Haha thank you whitefire. See, I knew I liked you!
Seriously, MrDawn. I am not a troll. I promise. I really try to join these conversations with nothing but the pursuit of truth. Unfortunately sometimes my baser instincts get the better of me and make me say some hurtful things. Especially after reading other comments in here all day. I really don’t mean any disrespect and if I have disrespected you in any way then I am sorry. But bro, my comments have been very meek (hehe) compared to what the others say. Don’t dish it if you can’t take it.
Appeal to Probability. Possibility does not correlate to probability, probability doesn’t correlate to certainty. Nor does it mean it has or will happen. Correct?
Yeah, it’s the mistaken assumption that if something is possible it is probable or if something hasn’t been shown to be impossible, then it is possible.
Cog? Obtuse? … Geeez… Cog doesn’t even know what an ANGLE is, much less an obtuse one. That being said, if you want to ACCURATELY describe Cog, you might try calling him acutely chronic… Or is it chronically acute?.. … Hmmmm… Oh, well, either way would work, I suppose. Or, hell, maybe he just likes chronic, for all I know. Anyway, point being, Cog has been called many things on here, for sure. (Believe me, I know because I’m the main one who calls him things.) However, “obtuse” has never been one of those things. From my experience, if a person pays attention, Cog is usually fairly straight to the point.
I don’t get why they lie about it, deny, make excuses, claim that I’m lying, and deflect, or claim that I’m misinterpreting it to sharpen my ax. I’ve chalked it up that those Christians are going to believe in it no matter what and I think it’s because they want to.
Because I have realized that it is whatever they want it to be. If they go to it for comfort or if it somehow makes them feel special, that is what it is then. It is whatever they make it.
And of course they’ll try to argue it into existence and try to use shitty arguments like Argumentum Ad Populums, Argumentum Ad Ignorantum, Appeal to Probability, or Reductio Ad Absurdum. They’ll try anything. They’ll even offer up imaginary evidence like their Bible.
They want so badly for it to be REAL. I think they’re desperate.
I have heard said before, “It is easier to con a person than it is to convince a person he/she has been conned.” And I have actually witnessed this in action quite a few times over the years in various realms of conning, with religion being the biggest and most vicious “con-dog” in the arena. Granted, in the psychological world there are a number of “sophisticated” reasons for this. However, at its most basic level, most people simply do not want to believe/admit they have been so easily fooled. And (in regards to religion) when you add the fact a majority of the conning is being committed by those who are closest to and most trusted by the connee, there adds a double-whammie of denial. Moreover, on top of THAT, add the fact that most of THOSE connees were saturated into the con at very young ages during a time they had no idea they were being conned, and severely lacked the means to defend themselves from it even if they were somewhat aware of it. Sure, there are exceptions to this, I know. But, though I do not have any actual numbers/statistics, I believe it’s a damn good bet a vast majority of folks fall into the category I just described. (I happen to be one of them, by the way.) Oh, and it’s worth noting that most all of those close family/friends doing the conning do so in all earnest sincerity believing they are doing what is best for the child/children.
So, add all that together, and it is possible to wind up with an individual who may be incredibly intelligent and critical thinking in most all areas of his/her daily life, yet will absolutely REFUSE to apply that same intelligent thinking to his/her god of choice. They do not even want it to be questioned, and will often defend it aggressively if pushed. Such insidious indoctrination from an early age can be a very difficult thing to escape. I know this from personal experience. That is why I do not often allow myself to get angry with most theists, nor do I begrudge them their faith. For most, they are not even aware of what they do, and they likely will never be able to see it.
Far from being logical, that has all the hallmarks of a special pleading fallacy.
Impossible, if a deity possesses limitless power, it cannot by definition be limited. This violates logic, and the law of non contradiction.
Of course the notion of omnipotent contains innate contradictions, and ipso fact is an irrational concept, that requires just the kind of special pleading fallacy that you used above.
Yes, Turtles all the way down is a “god of the gaps fallacy.” Your problem must be that you have no idea what is meant by a god of the gaps fallacy. You don’t underestand the futility of possibility.
"The “God-of-the-gaps” argument refers to a perception of the universe in which the concept of “God” is invoked to explain what science is, as yet, incapable of explaining. In other words, only the “gaps” in scientific knowledge are explained by the work of God, hence the name “God of the gaps.”
Envoking any unfalsifiable position concereing a god ultimately boils down to a god of the gaps fallacy. You are “IN FACT” arguing for a god of the gaps.
As for possibility, it has no parameters. It can not be demonstrated not to exist at some point, in some dimension, someplace in some multiverse. There is no reason at all to contemplate possibilities aside from chewing gum for the mind. When you have an actual probability, let me know.
That would depend what you’re claiming is possible and why, if you are using an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy of the kind the defines the word miracle, X is true because Y is an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws, and is therefore attributed to a divine agency. Then yes, that would be a god of the gaps argument.
That’s fine. I don’t believe a lot of people. Each to their own. I can understand your position. I do the same thing with every Christian who runs their mouth about “god claims”. When they claim “God” is real and I don’t believe them. Really though. I think people are going to believe what they want no matter how much or how many people disagree with them.
I tell you I saw a herd of unicorns out in a field one day, but I don’t have any evidence. You say you know unicorns don’t exist and to come back when I have evidence.
or
I tell you I saw a group of garden gnomes in my back yard, but I don’t have any evidence. You say you know garden gnomes don’t exist and to come back when I have evidence.
or
I tell you I shook hands with Santa Claus, but I don’t have any evidence. You say you know Santa Claus don’t exist and to come back when I have evidence.
Years ago I once hit a golf ball so hard it launched into orbit around the Earth. And it’s possible it is still in orbit as I type this. Unless, of course, at some point its orbit decayed and caused it to fall back into the atmosphere where it burnt to a crisp and was totally obliterated before reaching the ground. Don’t believe me? Then prove me wrong. (Oh, by the way, I have no evidence for any of that.)
If there is. I have yet to meet one. The ones I know try to argue their version of their “skyfather” into existence. When I see people saying shit like this. I just want to facepalm in front of them so bad and walk away. The complete & utter bullshit of it is astounding. I can’t comprehend whether they actually believe that or if they’ve completely made it up.
When you listen to the crazy bullshit that she’s saying in the video. Don’t you just want to laugh at how absurd it is?
… Geeez… Cog doesn’t even know what an ANGLE is, much less an obtuse one. That being said, if you want to ACCURATELY describe Cog, you might try calling him acutely chronic… Or is it chronically acute?.. 
