Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Chatter / Re: Trump's ghost writer tells all.
« Last post by shnozzola on September 25, 2016, 08:03:09 AM »
Yeah, Nam and I had talked about this before.,30100.msg710189.html#msg710189

It is scary.   I still say America is too smart as a large group to allow Trump to be president, but it is sad that a group of Republicans would allow him to even get this far.  I saw this past week George Bush 41 said he'll vote for Hillary. 

Here's the latest from the Newyorker:

Here,  the opposite of what I just wrote:

Randall Schweller, a political scientist at Ohio State University, told me, “I think we’re just at a point in our history where he’s probably the right guy for the job. Not perfect, but we need someone different, because there’s such calcification in Washington. Americans are smart collectively, and if they vote for Trump I wouldn’t worry.”

A look at Trump decision making:

In “Trump: Think Like a Billionaire” (2004), Trump wrote that others “are surprised by how quickly I make big decisions, but I’ve learned to trust my instincts and not to overthink things.” He added, “The day I realized it can be smart to be shallow was, for me, a deep experience.” He prides himself on vengeance and suspicion. “If you do not get even, you are just a schmuck!” he wrote, in 2007. “Be paranoid,” he said in 2000.
General Religious Discussion / Re: Does God exist? And was Jesus Resurrected? - For Charlie
« Last post by eh! on September 25, 2016, 06:43:57 AM »
BS acts like he is too embarrassed to show his evidence and is covering up.

 If I had god evidence I would show the entire world... and I'm a frikkin atheist.

Why would anyone with god evidence not be shouting about it, you would even get invited as a guest on Oprah.

But nope, BS wants to change what evidence means like we won't notice. Fuk if god existed and wanted us to know then we would know.

He either doesn't want us to know or the god thing doesn't exist.
Ignoring the fallacious nature of your assertions, you have made it quite clear here that your request for evidence in post #292 lacked any genuine desire. After all, if all of the evidence is circumstantial or delusional then why are you asking for it?

Nice dodge.
And therein lies the problem and the reason for my questions. If you really want to make a determination about God’s existence, then it becomes necessary to consider and examine the evidence God has created for us....

What evidence is that, exactly?

Maybe we can get this hideous mess back on track?
when evidence is presented and labelled as weak, the response is that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” or something similar. That is an extraordinary claim in itself, highly subjective in nature, and with no evidence to support whether it is valid or not.

Actually it is a mathematical statement, meaning that low prior probabilities have to be offset by high evidential probabilities.

Your nonsense statement about this shows that you are rationalizing excuses to believe whatever you want.

There is always room for more fact checking. It would be rather hypocritical for me to suggest a greater level of humility to others if I was not aware of that need for myself. Right?

I suppose many folks share a similar path to determining whether they believe God is real or not while others travel a different road. For me, initially, it was directly in the front door but then back out and in again through the side door. What I mean by that is I had experiences that I believed were directly attributable to God's intervention in my life but I had to rule out other possibilities prior to becoming a committed Christian so I challenged my beliefs by considering and examining and studying the other options. At this point, based on everything I know, God is the only explanation for "how" and "why" (if you question the “why” I understand the reason). The other option (a naturalistic one) is simply too far-fetched and unsupported for me.

Claiming that the Christian god is the only explanation shows that you are rationalizing the answer you want to have. I can think of many explanations for coincidences in life. People have a natural habit of reading too much into coincidences and rationalizing the explanation they want.

If there is a chance of one in a billion that a certain event happens to someone today, it will happen to a bunch of people every day. Rare events happen to people all the time. Every time you pass a different car on the road, that is an extremely rare event. What was the chance that you would be there and see that exact car at that exact time? Normally you ignore that your life is filled with extremely rare events, but occasionally you might pick out some rare events and pretend they mean something.

As I mentioned, the medical community is not trained or required to identify and label outcomes as miracles.

Impossible miracles never happen. Claimed miracles are always events which can happen naturally. No training is needed to identify the impossible.

How do you go about determining whether you should have any confidence in what you believe? Surely, there must be some standard that you employ to reach a position on the matter. Same for dark matter, climate change, and Amun-Re. How do you know that you have gathered “enough evidence” to declare that your belief is rational?...or do you just know everything and dismiss belief as an enormously faulty construct of our minds.

How? Simple. Evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Belief is not an efficient way to gain knowledge. Belief is a faulty construct as you have shown above with your misunderstanding of the meaning of extraordinary evidence and your excuses to yourself for ignoring the need for extraordinary evidence.
Chatter / Trump's ghost writer tells all.
« Last post by Add Homonym on September 25, 2016, 03:03:47 AM »

This was pretty scary. Trump has never read a book and lacks the attention span to describe any details about himself besides his current method of self aggrandisement. Would be happy if the whole world was listening in on his private phone calls.
Forum Questions & Suggestions / Re: To mods/admins...
« Last post by Add Homonym on September 25, 2016, 02:58:30 AM »
No need to change the rules, because the rules say that soap-opera dramas "will not be tolerated", but that "forum members are expected to back up assertions they make"; there being no specified penalty for not backing up said assertions - just expectations.
Forum Questions & Suggestions / Re: To mods/admins...
« Last post by jaimehlers on September 25, 2016, 02:55:43 AM »
There's nothing in the rules saying that failing to provide evidence for a belief will result in disciplinary action.  It is entirely up to the discretion of the moderation team whether disciplinary action is warranted.  And a lot of the time, it isn't.  A lot of theists honestly believe (or at least convince themselves that they believe) that the evidence for their god is as clear and obvious as the sun.  What good will punishing people like that do?  If anything, punishment ends up backfiring, because of the way Christians are taught to believe that others will persecute them for their beliefs.

The problem, Zeno, is that you're basically advocating a false dichotomy.  You're saying that either we need to strictly enforce the rules, or else we should write exception after exception in.  The former is too rigid, and the latter is even worse because it removes even the possibility of disciplinary action for rule-breaking.  Right now, I think what we're doing is a reasonable middle ground between those two extremes.
Forum Questions & Suggestions / Re: To mods/admins...
« Last post by ThatZenoGuy on September 25, 2016, 12:02:37 AM »
Forum Questions & Suggestions / Re: To mods/admins...
« Last post by Mr. Blackwell on September 24, 2016, 11:23:38 PM »
Zenoguy, what you are advocating is nothing short of censorship. Are you so wavering in your disbelief in gods that you cannot tolerate the voices of those who seem unwavering in their belief? This is a discussion forum whose primary purpose is to try to convince theists that they are incorrect in their belief of gods. This website invites theists to come and join the conversation. De-conversion requires participation.  It's a two way street. How the fuck are you going to convince anyone they are wrong if you shut them out and ignore them? All that does is change the narrative.

How do you expect to learn anything if you silence everyone who does not already agree with your beliefs? 

How do you expect others to learn anything if you do not allow them to lend their personal voice to the conversation?

Think about it this way. Children ask questions. As they get older they begin to assert their opinions. If your children ask questions or assert an opinion you disagree with...are you just going to tell them to shut up and do as they are told? Or are you going to engage them in conversation?

Your view is very authoritarian but you haven't demonstrated that you have any authority about anything other than your own opinion...which, in this particular case, is wrong. 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10