Eveery argument in P&R boils down to:

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nitro, Nov 29, 2009.

  1. Don't be thick
     
    #41     Dec 1, 2009
  2. You're right. Let's all prostrate ourselves before a "god" who, by all accounts clearly does not give a shit one way or the other. (Almost as if he wasn't there. Hmm.)

    You first.
     
    #42     Dec 1, 2009
  3. Exactly. No need for a Creator. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras. Ever hear of Occam?
     
    #43     Dec 1, 2009
  4. Yes, and as it pertains to science I like this definition.
    The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."
    Better being the operative word. Not absolutely correct, just better. Until one can be absolutely sure the search should continue, wherever it leads. To do otherwise is not being true to fundamental foundation of science.
     
    #44     Dec 1, 2009
  5. you pretty much miss all the points... But apparently you "joined" here a couple of days ago, and are so bored, decided to camp on P&R.

    The real question is, who are you the likely alias of...

    (Don't bother responding, you will be on ignore before your next empty response hits your keyboard.)
     
    #45     Dec 1, 2009
  6. stu

    stu

    Sketchy evidence and no proof is all that's ever available to superstition.
     
    #46     Dec 2, 2009
  7. I'm curious what would YOU consider proof of no god? What proof would you accept that god does not exist?
     
    #47     Dec 2, 2009
  8. hello CO are you there :D
     
    #48     Dec 2, 2009
  9. hello anyone home :D
     
    #49     Dec 2, 2009