Theism vs. Atheism debate

Author: Fallaneze ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 634
  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    2
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    --> @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

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,981
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @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.

  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @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?

  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    2
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    --> @zedvictor4
    You picked an inaccurate number
    I have no idea what number your talking about. As per your ususal you always lack definitive desripition of what ever it is your think your talking about.  Waste of bandwidth again.

    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.
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,981
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @mustardness
    Drivel!

    And Bogus Science.

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

    Bucky Fuller you ain't!




  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 8,892
    3
    4
    8
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @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.
  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    2
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    --> @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
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,981
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @mustardness
    Absolutely fine. But consider my advice, ditch the pseudo-science and channel your mental energy into something a little more realistic.

    Regards.

    Z4



  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    2
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    Anyone up for debating your beliefs about the existence of God?
    Define God. Thats an easy one for those who choose to follow rational, logical common sense pathways of thought.

    " G "od = " U "niverse and this label the most wholistic cosmc set i.e. God/Universe is a subset catagory of " G "od = " U "niverse.

    Why do people deny or avoid obvious rational, logical common sense pathays of thought? There exists a few differrent reasons and they all overlap with common denominator ----ego * (i) *-----.

    Ego exists as part of the metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts catagory.

    Ego, like oxygen, is double-edged sword that can preserve humanities existence on Earth or make cause is extinction.

    Caring is biological aspect. God/Universe does not care if humanity  survives on Earth or elsewhere, even tho, the coding for biological life may exist all black hole type phenomena.

    Black hole phenomena appear to exist at center of most galaxies examined.