in reply to Re^19: Who is your favorite scientist and why?
in thread Who is your favorite scientist and why?

Yet another red herring. I made no such claims. I only raised doubts about your claims that there is a creator.

i asked you: "what made you stop believing?"

your reply seems to lean heavily towards no creator:

I realised that such belief was just wishful thinking. It was comforting but not based on any substantial evidence or reasoning. It was dishonest because it ignored allthe contrary evidence (e.g. for each wonder there is an equal horror).

you cant even get your story straight. have a great life.
  • Comment on Re^20: Who is your favorite scientist and why?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^21: Who is your favorite scientist and why?
by Arunbear (Prior) on Dec 20, 2017 at 16:25 UTC
    i asked you: "what made you stop believing?"
    And what did I say I stopped believing in? Hint - I never claimed I stopped believing in a creator, so the rest of what you wrote is totally irrelevant (but that's not surprising any more).

    But more importantly, whatever happened to

    and if not responded to with requested data i will not continue this conversation any further.
    Why haven't you done what you said you'll do?

[reply]
      i will not continue this conversation any further.
      Why haven't you done what you said you'll do?
      The troll isn't going to go away if you keep feeding it.
[reply]
        troll just got here it seems
[reply]
      first answer this question. do you believe the universe was created or not?(my answer is i do now. i didnt use to think this though)

      now on to your message. the topic of discussion was "purpose". i guess i have to spell it out for you. the "between the lines" version is:

      - no purpose, which seemingly (please answer question in bold!) is your views, aligns with no creator.
      AND
      - purpose aligns with a creator.

      to me your whole argument is counter productive and you have resorted to personal attacks because you've run out of things to pull from your bag of bullshit!

      i chose to respond (just like this response) because what you are saying is a deflection and just an attempt to derail the argument because you have nothing but OPNIONS on the subject. the facts i gave you about quantum mechanics are provable by anyone who has the means to test it. your whole argument is full of quotes that are peoples opinion lol.

      even though you have been asked, by me, MANY times, you still have not provided me with facts/discoveries that support your views and you also havent really even told anyone directly what your own views are. instead you have provided me with darwins evolution, and a horror quote from someone, and a link to someone rambling on how someone stopped discovering things because they didnt have the means to discover the things we are able to in the present. but anyways, you let charming words lead your views. ill let the facts lead mine.

      P.S. i can tell when someone has no clue what they are talking about, while also derailing a thread/arguement, when they start using terms like "red herring". i retract my earlier comment about not responding any further. lets continue this debate. i can predict your next message! your comment will either be a personal attack... a warm and charming quote from someone else which is merely an opinion... or you will say "red herring" again and again. go ahead and prove me wrong!

      P.S.S dont forget to answer the question in this comment! lol

[reply]
        If you weren't trolling, you might notice the irony of accusing me of deflecting, while doing so yourself. Asking about my beliefs is a classic way of deflecting attention from the fact that the "evidence" you presented is nothing but speculation and argument from ignorance. You can't fix the gaping holes in your reasoning so instead you try to start a new debate about what you think I believe.

        If you weren't trolling, you wouldn't pretend to be an agnostic. If you really were agnostic, you'd know that there are 3 options (not 2 as you pretend) when it comes to belief: 1) believing X is true, 2) believing X is false, 3) not having a belief about about the truth or falsehood of X.

        But why bother with rational thinking when you can just read between the lines.

        If you weren't trolling, you wouldn't pretend that you have a deeper understanding of the scientific method and cosmology than a real astrophysicist.

        I have no more questions for the witness. Happy trolling.

[reply]

In Section Past Polls