# Theism vs. Atheism debate

Author: Fallaneze ,

## Topic's posts

Posts in total: 634
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 2,029
2
2
3
--> @zedvictor4
We have 33 vertebrae. So What?
I said nothing about vertabrae. Your confused. Stick to what I say

Circles/Polygons?
When you learn what a circle and polygon{nall} is, then please come back an attempt to learn something beyond those two that ive been dealing with for 20 plus years.

The only waste has been your comments. They lack definitive description and your ego is hurt when I tell you that truth. Get over it and do more research.

Pi = 3 is a rounded off truth

Pi = 3.1 is rounded off truth

Pi = 3.14  is rounded off truth

Pi = 3.142 is rounded off truth

Etc.....3.14 15 92 65 35 897932384626433832795 is a rounded off truth.

When you actually want get interested in truth, please come back and share something of relevant significance with us. Thanks.

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 is a rounded off truth and the two zeros{ 00 }  make the relationship the whole rational number of significant-ally more relevance to my nunically geometric explorations and to  any person who choses to use rounded off numbers.  That does not appear to be you.

Please share when you have something of relevant significance and stop wasting bandwidth.

Pi^4 - 31{ XYZ } = 66.4 and that is rounded of number. If you want to see more of the irrational the put out some effort and use a calculator. Ive been doing just that for 20 years or more.  You, not so much. You fear being naive and I embrace it.

"Dare To Be Naive" ......Bucky Fuller

• Debates: 15
Forum posts: 3,981
3
3
3
--> @mustardness
You picked an inaccurate number and attempted to imply a significant relationship between that inaccurate number and one particular set of body parts. By pointing out that we have 33 vertebrae I was simply expounding the tenuous nature of your claim.

I know perfectly well what circles and polygons are. I was merely questioning the implied relationship between them.

"As for rounded off truth".  Well; perhaps you really should have taken up the flute 20 years ago.

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 3,289
2
3
3
--> @Fallaneze
After determining the weight of the evidence for and against the claim, it's more rational to believe the claim if the evidence is more for it than against it, and it's more rational to disbelieve the claim if there's more evidence against it than for it.
Is there no problem in 'determining the weight'?    I think its not worth stating that one should give more credence to something with good evidence than to something with little or no evidence.   Well, duh!  The problem is evaluting the quality of the evidence.

How good is something in the Bible as evidence?  Is it more or less than something in, say, Josephus?  Our experience of the world is that people don't come back from bein dead - is that good evidence the Lazarus story is fiction?

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 2,029
2
2
3
--> @zedvictor4
You picked an inaccurate number

and attempted to imply a significant relationship between that inaccurate number and one particular set of body parts.
I observe the truths and present them to you. If cant accept truth as presented to you, move on somewhere else.

By pointing out that we have 33 vertebrae I was simply expounding the tenuous nature of your claim.
Again, I stated nothing about 33 vertabrae and for the 2nd or rmore times, you narrow mind and ego and cannot accept the truth once again. Take a hike Z4 as your have not the slightest interest truth. You only want to play mind games that stem from a hurt ego.

I know perfectly well what circles and polygons are. I was merely questioning the implied relationship between them.
You have not pointed out anything because you never ever offer us definitive descripion of whatever it is you seem to think your talking about. Waste of bandwidths is all that you have to offer us. Sad :--(

For starters that you dont even no any relationships between polygon and circle just shows how many years behind the 8-ball you are.  They both enclose a 2D area.  Do you need me to spell out a long list of similarites between polygons and circles. Cone dude get real. Get specific with definitive descripitions of what is you think your talking about.

"As for rounded off truth".  Well; perhaps you really should have taken up the flute 20 years ago.

Huh? More meaningless dribble and waste of bandwidth from Z4.  Please share when you actually have any shred of some relevantly signnificant info to share with us. Thanks.
• Debates: 15
Forum posts: 3,981
3
3
3
--> @mustardness
Drivel!

And Bogus Science.

You might know one or two things, but so do millions of other people.

Bucky Fuller you ain't!

• Debates: 3
Forum posts: 8,892
3
4
8
--> @keithprosser
Is there no problem in 'determining the weight'?    I think its not worth stating that one should give more credence to something with good evidence than to something with little or no evidence.   Well, duh!  The problem is evaluting the quality of the evidence.
Bingo.  Standards of evidence.
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 2,029
2
2
3
--> @zedvictor4
I'm sorry Z4 from day one many moons ago, Ive never ever seen any definitive descriptive info from you, in regards to anything Ive stated, ergo, once I'm not going to continue to waste any more bandwidith.  Good bye.  :--O
• Debates: 15
Forum posts: 3,981
3
3
3
--> @mustardness
Absolutely fine. But consider my advice, ditch the pseudo-science and channel your mental energy into something a little more realistic.

Regards.

Z4

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 2,029
2
2
3