Im not sensitive about insults, slap the dick out of your mouth so you can think clearly .....how am i being dishonest? you seem to be taking this wayyyy to emotionally and personally.....I don't see why we can;t throw out ideas and debate points without talking down and and calling names or calling each other ignorant every five posts...If you don;t care to discuss that's your choice but really you have me all wrong.....Im actually having fun questioning gravity and everything else in this universe...but i actually agree with most of what you say...im just arguing the way alot of these guys do by claiming it doesn't exist if there is no picture
Ok prove to me how you lost more weight on Jenny Craig then on Richard Simmons sweating to the oldies?
Whether purposefully or unintentionally it appears dumbness is a favorite tool used in an attempt at argument when supporting ideas of god. Contradiction and the art of flip flop are also widely employed as preferred tactics for the ardent religious apologist. So why not do it TM. Why not Take Turok's Test. An unendingly demonstrable, repeatable, measurable, predictable and practical existence of gravity is continuously put forward scientifically and actually, as evidence to substantiate your required burden of proof. â..all i ask is that for all this space talk we apply the same burden of proof that is required for the existence of god.â Therefore is it that you require an unendingly demonstrable, repeatable, measurable, predictable and practical existence of god , as is the case for science and gravity ? .... Or is it that no burden proof is required. Just a "belief" of god will do as proof of god? I suspect the latter is the case, it then follows that a 'baseball in space' does anything the believer wants it to, but the belief and the believer ... prove nothing.