Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry that was in reference to you - as usual you can't understand what you read.
Oh he knows that. That's just the favored argumentative tactic our self-proclaimed paragon of maturity, called Argumentum ad I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I.
I was just thinking that. I agree with universal information processing as a natural thing too. The universe may very well be a life form. That claim matches almost all observations. I use the word god to see how the baggage effects people. It gives me a clue into the brain state I am dealing with.
I diverge from mystic conclusion of this fundamental underlying consciousness field. i totaly understand what he is saying.
I get it, too - I spent enough timetrying to tease it out of him! I get the idea that the universe might be a ..well intelligent entity rater than a life -form. But in fact, there is no valid reason to suppose that to be the case and a few good reasons to suppose it isn't - quite apart from the logical placing of who has to prove what. So the proponents of a cosmic -mind -god have it all to do, but prefer to make a case by telling us that we are too stupid to see the Truth.
Speaking of which, if you slap the "God" label on what appears to be a material universe, you can expect a rejection of the claim. It is not an unreasonable reaction.
See folks, this is just what I mean. When they don't have anything to refute what I propose they resort to throwing dust in the air, ranting and raving away. Such a pity.
Yes, minds like yours are such a pity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Let's try this again, shall we?
No let's not. You are not educated, nor sophisticated enough to understand the difference between how life originated vs. how life evolved. You want to argue that origins of life as Evolution. It's not.
Clear up that confusion on your part and perhaps you might be able to progress.
You see, all you know about creationism is what liars for creationism have brainwashed you with. It is nothing more than pseudo-science. It is not a science and should never be taught as a science. Perhaps you should visit the Dover Case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Just for the sake of argument, let's just suggest evolution is the way God brought about life on earth. Science cannot account for who or what programmed that first cell.
This is clear ignorance about cell evolution and genetics on your part. This is why you will never understand.
All unsubstantiated claims - you keep repeating this. Doing so does not make it true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiloh1
No it's honesty - something you lack! I never said science proved anything. It does not do so. I never said science demonstrated how life arose. What I did say is that your claims, the ones I mentioned and highlighted are unsubstantiated. You don't get to have the default position just because there are unanswered questions in science - that is an argument from ignorance - a fallacy.
Your diversionary tactics don't play with me Esui - as noted by others I see right through your errors, assumptions, and fallacies.
He is not bright enough to even understand his own unsubstantiated rubbish.
It is refreshing when someone actually understands my posts.
And then, of course, there is you, Arq, who manage not to understand even the most obvious of my views. There is a huge difference between Creation and Existence, Arq, but you seem unable or unwilling to see it. ::Sigh::There is also a difference between intelligently ordered and INTELLIGIBLE, Arq, something you also seem unable or unwilling to see. You also seem to have trouble distinguishing between APPARENT design and intelligent design.
Pretending that you understand enough to determine when something has been debunked when you haven't a clue what is involved in the subjects under discussion is part of the vanity and hubris, Arq. You have to know the material to know whether or not it has been debunked. You do NOT. I am tired of your incessant pretense to knowledge you do not have.
That would be the point of the bold about the Trojan Horses in my post above, Arq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
I was just thinking that. I agree with universal information processing as a natural thing too. The universe may very well be a life form. That claim matches almost all observations. I use the word god to see how the baggage effects people. It gives me a clue into the brain state I am dealing with.
I diverge from mystic conclusion of this fundamental underlying consciousness field. i totally understand what he is saying.
It is clear you do seem to understand my views. I do not understand your reticence about the consciousness field since there is little else that can accommodate our composite consciousness. Where else do you think it can reside within our reality? Since it is "EM-like" dark stuff no physical material can contain it, just produce it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Like the Other one, he'll be back. He Needs us.
Perhaps you should visit the 
