Ignorance and the Bible

The way I remember it is because life takes a low entropy energy source (sunlight), and metabolizes and radiates it into a higher entropy energy form. Therefore it accords with the second law of thermodynamics.
 
No...the points I made earlier.

Here they are again...bolded and enlarged so you can see them:

When speaking of whether or not any gods exist..."believing" is merely blind guessing. "Faith" on the other hand, is merely insisting that one's blind guess is correct.
Faith is not insisting anything. It merely makes a claim. Insisting that the claim is True (trying to prove it) produces the circular argument fallacy. This is what a fundamentalist does.
You folk are absolutely sure your blind guesses that a god exists...and that you know what pleases that god and what offends it.
So? Still remains an argument of faith. No fallacy.
Atheists are absolutely sure that their blind guesses that no gods exist (or that it is more likely that no gods exist than that at least one god does exist).
Atheists make no such claim. Atheists don't care whether a god or gods exist or not.

The Church of No God are fundamentalists, trying to prove their religion is True.
You and those who guess as you do MAY be correct. The atheists MAY be correct.
Atheists make no claim.
I do not know which it is...and I would rather not make a blind guess about it.
You have to. It is not possible to prove whether any god or gods exist or not.
 
YES IT HAS BEEN ASKED...SEVERAL TIMES.

NOT ANSWERED.

SEE MY POSTS #1194 & 1216.

Never really answered...just avoided or given short-shrift...with YOU deciding what a Christian is.
A Christian is someone that believes that Jesus Christ exists, and that He is who He says He is, namely, the Son of God.
I am saying your "beliefs" on this issue are merely BLIND GUESSES about the REALITY of existence.
So? The Argument of Faith is also known as the Circular Argument. Not in and of itself a fallacy.
Tell me how you know the stuff you spout as being the truth rather than a guess.
Attempted force of circular argument fallacy.
I am saying your "faith" is merely your insistence that your blind guesses are correct.
This part is correct.
Tell me how you know the "faith" you have in your blind guesses are "the truth."
Attempted force of circular argument fallacy.
Actually discuss the issue rather than do what the atheists do in avoidance.
Atheists don't particularly avoid. They comment just like any other posters here.
 
I don't think Perry ever misses a post I compose
It's a weird obsession of his. I looked at his messages and, for the past several days, he only posted to this thread. Before that, he was chasing after you on this thread:
 
Every example I've cited of Bart Ehrman on this thread is where his conclusions categorically clash with the conclusions of you and Domer.

So don't try to hitch yourself to Ehrman's wagon.

He at least practices a type of agnostic intellectual uncertainty, and he tries to steer clear of the confirmation bias practiced by atheists on this thread and elsewhere.
What 'confirmation bias' by atheists? What 'bias' are they 'confirming'?
 
You, gmark77, are the one who does not understand atheism. You pretend it is something other than what it is...a belief system.
Atheism is not a belief.
And "implicit atheist" is another name for an intellectual coward who wants to use "atheist" as a self-descriptor.
No such thing. A person is either an atheist, or he is not.
Grow some balls.

Bullshit. Atheism is a pretense.
Atheism has no pretense.
TEST:

Do you believe there are no gods?

Do you believe it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

C'mon. Answer those questions.
Stating there is a god or gods is a religion.
Stating there are no gods is a religion.

An atheist states neither.
 
That's not a citation!
I'm not going to go through my library to find the Sean Caroll book I read it in.
And it isn't a reason!
I already posted a reason before you even wrote your post
The way I remember it is because life takes a low entropy energy source (sunlight), and metabolizes and radiates it into a higher entropy energy form. Therefore it accords with the second law of thermodynamics.

Instead of relying on my posts to teach you new things, why don't you do what I did - do the hard work of extensively reading books on physics, religion, history, etc.
 
The way I remember it is because life takes a low entropy energy source (sunlight), and metabolizes and radiates it into a higher entropy energy form. Therefore it accords with the second law of thermodynamics.
From Bing AI:
Entropy favors biological life over inanimate matter because biological systems actively maintain and increase their internal order and complexity, seemingly defying the universal tendency towards disorder.
 
It's a weird obsession of his. I looked at his messages and, for the past several days, he only posted to this thread. Before that, he was chasing after you on this thread:
Trump is not an atheist, Sybil. He is a Christian.
 
I'm not going to go through my library to find the Sean Caroll book I read it in.

I already posted a reason before you even wrote your post


Instead of relying on my posts to teach you new things, why don't you do what I did - do the hard work of extensively reading books on physics, religion, history, etc.

I see you don't understand your initial claim.

Sad, really.

But then not unexpected since this is clearly not your area.

Pro-Tip: Try sticking to things you know when you post.
 
Back
Top