Damn, I’m already there! Of course, being Competitive Relaxing the entire material should take upwards of a decade to complete just a B.A, and perhaps another decade for Post Grad, and if someone goes for a PhD (like us) then it’s literally a lifetime commitment to study!
What? Using logic to prove the illogical? Diabolic, my friend! Why is it that people who insist on faith continuously try to make their argument from data and logic? Is it merely an instance of “if I can’t convince you that way, how about this way?” Or is it, maybe . . . Satan?!
I was reading an excellent comment just yesterday responding to someone who said “I hear god.” The return was: “Which god do you hear? How do you know? How can you be certain it wasn’t Satan whispering sweet nothing’s to make you feel good?”
Did God say he was a Nigerian prince and that he had millions of dollars in a bank but couldn’t get it out and . . . Sometimes we are skeptical, other times not. I think it is a matter of training. Reading about child tent preachers (and hearing from them, esp. Sam Kinison) one gathers there is a great deal of pleasure to be found in pleasing one’s parents, relatives, and strangers. Well, then there is the money, too. Why is god, all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-seeing and always short of cash?
Lordy, lordy, instead of singing “Bringing in the sheaves, . . . ” we should be singing “Bringing in the sheep . . .” to be fleeced. (Hymnal reference with which you may not be associated, sorry … addicted to word play I am.
I find bungee chords work really well, although mine has rather long ones. I find generally that my inner mini-me (say it really fast it’s even funnier!) that speaks all the sense, the outer me is the whiner 🙂
lol, not in my world. Anyway not my thing to play with another man’s magic (pure allegory here you understand, I’m not referring to myself as a man – at least not this life-time) 😉
Brains do get fried when the bullshit-o’dometer hits the William Lane Craig highs. I like the fact that no cosmologists actually debate him anymore. There is only so much crap a living human being can endure.
Any omnipotent omnipresent god that ‘needs’ an apologist is not much of a god, not really. WLC is a fury of facepalm spawning bullshit. He’s no more potent than a bum on speaker’s corner with an extra tuppence who happens to wear a suit and have a degree he can pretend is worth something.
His debate skills are like that of Muslim apologists – fire as many comments/statements as you can and pretend any rebuttal missed the point. Oh wait, maybe that’s PeW?
Rabid apologists like Craig like to believe that by inventing thought exercises which conclude with, “and therefore, god!” is the same thing as presenting hard evidence for their particular god. It’s the equivalent of a child saying, “Santa Claus exists because I say he does!”
Hi John. I completely forgot to delete your comment about that christian dude and he just made a comment about what you wrote. Shit. Sorry man. Should I delete them now? Or would that be worse? Your call.
Nah, don’t worry about it. Prayson’s seen my comments about him before. Nothing derogatory. He knows I think his heart is in the right place, just his mind is off the tracks. He’s aware 🙂
Paws to reflect here, I was explaining me swollen feet … dumb keyboards should be bigger —I tried tailing it but swept the whole thing off me desk. (Not easy being an Argus, I tell ya~!)
Name one study that give evidence that naturalism is true. Give me one solid piece of evidence. Anything. Since you believe there is evidence in all those different fields, surely you should be able to give me just one example of a piece of empirical data that shows the veracity of naturalism.
I don’t see how e=mc2 translate to “All that exists in this universe is combinations of matter and energy with no possibility of anything existing beyond.” I don’t see how it’s relevant to any other definition of naturalism I’ve been able to find. Perhaps I’m too dumb to make the connection. Please, walk me through it.
Then help me understand please. I’m starting to lose patience. You claim that your belief in naturalism is demonstrable. So demonstrate it! If you can’t, then admit it! Just insulting me makes it appear that your arguments don’t actually have substance.
I said “perhaps” I’m too dumb. Let’s find out. Explain it to me and we’ll find out. I don’t really believe you will though: if past experience is any indication you’ll just insult me without actually making a cogent argument.
Harden up, Princess…. They were your words, not mine.
Now, I believe you’re fishing for a Unified Theory of Everything, of which there currently isn’t one, and won’t be one until physicists work out quantum gravity. Until that point, which is fast approaching, we have the laws of the universe: small and large parcels of reliable and testable theorems, like gravity, the conservation of energy and thermodynamics. I’m no physicists but I’m sure I can demonstrate it for you by boiling water…. Heads-up, at normal atmospheric pressure it happens at 100 degrees EVERY TIME! Amazing, huh?
Come on, John, you can’t prove a negative. Anyone can always insist that there might be something “supernatural.” The more pertinent question is how can they distinnguish their god from a highly advanced alien. They can’t and neither can we prove that something outside of nature cannot exist using the laws of nature. The guy has a hook, but there is no bait on it.
That was the point of my comment. It is a fool’s errand as the question cannot be answered. It is like one of those “if God is all powerful can he make a rock he cannot lift” questions. Somebody ill inclined to accept the last 400 years of scientific evidence that has disproved tons of religious nonsense (and none has gone vice-versa) then no amount of argumentation will.
What does the Bible have to say about how things work? Almost nothing. Very little biology, very little chemistry, some politics, a little engineering, almost no cooking (no recipes!), etc. So, science doesn’t contradict the Bible so much as the Bible just doesn’t say anything.
I suggest that Bible thumpers live by the book and don’t accept anything not explicitly vouchsafed by scripture. That way we don’t have to listen to their drivel (no phones, no computers, etc.).
Hey cool! Water boils at a uniform temperature! That’s great! But it has absolutely nothing to do with whether naturalism is true or not. It would be like me saying “God exists because the melting point of lead is constant!” Come on, give me an actual piece of evidence that shows naturalism is true.
I was reminded by the good Mark of something I read some years ago during the Soviet era, to the effect that an American was being shown through the Soviet Museum of Great People:
Wherein the guide showed him the bust of a bewhiskered bloke and said: “This is Ivan Knockabolokov, our second greatest inventor—he invented the pneumatic tyre, the telephone, penicillin, the atomic bomb, the submarine, the typewriter, canned fish, hamburgers, the suspension bridge …”
“Oh,” said the American, trying to head it off at the pass, “and who was your greatest inventor?”
At which the guide beamed and pointed to a modest bust of a bespectacled woman— “and here we have Ivanna Noratitzov, our very greatest ever inventor!”
“And what did she invent?”
“She invented Ivan Knockabolokov~!”
thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com 
I think many of them imagine because there is no contradiction between their premises and conclusions they have proved god. Silly people
LikeLike
Silly indeed, my friend!
LikeLike
You always state the obvious in brief, cogent style. Bravo!
LikeLike
It could also just be laziness 😉
LikeLike
I want to be lazy too if that’s the result.
LikeLike
If we re-name it “competitive relaxing” you and I can teach it at universities across the planet! 🙂
LikeLike
I think we should develop the course content and set the bar very high so only a few can be admitted to the course. What say you?
LikeLike
Damn, I’m already there! Of course, being Competitive Relaxing the entire material should take upwards of a decade to complete just a B.A, and perhaps another decade for Post Grad, and if someone goes for a PhD (like us) then it’s literally a lifetime commitment to study!
LikeLike
What? Using logic to prove the illogical? Diabolic, my friend! Why is it that people who insist on faith continuously try to make their argument from data and logic? Is it merely an instance of “if I can’t convince you that way, how about this way?” Or is it, maybe . . . Satan?!
LikeLike
I was reading an excellent comment just yesterday responding to someone who said “I hear god.” The return was: “Which god do you hear? How do you know? How can you be certain it wasn’t Satan whispering sweet nothing’s to make you feel good?”
LikeLike
Did God say he was a Nigerian prince and that he had millions of dollars in a bank but couldn’t get it out and . . . Sometimes we are skeptical, other times not. I think it is a matter of training. Reading about child tent preachers (and hearing from them, esp. Sam Kinison) one gathers there is a great deal of pleasure to be found in pleasing one’s parents, relatives, and strangers. Well, then there is the money, too. Why is god, all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-seeing and always short of cash?
LikeLike
Monkey see, monkey do. Did you see Benny Hinn is asking his congregation for $2.5 million to get out of debt?
LikeLike
Lordy, lordy, instead of singing “Bringing in the sheaves, . . . ” we should be singing “Bringing in the sheep . . .” to be fleeced. (Hymnal reference with which you may not be associated, sorry … addicted to word play I am.
LikeLike
Or just yourself (she says facetiously) 🙂
LikeLike
…My inner voice is kinda wimpy and whiny. i wouldn’t listen to it if it pleaded 🙂
LikeLike
I get an image of a miniature you sitting in a little engine room somewhere inside your head peddling really fast – poor little guy! 🙂
LikeLike
Almost…. i have him planting catnip in long rows so as to resemble a Macedonian phalanx. It keeps him (and me) amused.
LikeLike
That’s very specific and quite apt, at least you let him stretch his legs and commune with nature. If only catnip were actually that effective!
LikeLike
If i don’t keep it specific he wonders….
LikeLike
about what?
LikeLike
wooooops, silly fingers: wanders 😦
LikeLike
that’s why I asked 🙂
LikeLike
Oh, don’t worry, i know…. cheeky thing
LikeLike
I find bungee chords work really well, although mine has rather long ones. I find generally that my inner mini-me (say it really fast it’s even funnier!) that speaks all the sense, the outer me is the whiner 🙂
LikeLike
what do bungee chords sound like?
Ha! Couldn’t resist! 15-All.
LikeLike
Mantra mantra mantra mantra mantra…how many times?
LikeLike
Five times the charm 😉
LikeLike
I’ll remember that.
LikeLike
Ah, but it won’t work because you already know what was behind the magic: pure ignorance. Hey, maybe ignorance is in fact bliss?
LikeLike
lol, not in my world. Anyway not my thing to play with another man’s magic (pure allegory here you understand, I’m not referring to myself as a man – at least not this life-time) 😉
LikeLike
B flat by the way. ACE
LikeLike
How about the two of you get a room! Sheesh!
John, I sent you a secret message as a reply to a previous comment. Shh, don’t tell anyone.
LikeLike
You foolish man, you already had my email! 🙂
LikeLike
Tee hee 🙂
LikeLike
Just a helpful reminder 🙂
LikeLike
It’s sad anyone has to argue with these people’s ideas, but the fact is they sway many to the detriment of us all.
LikeLike
Brains do get fried when the bullshit-o’dometer hits the William Lane Craig highs. I like the fact that no cosmologists actually debate him anymore. There is only so much crap a living human being can endure.
LikeLike
Such a rich way with words…
LikeLike
Can launch a thousand ships, or sink a fleet 😉
LikeLike
Just damn good.
LikeLike
Any omnipotent omnipresent god that ‘needs’ an apologist is not much of a god, not really. WLC is a fury of facepalm spawning bullshit. He’s no more potent than a bum on speaker’s corner with an extra tuppence who happens to wear a suit and have a degree he can pretend is worth something.
His debate skills are like that of Muslim apologists – fire as many comments/statements as you can and pretend any rebuttal missed the point. Oh wait, maybe that’s PeW?
LikeLike
Ahahaaaaaaaaaaaa! I hope he see’s that!
And just so you know, i’m so stealing “a fury of facepalm spawning bullshit” That, my friend, is priceless!
LikeLike
Steal away – a thing must be experienced to be truly appreciated!
LikeLike
Damn, that would’ve been a great line for when i was 18 or 19 🙂
LikeLike
Indeed! Hadn’t thought of it like that…. good take.
LikeLike
Bloody oath, mate. (Is that how you say it in Australia? My slang is a bit rusty…)
LikeLike
Spot on!
LikeLike
Extra! Extra! Get Your Sophisticated Sophistry!
LikeLike
Ohhh, how long have you been waiting to use that line? That’s a meme in itself!
LikeLike
Am a bit slow with this one ;/…can you explain pls lol
LikeLike
Rabid apologists like Craig like to believe that by inventing thought exercises which conclude with, “and therefore, god!” is the same thing as presenting hard evidence for their particular god. It’s the equivalent of a child saying, “Santa Claus exists because I say he does!”
LikeLike
I love WLC. “The Atheist need to show how something can come from nothing…ergo….empty tomb….ergo…I win!!!” Am I using “ergo” correctly?
LikeLike
Saucepan… ergo… rabbit… ergo… Martha Stewart…. ergo…. god!
Yup, think you nailed it, Doug
LikeLike
great…now I’m hungry
LikeLike
My apologies…
LikeLike
Hi John. I completely forgot to delete your comment about that christian dude and he just made a comment about what you wrote. Shit. Sorry man. Should I delete them now? Or would that be worse? Your call.
LikeLike
Nah, don’t worry about it. Prayson’s seen my comments about him before. Nothing derogatory. He knows I think his heart is in the right place, just his mind is off the tracks. He’s aware 🙂
LikeLike
you can delete this, obviously
LikeLike
Godito, ergo sum …
LikeLike
Bugger. That was meant to go immediately under your Marta Stewart in a rabbit stew thing …
awwww, shucks. T’was ever thus … *sniff*
LikeLike
Must be those swollen paws, Argus… been running around all day?
LikeLike
Four-wheel-drive gets better traction but there’s a trade-off cost to pay …
LikeLike
You got a gator? I’m coming to your patch for fun!
LikeLike
Paws to reflect here, I was explaining me swollen feet … dumb keyboards should be bigger —I tried tailing it but swept the whole thing off me desk. (Not easy being an Argus, I tell ya~!)
LikeLike
Speaking of Benny Hinn…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLH7LHrYpLs
Look out for him throwing his coat at one man !
LikeLike
I am speechless. That’s awesomely terrible. What on earth is wrong with these people???
LikeLike
Wind ’em up, let ’em go…barking mad!
LikeLike
Sir — ‘barking’ and ‘mad’ don’t always go together …
LikeLike
“Dear Mr. Zande, we thought you just ought to know…concluding Naturalism does not equal demonstrating Naturalism.”
LikeLike
Dear Mark, please see 300 years of empirical data, experimentation and peer reviewed papers from:
Physics,
Chemistry,
Biochemistry,
Biology,
Medicine,
Astronomy,
Geology,
Ecology,
Meteorology,
Botany…
LikeLike
Name one study that give evidence that naturalism is true. Give me one solid piece of evidence. Anything. Since you believe there is evidence in all those different fields, surely you should be able to give me just one example of a piece of empirical data that shows the veracity of naturalism.
LikeLike
e = mc2
LikeLike
I don’t see how e=mc2 translate to “All that exists in this universe is combinations of matter and energy with no possibility of anything existing beyond.” I don’t see how it’s relevant to any other definition of naturalism I’ve been able to find. Perhaps I’m too dumb to make the connection. Please, walk me through it.
LikeLike
Yes, I’m sure you are too dumb.
LikeLike
Then help me understand please. I’m starting to lose patience. You claim that your belief in naturalism is demonstrable. So demonstrate it! If you can’t, then admit it! Just insulting me makes it appear that your arguments don’t actually have substance.
LikeLike
But you already admitted you’re too stupid to understand! Your words, not mine.
LikeLike
I said “perhaps” I’m too dumb. Let’s find out. Explain it to me and we’ll find out. I don’t really believe you will though: if past experience is any indication you’ll just insult me without actually making a cogent argument.
LikeLike
Harden up, Princess…. They were your words, not mine.
Now, I believe you’re fishing for a Unified Theory of Everything, of which there currently isn’t one, and won’t be one until physicists work out quantum gravity. Until that point, which is fast approaching, we have the laws of the universe: small and large parcels of reliable and testable theorems, like gravity, the conservation of energy and thermodynamics. I’m no physicists but I’m sure I can demonstrate it for you by boiling water…. Heads-up, at normal atmospheric pressure it happens at 100 degrees EVERY TIME! Amazing, huh?
LikeLike
Come on, John, you can’t prove a negative. Anyone can always insist that there might be something “supernatural.” The more pertinent question is how can they distinnguish their god from a highly advanced alien. They can’t and neither can we prove that something outside of nature cannot exist using the laws of nature. The guy has a hook, but there is no bait on it.
LikeLike
Ah, Steve, I’m glad you’re here. You’re a scientist, knock yourself out with young Mark.
LikeLike
That was the point of my comment. It is a fool’s errand as the question cannot be answered. It is like one of those “if God is all powerful can he make a rock he cannot lift” questions. Somebody ill inclined to accept the last 400 years of scientific evidence that has disproved tons of religious nonsense (and none has gone vice-versa) then no amount of argumentation will.
What does the Bible have to say about how things work? Almost nothing. Very little biology, very little chemistry, some politics, a little engineering, almost no cooking (no recipes!), etc. So, science doesn’t contradict the Bible so much as the Bible just doesn’t say anything.
I suggest that Bible thumpers live by the book and don’t accept anything not explicitly vouchsafed by scripture. That way we don’t have to listen to their drivel (no phones, no computers, etc.).
LikeLike
Ah, in that case i’ll just leave mark to masturbate with his little word games 🙂
LikeLike
Hey cool! Water boils at a uniform temperature! That’s great! But it has absolutely nothing to do with whether naturalism is true or not. It would be like me saying “God exists because the melting point of lead is constant!” Come on, give me an actual piece of evidence that shows naturalism is true.
LikeLike
QED
LikeLike
quod erat demonstrandum….. Sound.
LikeLike
I always comment on the post itself first … only then do I read the other comments.Gotta go back now and read ’em. Hope I haven’t doubled up …
LikeLike
I was reminded by the good Mark of something I read some years ago during the Soviet era, to the effect that an American was being shown through the Soviet Museum of Great People:
Wherein the guide showed him the bust of a bewhiskered bloke and said: “This is Ivan Knockabolokov, our second greatest inventor—he invented the pneumatic tyre, the telephone, penicillin, the atomic bomb, the submarine, the typewriter, canned fish, hamburgers, the suspension bridge …”
“Oh,” said the American, trying to head it off at the pass, “and who was your greatest inventor?”
At which the guide beamed and pointed to a modest bust of a bespectacled woman— “and here we have Ivanna Noratitzov, our very greatest ever inventor!”
“And what did she invent?”
“She invented Ivan Knockabolokov~!”
LikeLike
Brilliant! Mark, evidently, has such severe mental deficiencies that all of Vienna would encounter problems assisting his return to reality.
LikeLike