Pissing off the atheists/naturalists

[Lacewing]

It sounds like this is all about me.

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

[Skepdick]

It sounds like this is all about me.

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

You are steering the dialogue so skilfully and intentionally towards me.

So… away from yourself then?

Have you ever considered that this huge ego of mine you keep encountering is merely a reflection?

[Lacewing]

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

You are steering the dialogue so skilfully and intentionally towards me.

So… away from yourself then?

Read what you just wrote and see how it applies to you.

Have you ever considered that this huge ego of mine you keep encountering is merely a reflection?

How do your criticisms of each person who disagrees with your OP reflect on me?

[Skepdick]

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

You are steering the dialogue so skilfully and intentionally towards me.

So… away from yourself then?

Read what you just wrote and see how it applies to you.

Have you ever considered that this huge ego of mine you keep encountering is merely a reflection?

How do your criticisms of each person who disagrees with your OP reflect on me?

Your bad faith engagement reflects on your.

You are adding fuckall to the dialogue.

If you don’t understand the dialogue - find another tree.

Woof! Woof!

[Iwannaplato]

It sounds like this is all about me.

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

I agree with a number of things he's said.

[Skepdick]

It sounds like this is all about me.

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

I agree with a number of things he's said.

No way. Did hell freeze over?

[Iwannaplato]

It's your thread, and nobody agrees with what you've presented... right? Sooo... who else is it about?

I agree with a number of things he's said.

No way. Did hell freeze over?

It must have.

Nah, I didn't hide it in the thread.

There are many things I agree with you've said elsewhere. Or perhaps better put, since your positions are shifting all over the place depending on context, I've thought they were interesting probes.

[Gary Childress]

I guess you missed the fucking point.

You are the one repeatedly missing the points: Your thread makes no sense to anyone. You criticize everyone who has disagreed with you. You've made it clear that you are not as intelligent as you want to believe you are. You are the only one getting pissed off.

It sounds like this is all about me.

Still barking up the wrong tree. Woof! Woof!

I can only explain it to you so many times before I am forced to conclude that I can’t understand it for you.

OK. So are you an atheist, a theist, an agnostic; or are you skeptical toward all those things?

[Lacewing]

I agree with a number of things he's said.

No way. Did hell freeze over?

It must have.

Nah, I didn't hide it in the thread.

There are many things I agree with you've said elsewhere. Or perhaps better put, since your positions are shifting all over the place depending on context, I've thought they were interesting probes.

Value comes in many forms

[Gary Childress]

No way. Did hell freeze over?

It must have.

Nah, I didn't hide it in the thread.

There are many things I agree with you've said elsewhere. Or perhaps better put, since your positions are shifting all over the place depending on context, I've thought they were interesting probes.

Value comes in many forms

But not necessarily the same kind of "value" for everyone.

[Lacewing]

Value comes in many forms

But not necessarily the same kind of "value" for everyone.

Sure. My point was that there can be some kind of value even from things that seem lacking in it. The kind of value depends on the individual, of course. It just seems worthwhile to point out that there are many forms of value... some are quite subtle and unexpected... such as having a completely different insight than what a discussion might be focused on. Or... having things turn out great after, and because of, some kind of upheaval.

Why are you responding to my post, by the way? You told me (as well as others) to leave you alone. Wouldn't it be appropriate if you refrain from commenting on my posts too? Or do you think this is to be a one-way standard, where you get to scream and act erratic whenever it suits you... and I (and others) are supposed to adapt to whatever mood you're in at any given moment?

[Gary Childress]

Why are you responding to my post, by the way? You told me (as well as others) to leave you alone. Wouldn't it be appropriate if you refrain from commenting on my posts too? Or do you think this is to be a one-way standard, where you get to scream and act erratic whenever it suits you... and I (and others) are supposed to adapt to whatever mood you're in at any given moment?

Fair enough. I stand scolded.

[Skepdick]

OK. So are you an atheist, a theist, an agnostic; or are you skeptical toward all those things?

I am a god-loving atheist. But if you want to cut the circle... I started at atheism. And now I am at the god-loving part.

A little knowledge of science make a man an atheist, but an in depth study of science makes him a believer in God. -- Francis Bacon

[Will Bouwman]

Nature IS supernatural

Well there's a turn up.

It’s more of a turn down.

The current understanding of nature is Ex Nihilo.

Well no. That's your current understanding of the current understanding. Ex nihilo is one hypothesis, but there are many others.

Unless you have something true to say about nothing, maybe you want to check on that definition again…

Okie-dokie.

supernatural
/ˌsuːpəˈnatʃ(ə)rəl/
adjective
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

Nature IS supernatural BECAUSE we lack complete understanding of its laws

You've gone back to thinking like this:

"Impossible" simply means NOT possible. And I say that it's NOT possible because I haven't seen anybody do it.

It's basically god of the gaps - you don't understand it, therefore it is magic. 'Supernatural' depends on whether you interpret the above definition as meaning beyond current understanding, in which case most of what we understand now was once supernatural, or that it means unconstrained by any laws that we could even in principle discover. Maybe it is, but we will probably never run out of natural hypotheses.

[Skepdick]

Well no. That's your current understanding of the current understanding. Ex nihilo is one hypothesis, but there are many others.

Oh Good!

So did the universe come from something or nothing? I was willing to settle for a miracle, but now you seem to suggest you have a better answer.

If it's something other than nothing you necessarily believe in the supernatural.

Atheist my ass.

It's basically god of the gaps - you don't understand it, therefore it is magic.

Congratulations on committing the EXACT SAME fallacy then.

You don't understand it.
You reject ex nihilio.
So you believe SOMETHING did it.

Atheist my ass.

And in other news my newest favourite phrase is "time of the gaps". You just throw more time at the problem and them magic!

Like the question of "How did life emerge from matter on Earth?". Abiogenesis isn't an answer. How does it work?
Oh you just throw time at it! OK! How much time?

8 million scientists working on the problem for 5000 years?
13.8 billion years happening to one planet?
13.8 billion years * 2 trillion planets?

And one of them wins the lottery.

Proof of work. You don't get it.

'Supernatural' depends on whether you interpret the above definition as meaning beyond current understanding

Don't tell me what it depends on. Which of the two interpretations are you using?

in which case most of what we understand now was once supernatural, or that it means unconstrained by any laws that we could even in principle discover.

Why are you speaking in negatives? Tell me what it means. Don't tell me what it doesn't mean.

My dear, idiot atheist. You don't seem to understand what irreducible complexity means.
And that's probably because you don't understand what reduction IS. Reduction IS computational evaluation.
Reducing the complex (universe) to the simple (scientific theories) takes time. A lot of time.

Time. Do you udnerstand it? No.

Infinite time complexity is irreducible by any temporal reductionist within Time itself.

It's supernatural.