God's not dead

[Denny Crane]

LOL

You're just downright silly when you talk about these things.

All you keep doing is confirm to me there is no empirical evidence of a god. I gave you a simple means of proof and you cannot do it because there is no god.

 

[magnifier661]

LOL

You're just downright silly when you talk about these things.

All you keep doing is confirm to me there is no empirical evidence of a god. I gave you a simple means of proof and you cannot do it because there is no god.

Ahhh but the argument we are debating isn't God exists. I am debating that your argument that God does not exist because there is no evidence that God exists. I have already given 1 very strong argument that is truly empirical. We can go on and use the Kalam argument or many others that all can and have been used in debates before.

What made you lose was your "BOLD" statement that there is zero evidence that God exists. Then you tried to go further and say "empirical". Both are wrong. You dug your own grave when you made a statement that is easily refuted. Notice that I don't have to prove God exists, knowing that was your intent. I merely had to prove that there "IS" evidence that God exists.

 

[Denny Crane]

My argument is that there is no credible evidence he exists.

Just like there is no credible evidence that leprechauns exist.

Zero empirical evidence. I stand by it.

And you cannot provide any, so I am satisfied in my position.

 

[magnifier661]

My argument is that there is no credible evidence he exists.

Just like there is no credible evidence that leprechauns exist.

Zero empirical evidence. I stand by it.

And you cannot provide any, so I am satisfied in my position.

There is physical evidence. There's not a shred of evidence of any god.

Do you stand by this statement you made from the beginning?

 

[magnifier661]

Or this Denny... In fact, you kept repeating over and over there is "no evidence"

I can't prove you were born, yet here you are posting.

I'd call that evidence you were born.

For the same reason, we are sure that self replicating molecules evolved.

There is not a shred of evidence of any god. Never has been.

 

[Denny Crane]

Not a shred of evidence of god. I stand by it.

Mass delusion is no evidence at all.

I ask you to provide one simple bit of evidence that you can measure with a device, like a camera or spectroscope or whatever. You can't because there is no evidence at all.

 

[blue32]

Just agree to disagree and move on, holy shit.

I debated this same shit in high-school, to the same effect, nobody changed their views and all it did was get people upset at each other.

Move along. Each person should understand that the other guy can believe in what he/she wants and that should be totally acceptable.

Time will tell which edition of the story comes out to be true.

 

[Denny Crane]

At least I try to learn something from these kinds of exchanges.

 

[magnifier661]

Not a shred of evidence of god. I stand by it.

Mass delusion is no evidence at all.

I ask you to provide one simple bit of evidence that you can measure with a device, like a camera or spectroscope or whatever. You can't because there is no evidence at all.

I thank this forum for their time. The debate is over and I thank my opponent for his efforts, despite the bleak outlook. I really didn't have to prove much, since my opponent used such a broad and bold statement that he had no business stating as fact.

 

[Denny Crane]

Not a footprint. Not a molecule. No energy. Nothing in his handwriting. Nothing. No evidence of any god.

 

[magnifier661]

Just agree to disagree and move on, holy shit.

I debated this same shit in high-school, to the same effect, nobody changed their views and all it did was get people upset at each other.

Move along. Each person should understand that the other guy can believe in what he/she wants and that should be totally acceptable.

Time will tell which edition of the story comes out to be true.

That isn't the argument though. The argument was "There is zero evidence God exists". It doesn't matter what you, I or anyone else believes in; but the debate is solid and valid. If Denny can refute my arguments about evidence, then he could easily win the argument. Unfortunately, his broad and bold statement dug him a hole. And his ego refused to accept defeat.

 

[Denny Crane]

If you could provide a shred of evidence that isn't entirely between someone's ears, I'm a believer.

The gauntlet has been thrown down and you dodge it because it's impossible. Impossible because there is no evidence you can find.

Good luck.

 

[magnifier661]

If you could provide a shred of evidence that isn't entirely between someone's ears, I'm a believer.

The gauntlet has been thrown down and you dodge it because it's impossible. Impossible because there is no evidence you can find.

Good luck.

I have provided more than just a shred. And it's not my fault that you pick and choose evidence that only supports your argument.

But the reality is, I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone that can look at my argument about "evidence", and of sound mind and judgement should accept it as evidence. They don't have to believe it though. That wasn't the point of the debate.

 

[Denny Crane]

You've provided nothing.

That's the point. There is nothing in terms of proof of any god.

 

[magnifier661]

You've provided nothing.

That's the point. There is nothing in terms of proof of any god.

Lmao... The point was not to prove God exists. I was arguing your argument that there is zero evidence that God exists, which is 100% false. All I needed to do was have just one argument stick and your entire argument crumbles. It was easier than breathing. It wasn't my fault that you put the trap right in front of you, then screamed bloody murder after the fact.

 

[Denny Crane]

i testify leprechauns exist. They certainly must!

Yours is the argument that just crumbled.

 

[magnifier661]

i testify leprechauns exist. They certainly must!

Yours is the argument that just crumbled.

And that only proves my point, as crazy as it sounds, it is still evidence. So yes, we do have evidence that leprechauns exist. Not proof, per say, but evidence all the same. You are just supporting my argument Denny.

 

[Denny Crane]

Just wow.

OK, you win.

The only "evidence" of "god" is the batshit crazy kind, like the kind that supports the existence of leprechauns and unicorns.

 

[magnifier661]

Just wow.

OK, you win.

The only "evidence" of "god" is the batshit crazy kind, like the kind that supports the existence of leprechauns and unicorns.

Thanks for playing

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

I'm glad you guys settled that.

 

[blazerboy30]

Not a footprint. Not a molecule. No energy. Nothing in his handwriting. Nothing. No evidence of any god.

This is such a silly statement. You have no idea what "God" means to each person. There is no way you can possibly say there is no evidence.

You have a preconceived notion of "God" and you're arguing against the existence of that "God". You've built yourself a nice little strawman to knock down though.

 

[Denny Crane]

This is such a silly statement. You have no idea what "God" means to each person. There is no way you can possibly say there is no evidence.

You have a preconceived notion of "God" and you're arguing against the existence of that "God". You've built yourself a nice little strawman to knock down though.

I have repeatedly said "any god" in this thread, and I even mentioned a bunch of gods on a mountain.

So I have no particular a priori notion of "that god".

The bolded bit is the strawman.

 

[blazerboy30]

I have repeatedly said "any god" in this thread, and I even mentioned a bunch of gods on a mountain.

So I have no particular a priori notion of "that god".

The bolded bit is the strawman.

My friend John Doe's "God" is light. Everything is governed by, limited by and created by EM waves, which are the embodiment of this "God". I see lots of evidence in a "God" such as this.

 

[Denny Crane]

My friend John Doe's "God" is light. Everything is governed by, limited by and created by EM waves, which are the embodiment of this "God". I see lots of evidence in a "God" such as this.

What a strange definition.

 

[blazerboy30]

What a strange definition.

a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity

Yes. Fits perfectly well.

Now I see you want to change your argument to what is acceptable for people to claim as their "God".

Moving goal posts and strawmen. Typical of your arguments.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yes. Fits perfectly well.

Now I see you want to change your argument to what is acceptable for people to claim as their "God".

Moving goal posts and strawmen. Typical of your arguments.

The moon is made of cheese. You can define cheese to mean anything, since words have no meaning it seems.

Light is no spirit, nor is it superhuman, nor does it have power over nature or human fortunes.

 

[blazerboy30]

The moon is made of cheese. You can define cheese to mean anything, since words have no meaning it seems.

Light is no spirit, nor is it superhuman, nor does it have power over nature or human fortunes.

Haha. Right Denny.

As usual, you're spouting nonsense.

Carry on.

 

[Denny Crane]

May the Light be with you.

 

[magnifier661]

The moon is made of cheese. You can define cheese to mean anything, since words have no meaning it seems.

Light is no spirit, nor is it superhuman, nor does it have power over nature or human fortunes.

Depends on how you look at it. Light "sunlight" helps man grow their food, give them vitamin D and help them see to build grand monuments.

 

[MadeFromDust]

The moon is made of cheese. You can define cheese to mean anything, since words have no meaning it seems.

Light is no spirit, nor is it superhuman, nor does it have power over nature or human fortunes.

Denny, don't you remember that dialogue we had in the past where you were stripping certain words of any kind of meaning in order to back whatever point it was you were trying to make? Because I do and it was odd.