Is God an Alternative Fact?

[Brickjectivity]

you are making excuses for using willful ignorance

No one can prove they are not willfully ignorant, and it is a loathsome accusation. We are all friends here, so please raise your standards of conversation. Do not substitute insults for discussion.

 

[McBell]

When we are ignorant of facts, we then use alternative facts to substitute for facts. This is human nature, not nature.

Ah, so humans are not natural...

At least you are consistent.

 

[TDselector]

No one can prove they are not willfully ignorant, and it is a loathsome accusation. We are all friends here, so please raise your standards of conversation. Do not substitute insults for discussion.

So you are asking me to lower my standards to meet with those who lack the conviction of their own opinions in contradiction to their own reality? To willfully ignore such a position is also known by several other terms which I will not get into. Opinions, including my own, are without merit if they are not based on the nature of our reality.

 

[TDselector]

Ah, so humans are not natural...

At least you are consistent.

We are effects of Nature, not the cause of it.

 

[McBell]

We are effects of Nature, not the cause of it.

So humans are natural after all?

You should make up your mind.

 

[Brickjectivity]

You may want to read the forum rules before continuing. Fair warning about not insulting other users. It is discouraged.

 

[TDselector]

So humans are natural after all?

You should make up your mind.

Humans are an effect of Nature, not the cause of Nature. Get your facts straight as to what I have been saying.

 

[McBell]

Humans are an effect of Nature, not the cause of Nature. Get your facts straight as to what I have been saying.

You said human nature is not natural.
Which would mean that humans are not natural.
Then you say human are natural.

Make up your mind.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Correction, I did not used current methods used in science. This how I was able to obtain "unambiguous" empirical evidence and why your very own existence can indeed confirm the findings. A hypocrite refuses to contest them in order to argue (selection) what they are not entitled to argue about.

I have not see any science so far in this thread. I don't think you know what science is.

 

[TDselector]

You said human nature is not natural.
Which would mean that humans are not natural.
Then you say human are natural. Make up your mind.

I stated, "When we are ignorant of facts, we then use alternative facts to substitute for facts. This is human nature, not nature." You are taking things out of context to suit your agenda of avoiding the the question being asked. Is God an alternative fact?

 

[McBell]

I have not see any science so far in this thread. I don't think you know what science is.

All I have seen thus far from the OP is insults and double speak.

I thought perhaps I was just not smart enough to comprehend the OP's obvious deep deep meaning, but the problem over whether or not humans are natural.....

 

[TDselector]

I have not see any science so far in this thread. I don't think you know what science is.

I am well aware of what science is and is not, do you?

 

[McBell]

I stated, "When we are ignorant of facts, we then use alternative facts to substitute for facts. This is human nature, not nature."

If human nature is not natural, what is it?

You are taking things out of context to suit your agenda of avoiding the the question being asked. Is God an alternative fact?

My answer to your question is "I do not know".

I would further state that neither do you.

 

[TDselector]

All I have seen thus far from the OP is insults and double speak.

I thought perhaps I was just not smart enough to comprehend the OP's obvious deep deep meaning, but the problem over whether or not humans are natural.....

What is Natural and what is Nature are two different questions as you should know.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I am well aware of what science is and is not, do you?

Science is a methodology for acquiring evidence.

Science is NOT a methodology for establishing truth.

Science is NOT an excuse to shut off your brain; no matter how many people use it that way.

 

[TDselector]

Science is a methodology for acquiring evidence.

Science is NOT a methodology for establishing truth.

Science is NOT an excuse to shut off your brain; no matter how many people use it that way.

I agree with #1 and #3 postulates. Do you know why "Science is NOT a methodology for establishing truth."?

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I agree with #1 and #3 postulates. Do you know why "Science is NOT a methodology for establishing truth."?

Science is the method we use to gather the evidence, but it is humans that have the final say on what is truth and what is not truth. Humans use the gathered evidence to help them make a conclusion, but that final determination is not something science can do.

 

[TDselector]

Agreed, science is an effectual study (gather the evidence) of Nature. Now do a keyword search of scientific studies that use both "direct selection and "indirect selection" terms and see how many of the millions of documents use such terms. Then see how such terms were used. You will find that in science, we ignore how we can conduct experiments in the first place which is a fundamental omission error. In science, we ignore the cause of the effects observed in scientific experiments, and since there are two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive origin variables that cause all the effects we observe in Nature, the methods used in science are based on omitted-variable bias which in turn leads to false-positive results. This is why "Science is NOT a methodology for establishing truth."

 

[Cephus]

When we are ignorant of facts, we then use alternative facts to substitute for facts. This is human nature, not nature.

No, then we say we don't know the answer. Not knowing doesn't give us a license to just make something up. The fact that some humans, even most humans, are stupid and irrational is not something to be proud of.

 

[Cephus]

I stated, "When we are ignorant of facts, we then use alternative facts to substitute for facts. This is human nature, not nature." You are taking things out of context to suit your agenda of avoiding the the question being asked. Is God an alternative fact?

No, gods are not facts at all because they cannot be objectively determined to be factual. They are the subject of beliefs. Empty beliefs if you ask me, but still beliefs.