Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
.Mad theists? Factual atheists?.Atheism is as mad as theism. Your arguments only convince you. Unless you perform lobotomies, you won't change anyone's mind.Next is-your argument is not compelling-some atheist is lining up to shoot it down. Take a day of rest.
Nope! Hasn't happened yet. The only way it can be countered is by a coherent explication of how an actual infinite is possible or how existence could arise from nonexistence. The fact of what would actually constitute a direct refutation of the cosmological argument should tell one something very important. It has not been debunked. It cannot be debunked. To deny its cogency is to either straw-man it or to deny the veracity of the imperatives of logic while contradictorily attempting to use the same to counter it. Absurdity!
Atheism is madness.
Atheism is as mad as theism. Your arguments only convince you. Unless you perform lobotomies, you won't change anyone's mind.
Nope! Hasn't happened yet. The only way it can be countered is by ...
mad theists are by nature irrational the opposite of factual atheist. the ism's are the difference.
You want some facts? The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
How’s that for facts?
You want some facts? The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
How’s that for facts?
Mad theists? Factual atheists?
You know this how?.Mad theists? Factual atheists?.Atheism is as mad as theism. Your arguments only convince you. Unless you perform lobotomies, you won't change anyone's mind.Next is-your argument is not compelling-some atheist is lining up to shoot it down. Take a day of rest.
Nope! Hasn't happened yet. The only way it can be countered is by a coherent explication of how an actual infinite is possible or how existence could arise from nonexistence. The fact of what would actually constitute a direct refutation of the cosmological argument should tell one something very important. It has not been debunked. It cannot be debunked. To deny its cogency is to either straw-man it or to deny the veracity of the imperatives of logic while contradictorily attempting to use the same to counter it. Absurdity!
Atheism is madness.
Atheism is as mad as theism. Your arguments only convince you. Unless you perform lobotomies, you won't change anyone's mind.
Nope! Hasn't happened yet. The only way it can be countered is by ...
mad theists are by nature irrational the opposite of factual atheist. the ism's are the difference.
You want some facts? The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
How’s that for facts?
You want some facts? The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
no, not the universe - after the moment of singularity, the completion of compaction of past matter into pure energy - the expulsion / explosion from unstable energy, matter reemerged into the universe to begin a new cyclical stage. the universe, Everlasting is unmoved by the event.
How’s that for facts?
yours suck -
Mad theists? Factual atheists?
true theists can only be secular - the christian bible, the desert religions at best are fairytails.
Empirical evidence? False.Theism cannot be proved but it can be rationally reasoned, inferred by empirical evidence and deduced by logically based
intuition.
Not a fact, as far as we know.The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
I will, as it is a fact. You are embarrassing yourself. You dont know what the terms "valid" and "sound" mean regarding logic.Keep telling yourself that while arguing unicorns, ice cream and the 6th dimension.
That’s because you are in denial.Not a fact, as far as we know.The universe literally popped into existence out of nothing 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.
No, it is just that we dont know for a fact that it popped into existence "out of nothing".That’s because you are in denial.
Dude, you can’t string together statements that have no sound basis and call it logic, sound or valid or otherwise.I will, as it is a fact. You are embarrassing yourself. You dont know what the terms "valid" and "sound" mean regarding logic.Keep telling yourself that while arguing unicorns, ice cream and the 6th dimension.
False. Ding, really, please shut your ignorant mouth and read the link so kindly spoonfed to you in this thread.Dude, you can’t string together statements that have no sound basis and call it logic, sound or valid or otherwise.
Sure we do. The second law of thermodynamics says it had to.No, it is just that we dont know for a fact that it popped into existence "out of nothing".That’s because you are in denial.
When you claim to know this for a fact, you are shamelessly lying. Which surprises nobody.
No. I don’t think I will shut my ignorant mouth. I’m right. You’re wrong. You can’t make a logical argument that unicorns make ice cream in the 6th dimension. I’ll be damned if I will let you shit all over logic with a ridiculous position that invalidates logic. That would be illogical.False. Ding, really, please shut your ignorant mouth and read the link so kindly spoonfed to you in this thread.Dude, you can’t string together statements that have no sound basis and call it logic, sound or valid or otherwise.
False.Sure we do. The second law of thermodynamics says it had to.
No, you are utterly and embarrassingly wrong, and you would fail a discrete mathematics course, a philosophy course, or a computer programming course. In fact, if you diplayed this behavior after being handed your failed test, you would get laughed out of the room by the teacher and the other students.No. I don’t think I will shut my ignorant mouth. I’m right.
You misspelled true.False.Sure we do. The second law of thermodynamics says it had to.
My education background is in engineering.No, you are utterly and embarrassingly wrong, and you would fail a discrete mathematics course, a philosophy course, or a computer programming course. In fact, if you diplayed this behavior after being handed your failed test, you would get laughed out of the room by the teacher and the other students.No. I don’t think I will shut my ignorant mouth. I’m right.
Ding, your lack of education is showing.
Not relevant. That doesn't demand that the universe came from nothing just before the big bang. Go peddle your creationist talking points to someone else.You misspelled true.False.Sure we do. The second law of thermodynamics says it had to.
Do you understand what thermal equilibrium is?
Irrelevant. What matters is that you clearly have had no logic training.My education background is in engineering.
It is literally the reason why the SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe.Not relevant. That doesn't demand that the universe came from nothing just before the big bang. Go peddle your creationist talking points to someone else.You misspelled true.False.Sure we do. The second law of thermodynamics says it had to.
Do you understand what thermal equilibrium is?
Did you even graduate from high school?Irrelevant. What matters is that you clearly have had no logic training.My education background is in engineering.
Is the following statement true, or is it false?:
"If dolphins build skyscrapers, then a milliliter is equal to a cubic kilometer."
...beginning at the point where the natural laws begin. This point in time can occur more than once. Again, I have no interest in debating your creationist talking points based in 30 year old physics.It is literally the reason why the SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe.
