Conquer Club

just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

If you're so sure, why start a thread about it. You should be humbled in knowing you've got it right and the opposition has it wrong.

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

OK. So you've got absolute proof. Let's hear it.

Gregrios wrote:If you're so sure, why start a thread about it. You should be humbled in knowing you've got it right and the opposition has it wrong.

Bullshit.

The fact that he's so sure means that he absolutely should start a thread about it.

Why? Because it'll give him the ideal opportunity to point out how deluded, irrational and incapable of rational argument people like Gregrios are.






lol.

daddy1gringo wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

OK. So you've got absolute proof. Let's hear it.

Why does the burden of proof lie on him?

Yeah, you'd have thought it would lay with the people that are making the positive claim that something physically 'is', and who believe that that said proposition gives them the right to morally judge others based on their otherwise unobjectionable acts.

Iliad wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

OK. So you've got absolute proof. Let's hear it.

Why does the burden of proof lie on him?

Because he took it on. Read the opening post.

daddy1gringo wrote:Because he took it on. Read the opening post.

No he didn't. Read the opening post yourself.

Just enquiring whether other people agree on a seemingly self-evident proposition does not mean that the questioner is automatically saddled with the burden of disproving the countervailing possibility.

For example: Btw, most of us posting here are not squillionaires. Just making sure we were all clear on this.

Do I now have to prove that most of the people posting on CC are not squillionaires? Really?

Given that the claim is not a positive one, nor are the probabilities alligned against the positor... he has no burden of proof. That lays with those who make the countervailing positive statement. i.e. God Botherers like you.

Oh, I get it. Just the usual:

"You Christians ignore all that proof and all that science"

"Like what?"

"Well.... Well... uh, You can't prove it either! Uh.... Can't prove a negative!

daddy1gringo wrote:Oh, I get it. Just the usual:

"You Christians ignore all that proof and all that science"

"Like what?"

"Well.... Well... uh, You can't prove it either! Uh.... Can't prove a negative!

Straw-Man, Daddy1Gringo. Daddy1Gringo, Straw-Man.

I'll leave you two to continue getting acquainted.


Call me if you ever decide to stop randomly trying to put words into other peoples' mouths. I'll be ready for a serious debate just as soon as you're old enough to handle one.

daddy1gringo wrote:Oh, I get it. Just the usual:

"You Christians ignore all that proof and all that science"

"Like what?"

"Well.... Well... uh, You can't prove it either! Uh.... Can't prove a negative!

are you ever taken by the knowledge of how stupid you are

i am serious. do you ever just stop dead in the middle of whatever you're doing, struck with the realization that you are so shitty and unteachable, the only logical recourse is suicide?

it must take hours to force those awful feelings to subside. it's a wonder you've been able to for so long.

Dancing Mustard wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:Because he took it on. Read the opening post.

No he didn't. Read the opening post yourself.

"Btw, there is no God" -- Definite statement of something as obviously true.

"Just wanted to make SURE we're all CLEAR on that" -- once again, statement that this is absolutely true and if you don't "know" it you're just not "clear"

daddy1gringo wrote:"Btw, there is no God" -- Definite statement of something as obviously true.

"Just wanted to make SURE we're all CLEAR on that" -- once again, statementr that this is absolutely true an if you don't "know" it you're just not "clear"

RTFR

Then read Sultan's most recent post four more times.

kkthxbi!!!

Dancing Mustard wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:"Btw, there is no God" -- Definite statement of something as obviously true.

"Just wanted to make SURE we're all CLEAR on that" -- once again, statementr that this is absolutely true an if you don't "know" it you're just not "clear"

RTFR

Then read Sultan's most recent post four more times.

kkthxbi!!!

I read it. He is entitled to his opinion.

As I have repeatedly said, I believe Science and pure logic are inconclusive on this subject. Whether a person decides to believe or not believe, he does so based on something else, then takes the facts and fits them into his own point of view.

Anyone, on EITHER side of the argument who speaks as if science and logic overwhelmingly prove one side, and that anyone who disagrees with them is just ignorant of that fact, takes on the responsibility to back up what they are saying.

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

I don't think "we" all are (based on this thread and others). I guess you were bored?

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

Ok, make sure we're clear. Like you said. I'm still waiting.

If God is everywhere at once, does that mean that he's up your rectum?

Your logic dazzles me.

Dancing Mustard wrote:If God is everywhere at once, does that mean that he's up your rectum?

Ah, so THAT's why he hates homosexuals so much.

Now it all makes sense.

Iliad wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

OK. So you've got absolute proof. Let's hear it.

Why does the burden of proof lie on him?

Umm...maybe because he's the one who said it.

Dancing Mustard wrote:If God is everywhere at once, does that mean that he's up your rectum?

::hugs DM::

Dancing Mustard wrote:If God is everywhere at once, does that mean that he's up your rectum?

Lol. *claps for DM*

And up yours, DM.

daddy1gringo wrote:

Dancing Mustard wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:"Btw, there is no God" -- Definite statement of something as obviously true.

"Just wanted to make SURE we're all CLEAR on that" -- once again, statementr that this is absolutely true an if you don't "know" it you're just not "clear"

RTFR

Then read Sultan's most recent post four more times.

kkthxbi!!!

I read it. He is entitled to his opinion.

As I have repeatedly said, I believe Science and pure logic are inconclusive on this subject. Whether a person decides to believe or not believe, he does so based on something else, then takes the facts and fits them into his own point of view.

Anyone, on EITHER side of the argument who speaks as if science and logic overwhelmingly prove one side, and that anyone who disagrees with them is just ignorant of that fact, takes on the responsibility to back up what they are saying.

How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.

Simon Viavant wrote:Are you a child molester?

Magic 8-Ball says: Contact Authorities Immediately