DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIO7PAuiEUs&NR=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Well, this thread is certainly taking a turn for the worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 yes it is with all the insults from people with no argument.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 the existence of god or the easter bunny is unproven, but we cant disprove their existence either, this is why the onus is on the one making the claim, ie the christian person trying to prove the existence of god.... wrong again dctom..... Not "disproven" and "unproven", you moron. "Disprovable" and "unprovable". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Well, this thread is certainly taking a turn for the worse. look at the bright side, you do have an ally in Dellapelle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Not "disproven" and "unproven", you moron. "Disprovable" and "unprovable". omg r u this dumb, same difference....able doesnt change the word... u r waaaaaaaaaaay behind now dctom, calm down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 thats like saying disproven is different from disprove or disproving...lol omg here let me help u out... http://www.thefreedictionary.com/disprovable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 the only differnce is it being a adj or noun, the definition doesnt change dctom....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Usually those that feel the need to "disprove" God to such an extent are currently undergoing internal struggles, or hold on to deep anger from perceived unjust treatment. I feel bad, because there is legitimate pain that triggers a defense mechanism. You almost NEED to convince yourself there is no God so you can cope. It is ironic in a sense that some would say those who do believe are the ones attempting to cope. I understand the hypocracy of many organized religions turns people off. Someday your anger will subside and hopefully you can see the simple things in life as the blessings they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 the only differnce is it being a adj or noun, the definition doesnt change dctom....lol Yes, it does. Something can be unproven, but not unprovable. Conversely, something can be disprovable, but not disproven. They are different definitions. And in your almost infinite capacity to look retarded, you posted three sequential posts demonstrating your total inability to grasp that simple concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Usually those that feel the need to "disprove" God to such an extent are currently undergoing internal struggles, or hold on to deep anger from perceived unjust treatment. I feel bad, because there is legitimate pain that triggers a defense mechanism. You almost NEED to convince yourself there is no God so you can cope. It is ironic in a sense that some would say those who do believe are the ones attempting to cope. I understand the hypocracy of many organized religions turns people off. Someday your anger will subside and hopefully you can see the simple things in life as the blessings they are. ...and thus enters the flip side of the retard coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Yes, it does. Something can be unproven, but not unprovable. Conversely, something can be disprovable, but not disproven. They are different definitions. And in your almost infinite capacity to look retarded, you posted three sequential posts demonstrating your total inability to grasp that simple concept. so u do realize that the existence of god is not disprovable and at the same time he is unprovable. again the onus is on u to prove gods existence... again ur wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 After 16 pages, this thread is peaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 so u do realize that the existence of god is not disprovable and at the same time he is unprovable. again the onus is on u to prove gods existence... again ur wrong What??? You're not even having the same discussion as the rest of us! I'm not arguing for the existence of God either way, you imbecile...I'm just pointing you complete inability to understand that "God" is not provable or disprovable, buit UNPROVABLE, and that there is no "burden of proof" involved. YOU CAN'T APPLY A STANDARD OF PROOF TO A MATTER OF FAITH THAT IS BY DEFINITION AN UNPROVABLE PROPOSITION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Chaos + Chance? Chaos + Chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Chaos + Chance? Chaos + Chance? Oh, great. Our two dopiest posters - one who has an irrational belief in rationality, another with an irrational belief in irrationality, neither with an understanding of the idea of "metaphor" - are now having a youtube flame war. Only thing missing now is a truculent dinosaur rolling a 3.5 on a die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Oh, great. Our two dopiest posters - one who has an irrational belief in rationality, another with an irrational belief in irrationality, neither with an understanding of the idea of "metaphor" - are now having a youtube flame war. Only thing missing now is a truculent dinosaur rolling a 3.5 on a die. wouldn't an irrational belief in irrationality make me .....rational? By the way.....nice job spewing insults when you don't even bother to review what is included. I think your day could be better spent chucking peanuts off your porch at the squirrels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 wouldn't an irrational belief in irrationality make me .....rational? By the way.....nice job spewing insults when you don't even bother to review what is included. I think your day could be better spent chucking peanuts off your porch at the squirrels. I think METAPHORICALLY that is exactly what he's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts