If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[Into the Night]

How do we tell time? Motion of the sun,moon and earth!

For some intervals of time, yes.

Sun and the moon weren't created till day 4 ,so how long were days 1-2-33?

Time can still be measured outside of using the Sun, the Moon, or the Earth.

 

[Into the Night]

Again, stopping right here because you are playing dumb.

You must really enjoy wasting your time responding to me, given that I probably don't read half of your posts because you inject your stupidity into them almost immediately.

Tipped your king again. Come back and play anytime. Your fake ignore is just a lie.

 

[Into the Night]

These aren't things for science to explain. Learn what science is. Do you think it's for science to explain how far it is from LAX to La Guardia? Your comments are stupid.


Now, ask Cypress why his deity came into existence, and when that happened. Did his deity come into existence from nothing? You seem to be terrified of Cypress such that you won't ask him any of the tough questions. Why don't you ask him for the unambiguous definition of the global climate that doesn't violate math, science, logic or observation? Oh, that's right, you know that there isn't any such thing so Cypress won't have it either.

How did the goddess Climate just spring out of nothing?

Good. Good. Keep going. Ask Cypress for the orderly distribution pattern of universal matter and energy.

Nice meme! I haven't seen this one before! Definitely gets the point across! You artwork has definitely improved!

 

[Into the Night]

It's not. Literally is a description of how it is accepted by Christians, not a description of how it appears in the Bible.

I guess you better go learn what 'literally' means as well. You still have a LOT of English to learn.

Nope. The claims made at both. You just claim more irrational and implausible events to explain the first ones.

Go learn what 'claim', 'irrational', 'implausible', 'event', and 'first ones' mean. Random words. No apparent coherency.

I have.

You have what? Go learn what 'hence' means. Go learn what a predicate is and what a conclusion is. Go learn English and logic.

I don't even believe he exists because of a lack of evidence.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. You cannot make the evidence just disappear.
Attempted negative proof fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

 

[Into the Night]

I understand the concept very well. I wish you did.

Lie.

The concept is this: Atheists want to pretend they are not doing the same kind of "believing" as theists.

Redefinition fallacy (atheism<->religion).

..so they have warped the meaning of "atheist" to mean, "Anyone who does not believe in any gods."

Who is 'they'?? Redefinition fallacy.

Of course this means that babies,

A baby is.

toddlers,

Toddlers are already learning a religion.

incompetent people are all atheists.

What does incompetency have to do with religion??

It also means that agnostics are supposedly required to consider themselves atheists.

Atheists are not agnostics. Agnostics are not atheists. Redefinition fallacy.

It is a trick atheists are playing on themselves.

Atheism isn't a trick.

 

[Into the Night]

FFS.... The age of the Earth. The Bible does not literally say how old it is, but many Christians literally believe that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. There's entire society committed to it.

You don't get to speak for everybody. Omniscience fallacy. The age of Earth is unknown.

I believe it's incorrect, but that's not provable anymore than either of us can prove there isn't an island full of magical rainbow unicorns in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

Random phrases ignored.

However, it is still true that the Bible makes claim after claim after claim that flies directly in the face of various scientific areas. Your answer to these impossible things is to justify them with more claims that fly in the face of science.

Nothing in the Bible violates any theory of science. Science is not a face.

It's not possible for a human to walk on the surface of water,

It certainly is. I've even driven on the surface of water, and even skate upon it.

so your God magically changes the atomic makeup of water to make it possible.

Why not?

And that makes sense to you,

Yes.

despite the fact that the only evidence for your God today is a book written 2000 plus years ago,

Argument of the Stone fallacy. I have already provided you with quite a few pieces of objective evidence. You can't many ANY of it just disappear.

again, by people who couldn't explain where the sun went at night

Even the ancient Egyptions described as the Sun passing through under the world. The ancient Greeks said the same thing.

and used to very dead animals under buildings for good luck

No. To ward off evil spirits...a practice found in England.

and quite literally wrote about thousands of other gods for whom are atheistic in your beliefs..

Atheism is not a religion. You are not an atheist. You are a religious fundamentalist.

Shinto is a religion.

 

[ZenMode]

I guess you better go learn what 'literally' means as well. You still have a LOT of English to learn.

Sure Jan.

Go learn what 'claim', 'irrational', 'implausible', 'event', and 'first ones' mean. Random words. No apparent coherency.

Sure Jan.

You have what? Go learn what 'hence' means. Go learn what a predicate is and what a conclusion is. Go learn English and logic.

Sure

Argument of the Stone fallacy. You cannot make the evidence just disappear.
Attempted negative proof fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

I don't have to make it disappear. Any evidence that exists is limited and of poor quality.

 

[Into the Night]

^^ Because of strictly emotional and ego-related reasons, he refuses to acknowledge that all the matter around us and in the universe is organized in a periodic, regular pattern of structure, organization, and hierarchy.

The Universe is not a periodic table.

 

[ZenMode]

You don't get to speak for everybody. Omniscience fallacy. The age of Earth is unknown.

Yep, stopping right here again. When you want to discuss the actual topic, and stop avoiding, I'll be here.

 

[ZenMode]

Tipped your king again. Come back and play anytime. Your fake ignore is just a lie.

Nope. Completely true.

When you want to discuss the actual topic, and stop avoiding, I'll be here

 

[Into the Night]

Why did you omit all explanation of how the probability was calculated?

Simple. He denies probability mathematics.

@Into the Night just gave you one.

It would appear that you never call booooooolsch't when you should.

I never gave him any model of the Universe. There is no model of the Universe. There is just the Universe.

@Into the Night just gave you one. Obviously such a model can be constructed.

I never constructed a model of the Universe.

No laws of physics describe a creation of any universe.

This is true.

@Into the Night asked you why you assume the universe was created. What's your answer?

He hasn't answered it yet. He pivoted away.

 

[Into the Night]

Sure Jan.

Sure Jan.

Sure

Still refuse to learn English, logic, science, or mathematics, eh?

I don't have to make it disappear.

You can't make any evidence just disappear, Void.

Any evidence that exists is limited and of poor quality.

Evidence doesn't have a 'limit' or a 'quality'. It is simply evidence. You can't just make it disappear.

 

[Into the Night]

Great. Using the periodic table of the elements, map the stars of the universe.

He thinks it is a map of the entire Universe. It's not even a map.
I don't think he even knows how the periodic table was created.

 

[Into the Night]

Galileo famously wrote up and published his theory of the heliocentric solar system as a dialogue.

So? It doesn't really matter the method of describing a theory of science.

I didn't say he created science, dummy.

DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!

But Jefferson wrote extensively about the natural history, meteorology, flora, and paleontology of Virginia.

Not a theory of science...any of it.

 

[Into the Night]

You're getting confused between the origin solar system and the origin of the universe.

What is the 'origin solar system'? Why do you think there is an origin of the universe?

I've read or investigated the seminal works of the preeminent atheist authors and influencers of the 19th and 20th centuries. They all made a truth claim - there are no gods.

You are quoting religious fundamentalists, like ZenMode. You are not quoting atheists.

The definition obscure message board atheists want to use means my dog is an atheist.

You don't know what religion your dog has, if any.

If you haven't seen sufficient evidence for god, it insinuates you are waiting for more evidence.

I don't need to wait for more evidence. There is plenty already.

Explain to the board exactly what kind of evidence you are waiting for.

What makes you think he is waiting for evidence?

The universe as a whole is organized into a structure of galactic filaments and voids, because of the universal properties of gravity and dark energy.

The Universe is unorganized.

Random equations mean nothing.

 

[Into the Night]

I accept your tacit confession you were ignorant of the fact Galileo published his most famous scientific theory in the literary form of dialogue. (You may commence frantic Googling now.)

What 'confession'???
What does a search engine have to do with anything?

 

[Into the Night]

Agnostic. It doesn't know either way and makes no truth claims.

Redefinition fallacy (atheist<->agnostic). Assumption fallacy.

How do you know your dog isn't religious?

So even though you claim you need more evidence, you don't have the slightest idea and are afraid to say what kind of evidence you need, lol

He didn't claim to need more evidence. Just convincing evidence.

Filaments are organization, as are planetary star systems,

They are not. The Universe is unorganized.

as is the chemistry represented by the periodic table.

The periodic table is not chemistry. It is not the Universe either.

Are you aware the word 'periodic' indicates a repeating pattern, i.e. organization and structure?

So? It is not the Universe.

 

[Into the Night]

^^ Bad faith poster who refuses to admit there is organization all around us: in the periodic table of chemical elements, in the formation and motion of planetary star systems, in the intricate structure of galactic filaments.

The periodic table is not the Universe.
Your assignments is not the Universe.
A solar system is not the Universe.
Random equations is not the Universe.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[ZenMode]

Evidence doesn't have a 'limit' or a 'quality'. It is simply evidence. You can't just make it disappear.

More word games in an attempt to avoid an actual conversation about the topic. Evidence does vary in quality and quantity. You know that, but insist on playing dumb.

Again, whenever you want to discuss the actual topic, I'm here.

Until then, I am not going to be baited into your nonsense.

 

[Into the Night]

It's more probable than not that a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by some kind of rational agency or force.

Math error: Failure to declare boundary. Failure to declare randX. Buzzword fallacies (rational, lawful, organized).
Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. You have been locked in this paradox for some time:

1) The Universe exists.
2) The Multiverse exists.

Einstein famously said the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it's comprehensible.

Einstein is not the Universe. Name dropping is not the Universe.

It's logically incoherent and unintelligible to believe a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by chance and inanimate, irrational material physical causes.

Random words. No apparent coherency.
Go learn English and logic.

I could be wrong about it.

Random words isn't 'wrong' or 'right'. It's just random words.