He is an Uncaused Cause. Are you familiar with the arguments?
So then, Uncaused Causes are something we can get from nothing, according to you. It is not from something, it is from nothing.
So BibleStudent believes undesigned nature is inconceivable yet an uncaused cause is conceivable. If that isn't a case of doublethink, I don't know what is.
This has the appearance of 'doublethink' to you because you have convinced yourself that naturalistic causes are the only means for forming a rational belief.
Exactly how have I convinced
myself that naturalistic causes are the only means for forming a rational belief?
Now you are shifting the burden of proof onto me, as if I have to prove that naturalistic causes are the only means of forming a rational belief. 2ND EDIT: This is also a straw-man as I made no such claim.
In this thread you have used many irrational arguments and logical fallacies, specifically; straw-man arguments, presuppositionalism (shifting the burden of proof), arguments from incredulity, equivocation arguments, argumentum ad hominem, balance fallacy, doublethink fallacy and special pleading. You've been close to committing other logical fallacies such as non-sequitur, begging the question fallacy, false cause, false dilemma, ad hoc fallacy and argument by assertion. EDIT: It appears while I was writing this, you've now employed the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy as well. 2ND EDIT: Ad hoc fallacy and/or argumentum ex culo is also being used.
People make mistakes and it is not uncommon for even a rational person to mistakenly use an irrational argument or logical fallacy on occasion. You, BibleStudent however have almost exclusively used irrational arguments and/or logical fallacies. It is almost as if you are a POE, but I would say it is more likely that you
, BibleStudent are simply trying to convince yourself
without any regard to rationality.
As Jag so eloquently put it:
You've been told repeatedly. Given your inability to grasp what you are being told, I can only draw a few potential conclusions. You aren't actually reading the replies you are getting (but you do quote them, so maybe you are reading them); you don't actually understand what is written (more likely than the previous), or you are willfully resisting understanding what is being written (which is pretty dishonest). In any case, I have to drop out of this discussion before I forget to resist the urge to speak to you contemptuously.
Enjoy your stay.
I have been waiting patiently for you, BibleStudent to provide any evidence that supports your claims that ID is scientific, is a theory, uses the scientific method, or as you put it "does an excellent job of scientifically demonstrating how a Designer could be the cause of the beginning of life"
BibleStudent, you can keep claiming that your previous replies in this thread provided that evidence all you want however all of the supposed evidence you have provided so far has been refuted here in this thread (not to mention by the scientific community and the United States judicial system). Until you actually address the problems with your evidence, they are unacceptable as evidence of your claims. If you continue to reference your previous replies as evidence then you will be engaging in an argument by assertion logical fallacy. Your other option is to provide different evidence.
I for one would be interested in what predictions are made by ID? The previous predictions you posted in this thread from evolutionnews.org are very poor examples and can hardly be considered actual predictions since they are predictions of known observations.
If you would like a good example of a prediction, why don't we take a look at a prediction made by an abiogenesis hypothesis.
Research into one abiogenesis hypothesis has made the prediction that glycine would be present on Saturn's moon of Titan even though glycine has not yet been discovered on Titan. If glycine is discovered on Titan, then that would confirm a prediction made by the particular abiogenesis hypothesis. If it can be reasonably confirmed that glycine is not present on Titan then the prediction was incorrect and the hypothesis or tests made will have to be reviewed and either revised or abandoned.