assertion, you clearly haven’t even the most basic understanding of how gravity works.
Are you serious? Do you not know that water is ubiquitous in space?
" Water appears to be one of the most abundant molecules in the Universe . It dominates the environment of the Earth and is a main constituent of numerous planets, moons and comets."
I am starting to lose patience with your nonsense now…
What did you want to debate here? Only this is an atheist debate forum, and given you’re a theist, one imagines you have some reason for seeking us out, and it surely can’t just be to demonstrate your breathtaking ignorance of the most basic scientific facts? Most of which you could learn with a simple search on the internet.
I can see why you’d want to move swiftly on from your previous raft of absurd assertions, but it is rank dishonesty to keep reeling off claims and ignoring the responses. As I said in my previous post, my patience is not limitless for your nonsense.
1 Like
Bullshit.
“Fine tuning” is a myth.
I’m aware of two scientific papers destroying this myth.
One demonstrates that stellar nucleosynthesis and organic chemistry would remain essentially unchanged, even if key physical constants varied by as much as five orders of magnitude.
The other demonstrates that the same would be the case, even if we deleted the weak nuclear force from the universe altogether.
Your cartoon magic man is fiction, and so is your goat herder mythology.
Oh, and on the subject of gravity, I suggest you learn something substantive about the topic. A good place to start would be Theoretical Mechanics by Murray R. Speigel, which was one of my textbooks at university. Pay particular attention to Chapter 5, Central Forces and Planetary Motion.
Of course, some of us moved on even from that, and moved on to Einstein’s Field Equations. But you’ve yet to demonstrate that you’ve moved beyond primary school arithmetic, let alone tensors and the Ricci calculus.
Once again, stop spooning up bullshit from lying creationist websites, and learn some FACTS from sources of genuine scientific information.
While you’re at it, try asking yourself why your goat herder mythology contains a pathetic lie about genetics, one that was utterly destroyed by a 19th century monk.
1 Like
Isn’t it interesting how life emerged in exactly these conditions. It’s amazing how different forms of life evolve under different conditions. In 1956 at Oregon State University, nuclear researchers found that the bacterium D. radiodurans thrived in levels of radiation thousands of times what most animals can. D. radiodurans not only enjoys living in the cores of nuclear reactors, but it can survive exposure to everything from toxic chemicals and corrosive acids to extreme heat above the boiling point of water, subzero temperatures in the Antarctic, and the vacuum of space. These environments were made specifically for them?
(ERA-experiment “space biochemistry” - ScienceDirect).
Poychaete annelids(Annelids: Powerful and Capable Worms | Shape of Life) live in the bottom of the ocean, under extreme pressure, and in the insane conditions next to the vents of active volcanoes. Colonies of these tubeworms live on hydrothermal vents spewing hot, mineral-rich water that, in some places, can reach an (astounding 350 degrees Celsius) or (660 degrees Fahrenheit). (MBARI researchers discover deepest known high-temperature hydrothermal vents in Pacific Ocean • MBARI) The place must have been made just for them?
Steamboat Springs is home to a new species of blood-red worm capable of living in a cave full of hydrogen sulfide. The perfect environment made just for this worm? The levels of hydrogen sulfide gas inside the cave can reach levels that could kill a person. Researchers studied the worms for over 1,000 hours before certifying them as a new species, Limnodrilus sulphurensis. They documented the find the journal Zootaxa .
Pardon me if I do not prefer the explanation of Douglan Adams to your own. It’s much simpler, and it does not require magical flying eternal all powerful, all knowing, universe creating, deities, who exist beyond time and space, while caring about my personal life, who I have sex with, how I grow, my hair, what I eat, or what tattoos I put on my body.
Douglas says this: "Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it! This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”
@Cognostic … I was introduced some time ago, to a scientific paper documenting the discovery of Poecillid livebearing fishes living in the Cueva del Azufre in Mexico. These fishes live in water whose dissolved hydrogen sulphide content would kill most other fishes via respiratory shock and haemoglobin poisoning in minutes.
Then of course there’s that nice scientific paper on tardigrades I found. Several specimens of which were exposed to the vacuum of space in low Earth orbit for 21 days, then returned to Earth. They woke up and started walking around in the Petri dish when returned to the laboratory.
Other tardigrades have survived being dusted with uranyl acetate for electron microscopy, subject to high vacuum, hit with a 1 MeV electron beam in a transmission electron microscope, then returned to the lab bench.
1 Like
I’m familiar with the tardigrades. I am looking up Cueva del Axurfre now.
1 Like