I think God is teaching us a lesson

[Anonymous]

Here’s a theory. It may sound nuts, but bear with me. Does anybody remember Muslima from a few years back? She loved playing childish mind games, she never gave up, she was definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and she ended lots of her posts with smiling or laughing emojis. You may see where I’m going with this: these are all characteristics of PP above. For this theory to work, Muslima would’ve had to have lost her faith somewhere along the way. But the behavior of pp above is entirely consistent with the pure spite of somebody who lost her faith and doesn’t want anybody else to have faith either. Same poster or just separated at birth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You make no sense. Show me where I “lied” about the origin of the bovine in the post above, i.e. after you cleared it up?

At 03/29/2020 02:56 I mentioned that it was a believer, not me, who brought it up.
At 03/30/2020 11:30, I point it out again, IN CAPITAL LETTERS
At 03/30/2020 11:43, a third time

And then at 03/30/2020 11:55 you accuse me of being the one who brought it up

So, you either are lying, or not reading. Which is it?

Anonymous wrote:
And what hubris, and, um, lying: Why do you think you’re the only one who trusts evidence?

On this topic? Yes, I do and you don't. I am certain you have a different (and much higher) standard of evidence for medicine, sciences, society and other areas.

Anonymous wrote:
Not to mention you fell into another faulty analogy. If you’re trying to make a point about which of us is capable of changing their mind (you didn’t express your point well), you’ve confused the actors and the causes. You’d have been better off saying you would/would not change your mind if god/gods/angels/fairies talked to you and I would/would not change my mind (although you’d have been wrong) change my mind with clear evidence there’s no god. The fundamental flaw with your new analogy, and probably why you were unable to express yourself and it failed so hard, is that you can’t disprove there’s no god.

Not claiming there absolutely is no god. Only claiming I see insufficient evidence to support the existence of one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Great. Then you won’t need to keep making statements about how you’re the only one who will change their mind when shown evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Great. Then you won’t need to keep making statements about how you’re the only one who will change their mind when shown evidence.

So you would if I did?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Great. Then you won’t need to keep making statements about how you’re the only one who will change their mind when shown evidence.

So you would if I did?

If you’re asking, would I change my mind if you had *solid* evidence that God doesn’t exist:
1. Yes, of course
2. You don’t and can’t, so why are you even asking? Of all the irrelevant questions....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You make no sense. Show me where I “lied” about the origin of the bovine in the post above, i.e. after you cleared it up?

At 03/29/2020 02:56 I mentioned that it was a believer, not me, who brought it up.
At 03/30/2020 11:30, I point it out again, IN CAPITAL LETTERS
At 03/30/2020 11:43, a third time

And then at 03/30/2020 11:55 you accuse me of being the one who brought it up

So, you either are lying, or not reading. Which is it?

Anonymous wrote:
And what hubris, and, um, lying: Why do you think you’re the only one who trusts evidence?

On this topic? Yes, I do and you don't. I am certain you have a different (and much higher) standard of evidence for medicine, sciences, society and other areas.

Anonymous wrote:
Not to mention you fell into another faulty analogy. If you’re trying to make a point about which of us is capable of changing their mind (you didn’t express your point well), you’ve confused the actors and the causes. You’d have been better off saying you would/would not change your mind if god/gods/angels/fairies talked to you and I would/would not change my mind (although you’d have been wrong) change my mind with clear evidence there’s no god. The fundamental flaw with your new analogy, and probably why you were unable to express yourself and it failed so hard, is that you can’t disprove there’s no god.

Not claiming there absolutely is no god. Only claiming I see insufficient evidence to support the existence of one.

It’s your bovine analogy because you adopted it and kept bringing it up for points you were trying to make. Your little gotcha game with pp became irrelevant after you took it over with your own agenda. This really shouldn’t be so hard for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Great. Then you won’t need to keep making statements about how you’re the only one who will change their mind when shown evidence.

So you would if I did?

If you’re asking, would I change my mind if you had *solid* evidence that God doesn’t exist:
1. Yes, of course
2. You don’t and can’t, so why are you even asking? Of all the irrelevant questions....

Well first I give you credit for saying you would change your mind. Good for you!

Which god would you need to see evidence that it doesn't exist to not believe in? (we only ruled one out so far, your orange bovine).

What evidence would it take?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And what hubris, and, um, lying: Why do you think you’re the only one who trusts evidence?

On this topic? Yes, I do and you don't. I am certain you have a different (and much higher) standard of evidence for medicine, sciences, society and other areas.

Good grief. Why yes, I do have a high standard for evidence. I'm a researcher for a very well-respected group that you've heard of. I do things with hard data that you can only dream of. Your insinuation that people of faith can't tolerate evidence is as stupid as it is insulting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a theory. It may sound nuts, but bear with me. Does anybody remember Muslima from a few years back? She loved playing childish mind games, she never gave up, she was definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and she ended lots of her posts with smiling or laughing emojis. You may see where I’m going with this: these are all characteristics of PP above. For this theory to work, Muslima would’ve had to have lost her faith somewhere along the way. But the behavior of pp above is entirely consistent with the pure spite of somebody who lost her faith and doesn’t want anybody else to have faith either. Same poster or just separated at birth?

NP. I remember her. She was sharp and had better points than the “believers” who attacked her. They couldn’t sufficiently respond and had to resort to insults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You make no sense. Show me where I “lied” about the origin of the bovine in the post above, i.e. after you cleared it up?

At 03/29/2020 02:56 I mentioned that it was a believer, not me, who brought it up.
At 03/30/2020 11:30, I point it out again, IN CAPITAL LETTERS
At 03/30/2020 11:43, a third time

And then at 03/30/2020 11:55 you accuse me of being the one who brought it up

So, you either are lying, or not reading. Which is it?

Anonymous wrote:
And what hubris, and, um, lying: Why do you think you’re the only one who trusts evidence?

On this topic? Yes, I do and you don't. I am certain you have a different (and much higher) standard of evidence for medicine, sciences, society and other areas.

Anonymous wrote:
Not to mention you fell into another faulty analogy. If you’re trying to make a point about which of us is capable of changing their mind (you didn’t express your point well), you’ve confused the actors and the causes. You’d have been better off saying you would/would not change your mind if god/gods/angels/fairies talked to you and I would/would not change my mind (although you’d have been wrong) change my mind with clear evidence there’s no god. The fundamental flaw with your new analogy, and probably why you were unable to express yourself and it failed so hard, is that you can’t disprove there’s no god.

Not claiming there absolutely is no god. Only claiming I see insufficient evidence to support the existence of one.

It’s your bovine analogy because you adopted it and kept bringing it up for points you were trying to make. Your little gotcha game with pp became irrelevant after you took it over with your own agenda. This really shouldn’t be so hard for you.

Naahhh. That's dishonest right there. I do admire your ability to make the claim in the face of written evidence of its being false. I don't know how you do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ you can’t prove there’s no god. Either way, you failed again at simple logic and analogies.

Don't have to prove there's no god. Not claiming there absolutely isn't. Like I can't prove there are no unicorns. Just that there is insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Great. Then you won’t need to keep making statements about how you’re the only one who will change their mind when shown evidence.

So you would if I did?

If you’re asking, would I change my mind if you had *solid* evidence that God doesn’t exist:
1. Yes, of course
2. You don’t and can’t, so why are you even asking? Of all the irrelevant questions....

Well first I give you credit for saying you would change your mind. Good for you!

Which god would you need to see evidence that it doesn't exist to not believe in? (we only ruled one out so far, your orange bovine).

What evidence would it take?

Your condescension is undermined by your demonstrated lack of skill with logic and basic reasoning. This new set of questions is a pointless wormhole, given that whatever I answer, you have no--zero, zilch, none, nada--evidence to bring against god/gods/fairies or even orange bovines. Not playing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a theory. It may sound nuts, but bear with me. Does anybody remember Muslima from a few years back? She loved playing childish mind games, she never gave up, she was definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and she ended lots of her posts with smiling or laughing emojis. You may see where I’m going with this: these are all characteristics of PP above. For this theory to work, Muslima would’ve had to have lost her faith somewhere along the way. But the behavior of pp above is entirely consistent with the pure spite of somebody who lost her faith and doesn’t want anybody else to have faith either. Same poster or just separated at birth?

NP. I remember her. She was sharp and had better points than the “believers” who attacked her. They couldn’t sufficiently respond and had to resort to insults.

Well hello, Muslima! As I recall, she was a 'believer' herself, a committed Muslim. She made tons of statements she couldn't back up, like how Muslims will soon take over America. Somebody who was married to a Muslim tore her faux facts down piece by piece.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You make no sense. Show me where I “lied” about the origin of the bovine in the post above, i.e. after you cleared it up?

At 03/29/2020 02:56 I mentioned that it was a believer, not me, who brought it up.
At 03/30/2020 11:30, I point it out again, IN CAPITAL LETTERS
At 03/30/2020 11:43, a third time

And then at 03/30/2020 11:55 you accuse me of being the one who brought it up

So, you either are lying, or not reading. Which is it?

Anonymous wrote:
And what hubris, and, um, lying: Why do you think you’re the only one who trusts evidence?

On this topic? Yes, I do and you don't. I am certain you have a different (and much higher) standard of evidence for medicine, sciences, society and other areas.

Anonymous wrote:
Not to mention you fell into another faulty analogy. If you’re trying to make a point about which of us is capable of changing their mind (you didn’t express your point well), you’ve confused the actors and the causes. You’d have been better off saying you would/would not change your mind if god/gods/angels/fairies talked to you and I would/would not change my mind (although you’d have been wrong) change my mind with clear evidence there’s no god. The fundamental flaw with your new analogy, and probably why you were unable to express yourself and it failed so hard, is that you can’t disprove there’s no god.

Not claiming there absolutely is no god. Only claiming I see insufficient evidence to support the existence of one.

It’s your bovine analogy because you adopted it and kept bringing it up for points you were trying to make. Your little gotcha game with pp became irrelevant after you took it over with your own agenda. This really shouldn’t be so hard for you.

Naahhh. That's dishonest right there. I do admire your ability to make the claim in the face of written evidence of its being false. I don't know how you do it.

You hijacked the bovine thing. Own it, you liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well first I give you credit for saying you would change your mind. Good for you!

Which god would you need to see evidence that it doesn't exist to not believe in? (we only ruled one out so far, your orange bovine).

What evidence would it take?

Your condescension is undermined by your demonstrated lack of skill with logic and basic reasoning. This new set of questions is a pointless wormhole, given that whatever I answer, you have no--zero, zilch, none, nada--evidence to bring against god/gods/fairies or even orange bovines. Not playing.

Well that says all anyone needs to know about you and your position, doesn't it?