The poster Lincoln is a lying smear merchant

Posted in the Atheism Forum

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 36 of36
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Apr 13, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I can. They're still waiting for you at that linky. Keep skipping, Skip.
That's right Dude all you've got is one line of bullsh*t in the face of 2 points you are scared of admitting you got wrong and continue to for two years running"

1. Unable to understand that the burden of proof is on the person claims god is possible
2. Claimed that something real + unfalsifiable, exists, yet cannot provide an example.

Fail fail fail, that's all your made of.
What else can you do but call me a fundie, when its clear you're a dishonest coward, afraid of backing up your own claims, because you know that you are wrong.

---
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

You're lying again. Follow the linky. I'll do the same and see if you've done anything different in the past 2 weeks that you haven't done for years. If not, then you've failed as usual.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Dude wrote:
You're lying again. Follow the linky. I'll do the same and see if you've done anything different in the past 2 weeks that you haven't done for years. If not, then you've failed as usual.
That's right Dude all you've got is one line of bullsh*t in the face of 2 points you are scared of admitting you got wrong and continue to for two years running"

1. Unable to understand that the burden of proof is on the person claims god is possible
2. Claimed that something real + unfalsifiable, exists, yet cannot provide an example.

Fail fail fail, that's all your made of.
What else can you do but call me a fundie, when its clear you're a dishonest coward, afraid of backing up your own claims, because you know that you are wrong.

---

You will note in your reply, you STILL refuse to present any evidence to back up the 2 points you failed to make for TWO YEARS. Fact.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Oh hey Skip. I see you skipped it again.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Apr 16, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
Oh hey Skip. I see you skipped it again.
Failed again. Run along now:

1. Unable to understand that the burden of proof is on the person claims god is possible
2. Claimed that something real + unfalsifiable, exists, yet cannot provide an example.

Run weasel, run. Or try another of your ineffective one line comments.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Apr 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Not failed yet, Skip.

1 - Incorrect. The burden of proof is upon those who make the positive claim. You claimed not simply that there's no evidence of a God but also that it is "impossible", and definitely does not exist. Which is why I'm still waiting for you to describe the scientific experiment you performed that demonstrated that.

2 - It's been given to you MANY times, and you have yet to address them. And you know this. Remember that African wildebeest? Bacteria in 1500AD? The multiverse? Yep, you do.

I've never ran from you. You have the dynamic the wrong way around. As usual.

http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

Poster Skippy the "Skeptic" is a lying smear merchant. And knows it.

The last thing atheists need is a fundamentalist on their own team.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Apr 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
Not failed yet, Skip.
1 - Incorrect. The burden of proof is upon those who make the positive claim. You claimed not simply that there's no evidence of a God but also that it is "impossible", and definitely does not exist. Which is why I'm still waiting for you to describe the scientific experiment you performed that demonstrated that.
Wrong. Before anyone opened their mouth, the universe was as it was.

YOU then opened your mouth and proclaimed "god is possible". YOU Made that positive claim. The burden of proof is on YOU.

And you f*cked up. That's how glaringly simple your stupidity is. After two years, you STILL don't understand the burden of proof.
The Dude wrote:
2 - It's been given to you MANY times, and you have yet to address them. And you know this. Remember that African wildebeest? Bacteria in 1500AD? The multiverse? Yep, you do.
NONE of the concepts you have presented are both (a) real and (b) unfalsifiable.

NONE OF THEM. How many times do we have to repeat that for you you ridiculous fool?
The Dude wrote:
I've never ran from you. You have the dynamic the wrong way around. As usual.
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
Poster Skippy the "Skeptic" is a lying smear merchant. And knows it.
The last thing atheists need is a fundamentalist on their own team.
Full of sh*t who calls others fundamentalist when he himself runs away from the stupid claims he makes.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Apr 17, 2013
 
Talking to the dude is like arguing with a sub-standard cardboard box.

1. African wildebeast are real, physical creatures, and hence not unfalsifiable, they are falsifiable, and have not been, because they are in fact REAL. f8ck...

2. Bacteria is real, it IS falsifiable, its REAL get it?

3. The multiverse is NOT REAL. It is NOT REAL, it is unfalsifiable. If it was real and proven, it would be falsifiable..

DO YOU UNDERSTAND IN THERE LITTLE DUDE?

Is it getting through to you after two years of your stupidity?

Hello in there..*knocks on the hollow head of dude*

****echoes****
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Apr 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Before anyone opened their mouth, the universe was as it was.
YOU then opened your mouth and proclaimed "god is possible". YOU Made that positive claim. The burden of proof is on YOU.
And you f*cked up. That's how glaringly simple your stupidity is. After two years, you STILL don't understand the burden of proof.
Sure I do. Which is why (if you follow the linky) that my position was that I am open to the possibility of a God, and open to the possibility that it does not exist. Therefore I carry no burden of proof because I am not making a positive statement either way on either possibility.

In science ALL things are possible, unless they've been scientifically demonstrated IMpossible. And even then science STILL always leaves open the possibility that it might have made a mistake, so it can retract itself at a future date should further evidence be discovered later which may force it to re-evaluate current positions.

You on the other hand are arguing for an absolute. Of which there are none in science.
-Skeptic- wrote:
NONE of the concepts you have presented are both (a) real and (b) unfalsifiable.
NONE OF THEM. How many times do we have to repeat that for you you ridiculous fool?
None, for you have repeated it a MANY times already.

So in which case you should have no problem in telling me if the multiverse definitely exists or definitely doesn't.(shrug)
-Skeptic- wrote:
Full of sh*t who calls others fundamentalist when he himself runs away from the stupid claims he makes.
I've never ran away. And you know this. You on the other hand...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Apr 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

-Skeptic- wrote:
Talking to the dude is like arguing with a sub-standard cardboard box.
1. African wildebeast are real, physical creatures, and hence not unfalsifiable, they are falsifiable, and have not been, because they are in fact REAL. f8ck...
Yet before they were available for verification (caught on camera, caught in scientist's net, whatever) they could not be falsified, or in fact verified either way, correct?
-Skeptic- wrote:
2. Bacteria is real, it IS falsifiable, its REAL get it?
Yet that was not true in 1500 AD, correct? Which is WHY Chimney SPECIFICALLY pointed to a date before we knew of their existence.
-Skeptic- wrote:
3. The multiverse is NOT REAL.
Ah, so you've addressed this one finally.

How did you falsify the multiverse then? And shall I go tell Polymath to inform all his quantum physics buddies that you were able to solve the problem of seeing beyond the singularity?

How did you accomplish this by the way? You really have gone where no man has gone before.
-Skeptic- wrote:
It is NOT REAL, it is unfalsifiable.
Wait, it is UNfalsifiable, yet it ISN'T real? You can't falsify it but you've falsified it? This is a contradiction. Unless that it was a typo and you meant it WAS falsifiable and you've falsified it because it's not real. In which case the physics community would love to know how.
-Skeptic- wrote:
If it was real and proven, it would be falsifiable.
So God is real because you have falsified it?
-Skeptic- wrote:
DO YOU UNDERSTAND IN THERE LITTLE DUDE?
Is it getting through to you after two years of your stupidity?
Hello in there..*knocks on the hollow head of dude*
****echoes****
Yes, I understand perfectly. You do not have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Quite frankly you are all over the map.(shrug)

Perhaps things would go better for you if you did not become so frustrated. But feel free to cuss at me some more if it makes you feel better.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Apr 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure I do. Which is why (if you follow the linky) that my position was that I am open to the possibility of a God, and open to the possibility that it does not exist. Therefore I carry no burden of proof because I am not making a positive statement either way on either possibility.
Saying that god is possible IS a positive claim. It flies in the face of evidence. you made that claim, now address it you coward, or admit that the claim is unfounded.

In science ALL things are possible, unless they've been scientifically demonstrated IMpossible.[/Quote]

wrong, you never studied science and dont understand the zeroeth law. energy cannot be created or destroyed.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And even then science STILL always leaves open the possibility that it might have made a mistake, so it can retract itself at a future date should further evidence be discovered later which may force it to re-evaluate current positions.[/quote]

This property of science has nothing to do with your claim that "god is possible" - its a totally unscientific in falsifiable claim which you've made here.

[QUOTE who="The Dude"]<quoted text>
You on the other hand are arguing for an absolute. Of which there are none in science.[/quote]

There are tonnes of absolutes in science. lets start with the obvious:. ABSOLUTE ZERO.

What a coincidence. Its exactly how much understanding you have of this topic

[QUOTE who="The Dude"]<quoted text>
None, for you have repeated it a MANY times already.
So in which case you should have no problem in telling me if the multiverse definitely exists or definitely doesn't.(shrug)
<quoted text>
I've never ran away. And you know this. You on the other hand...
Multiverses aren't real because they are unfalsifiable.

Wow, it's not engh for you to be stupid, but to argue back with such stupid points in the face of your poor understanding is just pure wilful ignorance.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Apr 17, 2013
 
Dude, for the last two years running, if you think god is possible, he burden of proof is on you to prove you are not a liar, lying about the possibility of god, in the face of evidence against it.

Darn agnostics always lower the level of intelligence on ANY topic.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Apr 17, 2013
 
The point is dude, that you can't go around saying stuff is real or possible without evidence.

There is no evidence that Multiverses are real. They are by definition unfalsifiable concepts.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Apr 17, 2013
 
Golden rule: If you claim something is real or possible, unless evidence exists to prove it AND evidence that disproves it DOESNT EXIST then you are not full of sh*t.

as it stands, the facts say you are full of sh*t
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Apr 18, 2013
 
Skip wrote:
Saying that god is possible IS a positive claim.
No it's not, as it's counterbalanced by the OTHER possibility that it may not even exist at all.
Skip wrote:
It flies in the face of evidence.
No, it has NO evidence. It doesn't go AGAINST evidence. A subtle, but important difference.

Skip wrote:
you made that claim, now address it you coward, or admit that the claim is unfounded.
I've always been very clear about that claim. It has no evidence to support it. However you have NOT falsified it. You can't claim to have falsified something when all you've done is sat on your azz.
Skip wrote:
wrong, you never studied science and dont understand the zeroeth law. energy cannot be created or destroyed.
That is our current understanding. However look at Newtonian phyics being replaced by relavity. Look at relativity being replaced by quantum mechanics. Because new evidence discovered later MAY require us to re-evaluate current scientific models.
Skip wrote:
This property of science has nothing to do with your claim that "god is possible"
It has EVERYTHING to do with it.
Skip wrote:
its a totally unscientific in falsifiable claim which you've made here.
I have not made a positive claim either way.
Skip wrote:
There are tonnes of absolutes in science. lets start with the obvious:. ABSOLUTE ZERO.
An abstract mathematical concept. In math we can have proofs and absolutes. But math itself is not science. Which is why if we find reality suddenly match our math-model we simply change the model. Plus above you already admitted that science can be adjusted IF new evidence is found. Thus NO absolutes.
Skip wrote:
What a coincidence. Its exactly how much understanding you have of this topic
Projection and ad hom all in one.
Skip wrote:
Multiverses aren't real because they are unfalsifiable.
No, in order to falsify something it MUST be falsifiable. Ergo you cannot claim something is false without having falsified it. Which is EXACTLY what you are doing.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Apr 18, 2013
 
Skip wrote:
Wow, it's not engh for you to be stupid, but to argue back with such stupid points in the face of your poor understanding is just pure wilful ignorance.
Projection and ad hom.
Skip wrote:
Dude, for the last two years running, if you think god is possible, he burden of proof is on you to prove you are not a liar, lying about the possibility of god, in the face of evidence against it. Darn agnostics always lower the level of intelligence on ANY topic.
Disagreeing with the mighty Skippy does not equate to lying. Sorry. The evidence is you have not falsified it. In order to falsify it it must be falsifiable. If it's falsifiable then it is scientific. Ironically you are arguing that the 'God concept' is scientific.
Skip wrote:
The point is dude, that you can't go around saying stuff is real or possible without evidence.
I've not said it's real. There is no evidence. I have said it's POSSIBLE, because you have not falsified it.
Skip wrote:
There is no evidence that Multiverses are real. They are by definition unfalsifiable concepts.
Making them currently unscientific. That does not mean they are not real. In fact many cosmologists take the concept quite seriously. Obviously they are not familiar with your scientific genius.
Skip wrote:
Golden rule: If you claim something is real or possible, unless evidence exists to prove it AND evidence that disproves it DOESNT EXIST then you are not full of sh*t.
Evidence that disproves it does not exist because you have not presented any. Ergo the best you can claim is that there is zero evidence. Which I have always stated from the beginning.
Skip wrote:
as it stands, the facts say you are full of sh*t
Apparently not.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 36 of36
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••