Just wait until I tell you what I think of Stephen Hawking. I saw him claim the universe came from nothing on the discovery channel. A=notA, Some-thing=No-thing. All that education and world wide fame. The adoration of millions who probably nodded at his sage wisdom as he publicly espoused the most basic of logical errors. Awesomesauce!.
Once you can offer any evidence of a tiny or large Shillelagh to influence any event or any tiny hat, or even larger one…If I claim that I have a leprechaun living in my house which is an extraordinary claim, and was asked to prove it, producing said leprechaun would be extraordinary.
The claim is extraordinary because leprechauns are mythical beings not believed by most to actually exists in the flesh. To produce a living leprechaun, a mythical creature would be extraordinary. I am not trying to convince you with a tiny hat or tiny Shillelagh. While these items may be rare they aren’t extraordinary, they can be produced from ordinary means.
The extraordinary claim is proven with extraordinary evidence.
Your opinions are noted.Just wait until I tell you what I think of Stephen Hawking. I saw him claim the universe came from nothing on the discovery channel. A=notA, Some-thing=No-thing. All that education and world wide fame. The adoration of millions who probably nodded at his sage wisdom as he publicly espoused the most basic of logical errors. Awesomesauce!.
Then by what mechanism do one know something is extraordinary? As I pointed out with the 5 lb diamonds analogy, what you think is extraordinary may be common or have a completely reasonable explanation and there is no way for you to know the difference if you aren’t omniscient. Simply claiming that we don’t need to know everything doesn’t answer the question. If you tell me that it is whats"extraordinary to you" then you simply have a subjective feeling that is not necessarily meaningful to others. If you claim it is extraordinary because it is improbable your claim is suspect because you aren’t omniscient. If you claim it is extraordinary because it seems impossible you are committing the Fallacy of Incredulity. Any way you turn, you admit to a flaw in your claim.
What other evidence do you have for any historical event? All you have is testimonies of one kind or another. On what valid basis can you reject the claim? Any of the ways I demonstrated are logically flawed. As to other standards of evidence, I don’t see how how another standard of evidence is necessary simply because claims that some events are “extraordinary” is flawed. Its irrational to reject claims for a logically flawed reason, even if they contradict ones cherished beliefs.
It looks like the Fallacy of Equivocation to me.
Maybe we should see if we can make an emergency phone call to tell him this discovery that you have made has just disproved his work - something that you thought of was just never ever thought of by him before.Just wait until I tell you what I think of Stephen Hawking. I saw him claim the universe came from nothing on the discovery channel. A=notA, Some-thing=No-thing. All that education and world wide fame. The adoration of millions who probably nodded at his sage wisdom as he publicly espoused the most basic of logical errors. Awesomesauce!.
What is the difference in the claims?
“Stupid”? I’m afraid you missed it the second time too. The point is not that “a” number being called is usual, but that “that specific number” being drawn is extraordinarily improbable," so if you proporttion your believe according to probability of the event alone, you should never believe that that number was drawn.I watched the video - missed it the fist time
He claims that because the lottery has extraordinary odds of winning, any reporting of a winner is extraordinary - which is just plain stupid. The event of a lottery drawing happens daily, weekly etc. The event of the lottery drawing is not extraordinary, the chance of winning is extra ordinary. Different things. Bad logic.
But I answered this in post 37.
yes, I see how your reply was illogical. You keep trying to make me argue something that I am not. The contrary to Jesus rose is “Jesus did not rise.” For the “Jesus rose” to be contrary to our experience, (as you claim), the “Jesus did not rise” would have to be shown to be true.
There won’t be a last laugh. If you think the few Christians who make it through the narrow gate are going to laugh as sincere believers march themselves into hell , then you don’t know us at all. It’s kind of embarrassing to know you think of us that way. If you really think that we are such monsters, why hang out with us so much? If you are just upset that I made fun of Sagan and Hawking why be so mean? Shouldn’t you ask yourself if your previous belief in their sagacity was warranted? After all, if a farmboy redneck like me can expose them their arguments as logically flawed, then what will you do when a more intelligent, better educated and spoken theist comes along?
hawking claims that gravity created the universe from nothing. All the obvious problems with this aside (something coming from nothing-now that’s outside our present experience, but you see remarkably willing to believe it); His view has been widely ridiculed and he ignored his Oxford Colleague Roger Penrose’s several criticisms of his use of multiverses and imaginary numbers. Also, gravity affects physical matter, in the absence of matter, it’s hard to see how gravity would even exist, let alone affect anything, let along create a universe.
You must be joking. It is circular for me to argue that dead men don’t generally rise and that Christianity agrees with this? Isn’t this essentially what skeptics on this thread have been saying? Who cited the Bible to prove anything, I am not trying to prove the Resurrection here, only attack the pop internet slogan “EEREE.”
Do you really think Paley would have made a mistake that obvious? come one, the man was very intelligent even if you don’t agree with him. Consider Less. The contrary to “Jesus rose” is “Jesus did not rise,” not “dead men in general do not rise,” because Christianity agrees with the naturalist on this latter statement. So for you to claim that “Jesus rises” is contrary to experience, you would have to show that Jesus did not rise. I am not saying that in the absense of this that you need to believe he rose, only that you need to give up your claim that the Ressurection is contrary to experience.
You mean Hawking actually follows the scientific method? He is willing to correct his view upon more evidence?
Disproved work? Whoever said that? I laughed because he publicly stated belief in a logical contradiction. That’s far worse than belief in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Invisible Pink Unicorns, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. At least those things are possible. A logical contradiction is not. You should be laughing too.
In which claims?
So we are now going to start an inquistion. Hawking is number one on the list.
I can just as easily take your popes out of context. Or what your apologists claim are out of context statements and actions.Disproved work? Whoever said that? I laughed because he publicly stated belief in a logical contradiction. That’s far worse than belief in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Invisible Pink Unicorns, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. At least those things are possible. A logical contradiction is not. You should be laughing too.
Jesus Christ was not in human form? What would have to be shown to be true is that no other human has ever risen from the dead. So I showed that anyone to rise is contrary to our experience, whomever it may be, including Jesus.
I really do think that most Catholics are intelligent people, so I’m wondering why more haven’t decided to side with logic on this one and publicly state you are wrong.
Wrong again! Are there not infrequent events that happen in our lifetime? Gabrielle Giffords being shot in the head and surviving is an unlikely event. She should’ve died like 99% of other people being shot in the head. But we have data that says she’s alive! By your standards, this evidence doesn’t matter, and we should just assume she’s dead!
I didn’t say I believed it. There are still things that at the present time we do not understand. History has shown that as time goes by we can answer more and more.
