Black female atheists...do you exist?

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

​

False.

Prove this.​

An effect cannot precede a cause.


​

3. is unsubstantiated. and needs to be proven.

Big Bang Theory. Red Shift. 1st Law of Thermodynamics.​

You can do better than William Lane Craig level of apologetics.

You can't refute the Kalam Cosmological Argument.​

 

[Poitier]

Do you even understand what the math they're using asserts?

They haven even finalized the STANDARD MODEL yet, and you're taking SPECULATIVE PAPERS as gospel (which when you read them are on the level of philosophy merely) about the POTENTIAL to do such a ything.

I don't rely on optimism. I rely on results.

Of course it's speculative, dumbass, that's why I said *if* and they haven't finalized the standard model because we don't have that computational power yet, but it's coming...

and what do you think fukking videogames are? are you really that slow?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Of course it's speculative, dumbass, that's why I said *if*

and what do you think fukking videogames are? are you really that slow?

Now you're backtracking.

Again, demonstrate how you use this logic:

1. I create a simulation

2. this simulation shows some form of life manifesting and sustaining itself

Therefore:

3. I have shown that humans outside of the simulation exist in a simulation

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Just because you put it into a list doesnt make it true.

Everything doesnt have a cause

The ONLY thing that is uncaused is what the theists term as the 'Creator'. Everything else in human experience, has a cause.

I'm not stating that argument as true. I'm stating the argument as evidence. You just happen not to see it that way.​

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

An effect cannot precede a cause.​

Prove this.​

Big Bang Theory. Red Shift. 1st Law of Thermodynamics.​

None of which supports your claim.

You can't refute the Kalam Cosmological Argument.​

I already did.

Especially point 3.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The ONLY thing that is uncaused is what the theists term as the 'Creator'. Everything else in human experience, has a cause.

I'm not stating that argument as true. I'm stating the argument as evidence. You just happen not to see it that way.​

fukk

outta

here.

You assert it because you agree with it, do you not?

or are you aligning yourself with arguments you don't believe? Is that what you admit to doing?

 

[Poitier]

Now you're backtracking.

Again, demonstrate how you use this logic:

1. I create a simulation

2. this simulation shows some form of life manifesting and sustaining itself

Therefore:
3. I have shown that humans outside of the simulation exist in a simulation

And a universe

And quote me where I said this was 100 % true I said if it happens then it would be true in my eyes, has it happened?

 

[Malta]

Damn B, is this all you post about?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

That shyt was pathetic, wasn't it?

Not as pathetic as those who don't know Latin.

​

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

And a universe

And quote me where I said this was 100 % true I said if it happens then it would be true in my eyes, has it happened?

Not good enough.

Then you've just admitted to moving the goal posts.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Not as pathetic as those who don't know Latin.

​

I took two years of latin in high school

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

fukk

outta

here.

You assert it because you agree with it, do you not?

or are you aligning yourself with arguments you don't believe? Is that what you admit to doing?

EAT

A

DIKK

I assert it because it logically follows.

​

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Damn B, is this all you post about?

you came in the thread tho

 

[Poitier]

Not good enough.

Then you've just admitted to moving the goal posts.

Quote my ever-changing position then....

Show me how this quote below shows certainty

That's the point of building the simulation

If we can build one then we most likely are living in one

But then that means the people simulating us lives in a simulations too

 

[kevm3]

Reason is a human creation. Its the attempt to streamline consistency for the sake of inquiry.

false.

Patterns are the result of efficiency, not design. Evidence supports this.

You don't have lungs where they are because they were PUT there, but because its the best place for them considering the conditions you live in and the selective pressures that have sustained their consistency.

This is just evolution Theres nothing "intelligent" about chemotaxis.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you took some psychology classes, you'd understand why you're wrong. This sentence makes no sense.

You have not proven this statement. Saying "therefore" doesn't mean anything.

You can't keep just saying "intelligence" without understandin git.

Eyes aren't fukking "intelligent" They just receive signals from outside the brain and interpret them into electrical signals.

You tell me. You're making shyt up then pretending you've proven something, all while misinterpreting what you don't even understand. natural selection. Without an aversion to danger, species couldn't exist.

And how does this even imply a creator? What sort of specious logic is that??????



Prove this statement.

Complex elements in a group that adhere to a fairly stringent form and have similar functionality amongst members in that group is very unlikely to have been a result of randomness and chaos. A certain base mold that exists that allows for slight levels of deviation in various parameters to occur when the original is replicated is called a prototype. A prototype is the result of a DESIGN.

In life, there is a sort of generator which is generating all of existence. Explain to me how this generator, which you assert has NO intelligence and is completely chaotic, is continually generating a world that adheres to laws with fixed properties? If I ran a random number generator for eternity, it would continue to produce random numbers for an eternity, and you couldn't study any of those numbers or come to any conclusions about them because they are completely random and have no meaning nor do they adhere to any laws. You say reason is merely a tool of human comprehension... but in order for something to be comprehended, it has to be SENSIBLE. There are no conclusions you can draw from random numbers or random scribblings on paper because they are not reasonable. They produce no patterns.... You say that patterns are a result of efficiency. Can you show me a random number generator that eventually becomes 'efficient' and eventually starts producing patterns?
In fact, can you show me a graphical simulation that generates elements completely randomly, where none of these elements have any fixed properties, nor does the 'world' in which the simulation is occurring have any physics programmed into it eventually start to produce highly complex and functional patterns of their own volition?

What incentive does a world completely devoid of intelligence have to be efficient? Higher levels of efficiency derive from intelligent sources because they require that one continually recognize the situation at hand and to adapt in a fashion that would produce that higher level of efficiency. Recognition requires intelligence. It requires an entity to distinguish between various stimuli and then to make a determination on how to adapt to that stimuli.