Because I don't pretend to have an answer to things we can't answer yet.
You are contradicting yourself. You consistantly tell believers they are delusional. How do you know?
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Because I don't pretend to have an answer to things we can't answer yet.
You are contradicting yourself. You consistantly tell believers they are delusional. How do you know?
When you claim to have an answer that you can't possibly have you are deluding yourself.
Why are my claims more delusional than yours?
Ive never come on these boards and called people ridiculing names like you and others do toward believers.
Ive never called you delusional, ive never mocked yours or anothers lifestyle of non-belief like so many others here do.
So i dont believe I need to apologize for stating what I believe to be as true.
And I dont believe you need to either.
But to tell someone else they are delusional puts the ball in your court, not mine, to justify your claims and your behavior.
I never called you names nor did I ask for an apology.
But you are still claiming something is so, so the burden of proof is still on you to provide evidence. I don't care to prove you are delusional or not, but the fact is without evidence there's no reason for anyone to take your beliefs seriously, nor is there reason to take anyone else's beliefs seriously. Remember, you believe that people of the 3500 other registered religions are delusional.
Personally, as we have talked ad nauseum, I believe there is room for both the idea of Evolution and a Creator that started it all. I know you have made you views known and I respect that.
.
But me stating my beliefs is me stating my beliefs. I neither have to, as unfortunately too many believers do, try and prove you wrong or prove myself right.
To be a part of science, you most certainly do.
am I a part of science? is this what you science folks do all day?
hey, this ice cream is good.
PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!
qualifies for what?Ok, a scientific hypothesis must be falsifible and requires empirical evidence, observation, repeatable results and peer review before a it is accepted. Doesn't look like "God" qualifies.
qualifies for what?
science.
Do you want a scientific break down of the taste buds and neurology that make people like ice cream? Or are you going to say that subjective feelings are little angels whispering in your ear?
yup, never a generalization or negative remark from Wildo.
Are you telling me that using science you can show somebody that their claim that their ice cream is good is not able to be proven and thus their claim is not true?
When did I claim I don't make "negative" remarks? And how did I generalize, I asked you a question...
The fact is taste can be proven, and there's no purpose in proving or disproving individual mundane tastes, so your analogy sucks. Too negative?
why does the analogy suck?
You can prove what tastes good too somebody?
And then, since theres not enough of a purpose for you, why bother?
thats your answer?
If I tell you that I know for a fact that Rasberry tastes better Vanilla, you can tell me using science that im incorrect ( or should I say delusional?)
How would you know?
I say I believe in God.
Prove me wrong.