Evolution My ToE

[dad]

That's for sure. You apparently think reality is teeming with spirits and demons which you cannot identify to anyone else. So honestly, I'm starting to think you're a tad delusional, at this point, if you see all of that.

Of course Christians, including Jesus believe in Spirits. Of course, most religions and people also do. They are well-identified and even named. Science cannot identify a single one! Pathetic.

You do acknowledge that we reside on planet Earth, right?
And that the sun "rises" in the morning and "sets" at night when the moon comes out?
You acknowledge that animals are born and animals die?
You acknowledge that babies are conceived, and born and grow up to be adults. Etc., etc., etc.

You acknowledge that people are supposed to have some sort of point when supposedly debating, right??

There is a shared collective reality composed of basic facts about the world we live in.

If you want to start talking about the human collective you must acknowledge that the reality is that most believe in spirits and always have! That is reality. It cannot be denied. I assume you are trying to narrow down the definition of 'reality' to the set of beliefs of origin sciences? Ha. You can no more do that than you can limit what reality is to Mother Goose fables.

Facts that science has helped us discover.

Such as? What has science to do with spirits?

You go far beyond those into LalaLand, but you do acknowledge basic facts about reality that the rest of us also acknowledge. Facts that are demonstrably true, unlike the claims you keep trying to make.

If there was a 'Vague Blather' award, I'd put your name in for a contender.

I don't know what "you demo that!" means.

It means support your claim. Prove it. Evidence it. Discuss details of it.etc.

 

[dad]

Nope. Try responding to the words I actually said.

That was, "The idea that claims don't need evidential support because they're "supernatural" or whatever, is ludicrous."

Claims require supporting evidence in order to be accepted.

You apparently deny the supporting evidence of miracles, inspiration, angels, prophecy, the Ressurection, provision, inner peace, etc that lead most people on earth to believe in the spiritual. So what sort of supporting evidence do you want, a ghost in a test tube? People are the test tubes!

 

[SkepticThinker]

For Lurkers..in case anyone thought the poster was intelligently cohesive.. here is the bulk of his post we are talking about, that he says supports his case.

"..We have no evidence of any supernatural beings.

We have no evidence that any supernatural beings have written any books. Ever

We know human beings write books. We have evidence of human beings writing books.."

My post, in it’s entirety:

It's the only supportable claim there is here.

We have no evidence of any supernatural beings.
We have no evidence that any supernatural beings have written any books. Ever.

We know human beings write books. We have evidence of human beings writing books. We know human beings look for explanations to better understand the world around them.

That was written in response to your assertion that, “The Bible exists because people wrote it to explain and understand the world and their beliefs” is an “unsupportable claim.”

The unsupportable claim is yours. Again. Unless you can demonstrate to us that supernatural beings exist and in fact, have written books. I have no idea how you would do that. But that is your claim, after all.

You’re the one making an extraordinary claim here.

Not sure what evidence of spirits or the spiritual you think would be evidence science could deal with?? The rest of mankind found evidence enough to believe in spirits. All through the world and all through history.

How about any evidence AT ALL? Produce a spirit for us or some method by which you can measure the presence of a spirit.

I don’t know why you’d think anybody would just have to take your word for it without any evidential support.

?? Such evidence as...what exactly?? If you deny history and the Christian record and miracles and most religions of the planet, well, you do so without evidence!

Sorry, there is no history of the existence of spirits, or ghosts, or goblins, etc.

What there is, is a history of human beings using their imaginations to write about such things. I doubt you accept that leprechauns exist though, don’t’ you.

To break it gently to you, those that seek find. Those that deny find not. Science is not equipped to find spirits. This is news?

This is just another excuse for providing absolutely no evidence for your claims whatsoever.

Billions of people have found plenty of evidence. Why insult all religions and mankind?

I’ve insulted no one.


Do you have evidence or don’t you? It’s pretty simple.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let's take one example then and see how you fare showing that you know.

What causes the fundamental forces such as the strong nuclear force to exist, and why are they the way they are exactly? Ha

Sorry, but this is moving the goalposts again. And not understanding something does not make it a miracle. When you claim there have been miracles you take on a burden of proof. Your claim is automatically refuted if you cannot support it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The context is not yours to set. A king was told for example that following his kingdom there would be several others, which were detailed. That is history now.

Correct. And it does not belong to Christians either. Please be clear in your claims of prophecies. Vague claims are worthless. As are vague prophecies.

 

[dad]

Correct. And it does not belong to Christians either. Please be clear in your claims of prophecies. Vague claims are worthless. As are vague prophecies.

Since the kingdoms were spelled out, no worries. Greece was even called by name. (And that was with two kingdoms that preceded it mentioned first!

 

[dad]

Sorry, but this is moving the goalposts again. And not understanding something does not make it a miracle. When you claim there have been miracles you take on a burden of proof. Your claim is automatically refuted if you cannot support it.

You claimed science knows. When an example was cited, you fail and whine. In case you forget the example you were asked to demonstrate that science knows, here it is again

'What causes the fundamental forces such as the strong nuclear force to exist, and why are they the way they are exactly?'

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since the kingdoms were spelled out, no worries. Greece was even called by name. (And that was with two kingdoms that preceded it mentioned first!

You might be confused. Once again some of what are called "prophecies" was merely history written as if it were prophecy. Do you have a specific example? Vague handwaving will not get you anywhere.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You claimed science knows. When an example was cited, you fail and whine. In case you forget the example you were asked to demonstrate that science knows, here it is again

'What causes the fundamental forces such as the strong nuclear force to exist, and why are they the way they are exactly?'

I claimed that we know some of the answers in science. I never claimed that all answers are known. The particular examples that you referred to were well understood. You then tried to move the goal posts and tried to ask for new explanations. Please don't try to distort what I claimed.

And don't forget you lose even when you bring up examples that we do not know the answers to. Not knowing an answer does not mean that something is evidence. You are trying to use an argument from ignorance. That is a logical fallacy. Perhaps you do not understand what a logical fallacy is. It is when someone tries to use poor logic to "prove" an idea. Using a logical fallacy does not automatically mean that you are wrong. Only that you did not prove what you claimed that you could prove.

Still waiting for an example of a miracle.

 

[dad]

My post, in it’s entirety:

It's the only supportable claim there is here.

We have no evidence of any supernatural beings.
We have no evidence that any supernatural beings have written any books. Ever.

We know human beings write books. We have evidence of human beings writing books. We know human beings look for explanations to better understand the world around them.

That was written in response to your assertion that, “The Bible exists because people wrote it to explain and understand the world and their beliefs” is an “unsupportable claim.”

It obviously is not possible to prove there are no spirits, and certainly not by using science. Any claim that no spirits influenced things is absolutely unsupportable.

You were also told that supernatural claims would not be possible to evidence with physical-only natural science. Evidence for the supernatural involves the supernatural.

How about any evidence AT ALL? Produce a spirit for us or some method by which you can measure the presence of a spirit.

Man does not produce spirits, that is absurd. They exist on their own and may appear to man, or may inspire, hinder, illuminate, deceive, etc.

Sorry, there is no history of the existence of spirits, or ghosts, or goblins, etc.

False. ALL history includes spiritual aspects. What there is no history of is science knowing one way or the other.

What there is, is a history of human beings using their imaginations to write about such things

Unsupportable claim! You cannot prove that all claimed spiritual events and experiences are false. Get a grip. You can choose to deny and disbelieve.

. I doubt you accept that leprechauns exist though, don’t’ you.

I don't know. Perhaps some spirits in the past somewhere manifested themselves as little people to deceive or influence some folks. Maybe not. I am not going to declare any spiritual connection as impossible here. I do not make stuff up.

Do you have evidence or don’t you? It’s pretty simple.

Most people who believe in the spiritual feel that they have some sort of evidence...none of which falls into the realm of physical science.

 

[dad]

I claimed that we know some of the answers in science. I never claimed that all answers are known. The particular examples that you referred to were well understood. You then tried to move the goal posts and tried to ask for new explanations. Please don't try to distort what I claimed. .

No. The reactions depend on forces existing. The forces are part of the symphony of things necessary to allow us to live on earth.

 

[dad]

You might be confused. Once again some of what are called "prophecies" was merely history written as if it were prophecy. Do you have a specific example? Vague handwaving will not get you anywhere.

Interesting. Lurkers, in case you do not comprehend what the poster is saying here, let me translate.

The suggestion is that any prophesy that was fulfilled such as in the bible was actually a con job and written after the fact.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. The reactions depend on forces existing. The forces are part of the symphony of things necessary to allow us to live on earth.

So what? That does not stop something from being understood. And once again, it would not matter even if we did not understand what you chose.

Let me remind you one more time. You claimed "miracles". I asked for examples and you failed. You tried to use an argument from ignorance. That does not support your claim of miracles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Interesting. Lurkers, in case you do not comprehend what the poster is saying here, let me translate.

The suggestion is that any prophesy that was fulfilled such as in the bible was actually a con job and written after the fact.

No, not a con job. And it appears that you know that many Christians understand this fact. Scholars can fairly accurately date when some of the books of the Bible were written. Are the specific examples that you can think of already refuted? That seems to be the case.

And you do not seem to want to discuss reasonable standards for a "true prophecy". These are not mine, but seem to be very reasonable. They would apply to other religions too, one would simply take out the word "Bible" and replace it with "Quran" for the Muslims for example:

"
For a statement to be Biblical foreknowledge, it must fit all of the five following criteria:

1. It must be accurate. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not accurate, because knowledge (and thus foreknowledge) excludes inaccurate statements. TLDR: It's true.
2. It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not in the Bible, because Biblical by definition foreknowledge can only come from the Bible itself, rather than modern reinterpretations of the text. TLDR: It's in plain words in the Bible.
3. It must be precise and unambiguous. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if meaningless philosophical musings or multiple possible ideas could fulfill the foreknowledge, because ambiguity prevents one from knowing whether the foreknowledge was intentional rather than accidental. TLDR: Vague "predictions" don't count.
4. It must be improbable. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of a pure guess, because foreknowledge requires a person to actually know something true, while a correct guess doesn't mean that the guesser knows anything. This also excludes contemporary beliefs that happened be true but were believed to be true without solid evidence. TLDR: Lucky guesses don't count.
5. It must have been unknown. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of an educated guess based off contemporary knowledge, because foreknowledge requires a person to know a statement when it would have been impossible, outside of supernatural power, for that person to know it. TLDR: Ideas of the time don't count."

 

[YoursTrue]

Aside from the fact that you've avoided the point yet again ....



I'm not the product of any supernatural beings. My two human parents produced me.

But aside from that, why do you believe this now?

The process that gave you life (got you born) is what is from God. Not you in particular. The process.

 

[YoursTrue]

Aside from the fact that you've avoided the point yet again ....



I'm not the product of any supernatural beings. My two human parents produced me.

But aside from that, why do you believe this now?

and you believe that a unicell went on through stages to produce your parents, don't you?

 

[shunyadragon]

and you believe that a unicell went on through stages to produce your parents, don't you?

Yes, that is what the objective verifiable evidence demonstrates. No other viable hypothesis has been proposed that passes muster based on the evidence.

 

[dad]

So what? That does not stop something from being understood. .

Except neither science nor you understand any of this. Why is earth the exact right distance from the sun? Science would basically say fluke. The problem is that there are a whole plethora of things that work in perfect balance and harmony to allow life to be random. As for knowing what the fundamental forces really are and why they exist as they do...or at all.you do not know. Be honest.

 

[dad]

No, not a con job. And it appears that you know that many Christians understand this fact. Scholars can fairly accurately date when some of the books of the Bible were written. Are the specific examples that you can think of already refuted? That seems to be the case.

You are then declaring the holy prophets like Daniel, that Jesus Personally affirmed was His true prophet a con job. In so doing you are also fingering Jesus and the apostles etc.

And you do not seem to want to discuss reasonable standards for a "true prophecy". These are not mine, but seem to be very reasonable. They would apply to other religions too, one would simply take out the word "Bible" and replace it with "Quran" for the Muslims for example:

What is reasonable is to look at whether the prophecy about kingdoms to follow Babylon was accurate or not. The problem for scoffers is that is is so accurate, they must claim it was written after the fact. Period.

"
For a statement to be Biblical foreknowledge, it must fit all of the five following criteria:

1. It must be accurate. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not accurate, because knowledge (and thus foreknowledge) excludes inaccurate statements. TLDR: It's true.

The prophesies in the bible such as in Daniel are extremely perfectly accurate.

1. 
   

   [*]It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not in the Bible, because Biblical by definition foreknowledge can only come from the Bible itself, rather than modern reinterpretations of the text. TLDR: It's in plain words in the Bible.

   That is what we are talking about here Bible prophecy.
   
   

   [*]It must be precise and unambiguous. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if meaningless philosophical musings or multiple possible ideas could fulfill the foreknowledge, because ambiguity prevents one from knowing whether the foreknowledge was intentional rather than accidental. TLDR: Vague "predictions" don't count.

   Nothing vague about the kingdoms that followed Babylon.
   
   

   [*]It must be improbable. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of a pure guess, because foreknowledge requires a person to actually know something true, while a correct guess doesn't mean that the guesser knows anything. This also excludes contemporary beliefs that happened be true but were believed to be true

   To have a virgin from Israel, from the lineage of David, born in a predicted year, in a precise little village, that would be betrayed for an exact price to death, and have His hands and feet pierced, lots cast for His garment, and would rise from the dead, etc is not only improbable but impossible
   
   

   [*]without solid evidence. TLDR: Lucky guesses don't count.

   The witnesses were many, and you simply invoke Last Thursdayism to deny anything that cannot be placed under your nose today.
   

   [*]It must have been unknown. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of an educated guess based off contemporary knowledge, because foreknowledge requires a person to know a statement when it would have been impossible, outside of supernatural power, for that person to know it. TLDR: Ideas of the time don't count."

   This is incoherant nonsense. Of course the future is unknown in the past.

 

[shunyadragon]

Except neither science nor you understand any of this. Why is earth the exact right distance from the sun? Science would basically say fluke. The problem is that there are a whole plethora of things that work in perfect balance and harmony to allow life to be random. As for knowing what the fundamental forces really are and why they exist as they do...or at all.you do not know. Be honest.

There are trillions of planets in our universe of many many variations, and bt shear odds we are not alone in the universe. Your efforts to argue from ignorance is a fallacy big time.