Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[YoursTrue]

You mention it constantly, so I would reckon it is more than 35 posts, if indeed that is an accurate count of current reference.

Perhaps if you stop mentioning it, and stop responding to those you claim you have on ignore and actually respond to the post directly that you clearly have read and are responding to, any need to mention it would disappear. What do you think? Doesn't it seem like it takes away from the response to go about it like the example that is being set?

Why do you keep coming back as you do if you consider puzzle books, Scrabble and many PC or mobile games more productive?

HE mentioned it constantly? I don't think so...but whatever someone says no matter, it's ok, I guess.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

HE mentioned it constantly?

Persistently and frequently. That is pretty constant.

I don't think so

Your thoughts don't seem to align with the facts.

...but whatever someone says no matter

The facts right?

, it's ok, I guess.

Like this.

I don't use ignore, but I do tend to use the tried and true means that is traditionally available to me under that heading. See ya.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Careful referring to broad variable philosophical concepts like ontology and metaphysics to justify your 'might be unknown,; because these philosophies in some versions do not reject that our physical existence as natural, but speculate on the underlying causes and relationships of our natural existence

For example: Metaphysics of Science | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Metaphysics simpliciter seeks to answer questions about the existence, nature, and interrelations of different kinds of entities—that is, of existents or things in the broadest sense of the term. It enquires into the fundamental structure of the world. For example, it asks what properties are, how they are connected to the entities which have them, and how the similarity of objects can be explained in terms of their properties. The subject matter of metaphysics is somewhat heterogeneous: topics include the composition of complex entities (such as tables, turtles, and angry mobs), the identity and persistence of objects, problematic kinds of entities (that is, entities about which it is unclear whether or in what sense they exist at all, like numbers and fictional objects such as unicorns), and many more. Metaphysics is usually understood as working at an abstract and general level: it is not concerned with concrete individual things or particular relations but rather with kinds of things and kinds of relations.

Metaphysics of Science is not completely disjoint from metaphysics simpliciter. Not only does it draw on the pool of methodological tools employed in metaphysics, but there is also substantial overlap regarding subject matter. Metaphysicians have their own reasons, independently of science, to investigate causation, modality, and dispositional properties, for example. Like space and time, these concepts pertain also to everyday phenomena. Although Metaphysics of Science, too, is usually attentive to our everyday intuitions and opinions about such phenomena, it engages in a specific investigation of the roles these concepts play in scientific contexts.

Metaphysicians of science often take scientific realism for granted—that is, they hold the philosophical stance that the sciences are apt to find out what the world is really like, that they track the truth, and that the entities they postulate exist. Antirealism about science, on the other hand, often coincides with a skeptical or agnostic attitude towards metaphysics. In the context of some broader metaphysical inquiries, scientific endeavors might well be seen as but one way to the truth. A mainly science-guided metaphysics might even be seen as mistaken (as, for example, in phenomenological approaches (compare Husserl 1936; 1970)).

Your vague obtuse philosophy is close to what may be called Ontological Idealism.


The world being natural is not a fact. By definition the world being natural is based on objective facts regardless of what may be speculated as the underlying causes or relationships.

Well, I am a strong epistemological skeptic and have no postive ontology or metaphysics.

 

[Pogo]

Well, I am a strong epistemological skeptic and have no postive ontology or metaphysics.

You may claim to be an epistemological skeptic, but you certainly claim a metaphysical certainty of the non-physicality of Mind/Consciousness

 

[Eli G]

Oh, Lord!!!!

Now I know why I still keep coming back. They need a savior here.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You may claim to be an epistemological skeptic, but you certainly claim a metaphysical certainty of the non-physicality of Mind/Consciousness

Yeah and all other positive ontologies and metaphysics as without evidence-
I accept negatives as relevant, but I don't consider them absolute.

 

[Pogo]

It's ridiculous.

35 comments about how the ignore list works...

I advise you to find something serious that you can dedicate your mind to and exercise your brain (????).

Some puzzle books, Scrabble, Bingo, ... There are many games easy to install on your PC or mobile

Yes, we know, you have your opinion and if others differ, they are wrong and the subject is not worth discussion.
It is your M O.

 

[YoursTrue]

Persistently and frequently. That is pretty constant.

Your thoughts don't seem to align with the facts.

The facts right?

Like this.

I don't use ignore, but I do tend to use the tried and true means that is traditionally available to me under that heading. See ya.

You'll say anything even if it's ridiculous I notice. But then who am I? Someone you obviously care to downgrade and object even if you're wrong.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, we know, you have your opinion and if others differ, they are wrong and the subject is not worth discussion.
It is your M O.

Nope. You and others have exposed your silly selves.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You'll say anything even if it's ridiculous I notice. But then who am I? Someone you obviously care to downgrade and object even if you're wrong.

How do you know that other humans are wrong?

 

[Eli G]

Nope. You and others have exposed your silly selves.

Don't waste your time on that, my friend. It seems that they don't even realize "their silly selves" because they are uncapable of doing that, machines can't do that.

I opened this topic to show them, to atheists, that they believe more in miracles than believers themselves. That is easy to prove: they believe life came out of inorganic material just because some law appear just because out of somewhere just because ...

We, believers, don't think on "just because" origins. We believe in a ver powerful and wise Supreme Being who share life with his creatures. Life came form life.

Who believe in miracles? Believers? Nah; atheists do.

 

[YoursTrue]

Persistently and frequently. That is pretty constant.

Your thoughts don't seem to align with the facts.

The facts right?

Like this.

I don't use ignore, but I do tend to use the tried and true means that is traditionally available to me under that heading. See ya.

Hmm with respect, and I think you know what I mean, some thoughts or statements are contradictory and some people do not like to explain themselves. Such as someone who claims to believe there is a God but refuses to say why. Or someone who keeps his ideas hidden.

 

[YoursTrue]

Don't waste your time on that, my friend. It seems that they don't even realize "their silly selves" because they are uncapable of doing that, machines can't do that.

I opened this topic to show them, to atheists, that they believe more in miracles than believers themselves. That is easy to prove: they believe life came out of inorganic material just because some law appear just because out of somewhere just because ...

We, believers, don't think on "just because" origins. We believe in a ver powerful and wise Supreme Being who share life with his creatures. Life came form life.

Who believe in miracles? Believers? Nah; atheists do.

Thank you. Some here claim not to be atheists but...keep it hidden...

 

[YoursTrue]

How do you know that other humans are wrong?

You think there's no ground for decisions? If I don't think someone is right it's possible I can be convinced they are right. What about you?

 

[Eli G]

I even showed them in a comment that before it was discovered what a closed system is and that our planet is one, the Bible already said it, stating that certain elements such as water and air have stable quantities on our planet. ..

They argued stupidly over I don't know how many comments, as they usually do, until in the end they discovered that I was right when I said that the earth is a closed system... just as the Bible had said for thousands of years.

Do you think it's worth trying to reason with people who just want to argue for the simple pleasure of arguing?
God have mercy on them.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You think there's no ground for decisions? If I don't think someone is right it's possible I can be convinced they are right. What about you?

Well, I can't see that other people are right or wrong. And I don't that me thinking that other person is right or wrong makes that person right or wrong.
And yes, you are neither right nor wrong to me. You just think and feel differently than me.

But yes, there are grounds for decisions but to me there are in me and right or wtong to me. But you can other grounds.

 

[Pogo]

Nope. You and others have exposed your silly selves.

Another assertion without evidence or even sufficient definition to discuss.

 

[Pogo]

Don't waste your time on that, my friend. It seems that they don't even realize "their silly selves" because they are uncapable of doing that, machines can't do that.

I opened this topic to show them, to atheists, that they believe more in miracles than believers themselves. That is easy to prove: they believe life came out of inorganic material just because some law appear just because out of somewhere just because ...

We, believers, don't think on "just because" origins. We believe in a ver powerful and wise Supreme Being who share life with his creatures. Life came form life.

Who believe in miracles? Believers? Nah; atheists do.

And again, you fall back on arguing a strawman position which at this point indicates that you are unwilling to learn.

 

[Pogo]

Thank you. Some here claim not to be atheists but...keep it hidden...

OOOH the no true Christian Fallacy.

 

[Pogo]

I even showed them in a comment that before it was discovered what a closed system is and that our planet is one, the Bible already said it, stating that certain elements such as water and air have stable quantities on our planet. ..

They argued stupidly over I don't know how many comments, as they usually do, until in the end they discovered that I was right when I said that the earth is a closed system... just as the Bible had said for thousands of years.

Do you think it's worth trying to reason with people who just want to argue for the simple pleasure of arguing?
God have mercy on them.

LOL, your ignorance had the inadvertent positive effect of leading to a discussion by educated people of the change in use of a phrase over the last 50 years. No concepts were changed and nowhere in the discussion was anyone's interpretation of the Babble significant.
But it it feels good do it just like you did in the 60's.