(05-25-2015 03:25 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  What? I was just stating his quote in context because that little blurb has made the rounds of the interwebs half a dozen times taken out of context, but in context it's a factually accurate statement.

No you weren't. You added YOUR context to what he said. What he said is exactly what I quoted him as saying... that IF you say the answer to every unknown is God, THEN your belief is based on an ever-declining amount of evidence.... but I never said that the answer to every unknown was God. He also never said anything about it being unhealthy or anything else. That was all you.

Quote:I'm not arguing this, though. I've pointed that fact out half a dozen times so far this thread, yet you keep going back to it as if it's part of this discussion. It isn't. Quote where I said it, or admit you're just moving the goalposts to an argument you think you can win.

I find it incongruous that on one hand, you insist that you've never 'ruled out God', but on the other, you repeatedly refer to that possibility as some sort version of unhealthy or irrational. You MIGHT be being factually accurate, but you are not being genuine.

Quote:Not true, I've addressed explicitly what you've said multiple times. To which your response revolves around stating 'I cannot prove god doesn't exist', a claim I've never disagreed with, or to act as if there is a quantifiable difference between the meaning of 'evidence' and 'proof'. Neither are compelling, nor do they really give me a lot of confidence that you're able to have a productive conversation on this matter due to either being too invested from a faith perspective or too ignorant on how to form a rational argument. Sorry, but I'm not the only one who's noticed this about you on this subject matter.

I'm sorry that you don't accept that proof and evidence have different meanings. Take it up with Websters. As to any of the rest of this, you're fooling nobody.... least of all me.

Quote:Again, no one is stating affirmatively that there is no God, we are saying there is no compelling evidence that there is a god, especially a god as described in any of the major religions of the world. I will say that there is far more evidence in support for Bigfoot than there is for any of those aforementioned gods, upright primates do exist elsewhere for instance, but that doesn't mean I can claim affirmatively that a supernatural being doesn't exist.

Still, doesn't mean it's objectively rational to believe in a specific god, either, which is what you seem to not understand (among many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many other things in this issue).

Kindly quote where I have said that any major religion has accurately 'defined' God.... In fact, I've repeatedly said the exact opposite.

This only proves your lack of integrity on the issue or in the discussion, since you continue to claim that I've said things i specifically have not... or believe something I've specifically said I don't. This is precisely what I said you were doing moments ago... where you 'assign' all sorts of beliefs to me in order to defeat me, even when I've specifically refuted those beliefs. You claimed you hadn't done it... yet here, once again, you're doing it.

I strongly suspect that NDT would agree with the following statement, and that is that since you can't prove that God doesn't exist, to claim that you don't know something, but you somehow KNOW that it can't possibly be God is completely unscientific.... I say this because that is precisely why he says that he himself can't rule out the possibility of God. If he could, he would... because it would be scientific to do so.

But hey... he's just ND-T and you're UCF. What does HE know about science.

Again, I'm not asking or insisting that you agree with my opinions. I honestly could not care less. The difference between us is that I don't need to belittle your opinions to make me feel better about my own.

If you want to have a conversation with claw or anyone else, then please feel free to do so... but don't confuse my comments with theirs, otherwise you have once again done exactly what ND-T said is not constructive and I accused you of doing (and presented evidence to support my belief).