There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[Madsaac]

No yes or on. You have to learn that not all humans are a member of that we that you believe in.

No of course not but I think having an opinion about something is a basic human condition.

And giving evidence to support an opinion just goes hand in hand.

There is nothing special or unusual about this premise

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I give up!

Me thinks that you just don't want to admit that I am making sense, as the question I am asking is just simple logic. You should be able to answer it, but you won't, because to say "yes, there is more evidence/credibility for evolution rather than Creationism" would be to "lose" the debate. Is "winning" debates that important?

Just how I am perceive it, as you refuse to answer simple questions and are making the whole thing more convoluted than it has to be in my opinion. Not just this thread but every conversation i have with you, you confuse me. Maybe you're just way smarter than me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I do metacognition a lot. I don't just think about the answer to a question. I think about what is assumed with that question and in what context it is offered.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No of course not but I think having an opinion about something is a basic human condition.

And giving evidence to support an opinion just goes hand in hand.

There is nothing special or unusual about this premise

You can't give evidence for subjective opinions.

 

[Madsaac]

You can't give evidence for subjective opinions.

Yes you can.

The mighty tigers are the best team because they have the best fullback.

My subjective opinion is supported by evidence (however crude or basic). Can you see where the evidence is?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes you can.

The mighty tigers are the best team because they have the best fullback.

My subjective opinion is supported by evidence (however crude or basic). Can you see where the evidence is?

Yeah, best meets your subjectively chosen standard for best, because you accept the game as relevant.

 

[Madsaac]

Yeah, best meets your subjectively chosen standard for best, because you accept the game as relevant.

Yeah but its still evidence?

We both have some sort of similar understanding of what 'best' means

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yeah but its still evidence?

We both have some sort of similar understanding of what 'best' means

But it is in effect a contradictory version of evidence in regards to evidence as used per the question of God in the OP.

Your version is what makes sense to you. The other is independent of what makes sense to you as a norm of objective.

 

[Madsaac]

But it is in effect a contradictory version of evidence in regards to evidence as used per the question of God in the OP.

But its still evidence. It's bad evidence but it's still evidence and its up to my audience to assess it

Your version is what makes sense to you. The other is independent of what makes sense to you as a norm of objective.

It may be a little different to you but you should still must be able to get the gist (Some sort of understanding of my opinion) so you should be able to still assess it?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

But its still evidence. It's bad evidence but it's still evidence and its up to my audience to assess it

It may be a little different to you but you should still must be able to get the gist (Some sort of understanding of my opinion) so you should be able to still assess it?

Yes, I can differentiate when you are subjective or objective and use different versions of evidence without conflating them into one.

 

[Madsaac]

Yes, I can differentiate when you are subjective or objective and use different versions of evidence without conflating them into one.

Cool, I have to go now. Thanks for the chat, catch you later

 

[Audie]

Yes, governments would spend lots of resources on working out what immigration policy is best for their country.

And part of these resources would be certain types of studies being done to work out the best policies. They would have experts, (bureaucrats) giving the best advice, supported by evidence.

In theory, somewhere .

Are you not claiming that "immigration is good"?

And "studies" show that?

There's studies to show whatever you like.
Like bible readings.

How much of good for who and how many of
what sort of people and the same for the negatives
don't seem part of your claim.

The USA has done nothing resembling a best policy and
such policies as there are/ are enforced are insane
in nature and application.

 

[Muffled]

And that is a breaking of the Ninth Commandment. Not your false claim about you being rational. Your beliefs are demonstrably not rational as a result of you refusing to learn the basics of science and logic. No, your breaking was accusing me of having fantasies. That puts a burden of proof upon you and you know that you cannot properly support that claim.

Why are you so afraid to even learn the basics of science? Why do you refuse to learn what is and what is not evidence and why?

I believe I don't worry about breaking commandments. Legalists worry about that. I serve Jesus and listen to what He says.

Why do you bother repeatedly asking the same absurd questions when You know I don't believe a word of what you are saying when you ask them.

 

[Muffled]

But you are unfamiliar since you are demonstrably wrong. That means that you are either terribly ignorant of the fossil record or that you are lying. I do not think that you are lying, I think that you are just terribly ignorant. Now one could argue that your ignorance is self inflicted which would mean that you are not debating in good faith. That does not quite cross over into the field of purposefully lying, but it is close.

I believe I do not know everything about fossils but I have read the fantasies of those who look at the bones and tell you what the guy ate for supper.

 

[Muffled]

There is nothing we can point to and say "See? That proves God!"

I believe I am proof of God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe I don't worry about breaking commandments. Legalists worry about that. I serve Jesus and listen to what He says.

Why do you bother repeatedly asking the same absurd questions when You know I don't believe a word of what you are saying when you ask them.

No, you just pretend to do that. Jesus was quite clear that the old laws are still in force.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe I am proof of God.

Well that is a silly belief. That only tells the world that you do not know how to argue rationally.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe I do not know everything about fossils but I have read the fantasies of those who look at the bones and tell you what the guy ate for supper.

Please find a legitimate example.

 

[Audie]

I believe I do not know everything about fossils but I have read the fantasies of those who look at the bones and tell you what the guy ate for supper.

Do you wish to be respected?


It's quite dishonest to insult people
you know nothing about with garbage
that you just make up.

You know they say that you'll reap what
you're sowing.

 

[Madsaac]

Are you not claiming that "immigration is good"?

No, I'm claiming that the correct type of research should be conducted to determine if immigration is good

There's studies to show whatever you like.
Like bible readings.

Really? Is this a joke? I'll take studies conducted by experts in their field over one's done in the bible.

How much of good for who and how many of
what sort of people and the same for the negatives
don't seem part of your claim.

Yes it does, I'm simply suggesting that the experts in their field will determine what sort of people and the negatives or positives associated immigration.

Results and evidence obtained through rigorous studies.

 

[Audie]

What about this example, lots of people believe migration is bad, however there have been numerous studies and evidence to prove otherwise.

Maybe, if you don't mean what you say, don't say it.

(studies don't prove things, btw)