Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Where god fails, science succeeds [View all]skepticscott
(13,029 posts)31. You must never shake your head, then
Because EVERY time you've been asked to show some real, live person actually expressing the opinion that "if one cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or physically touch something then it cannot exist or probably doesn't", you fail miserably. You can't show that and you never will, because it's just another of your silly straw men. Everyone reading your schtick knows that, and you'll go through some more contortions here to avoid (again) a simple demonstration of your claim. Or you'll lie (again) and say you've already given that evidence many times and aren't going to bother doing it again. (just for the record, for those sensible people reading, he never has, and will refuse to link to evidence to the contrary, not surprisingly).
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
140 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Faith in one's ability to overcome is one thing, faith in a supernatural entity is another.
cleanhippie
Aug 2012
#5
In fact, while I am sure he is grateful for the technology, he attributes much of his
cbayer
Aug 2012
#18
I think you just validated my point. The statement "physical explanation" narrows
humblebum
Aug 2012
#28
"You prove real by testing" - No, you can prove "your" reality by "your" tests.
humblebum
Aug 2012
#102
"The onerous is not on me to prove they exist" - no one said that it was, but as I have already said
humblebum
Aug 2012
#110
When you use the term "obvious" - that is your SUBJECTIVE opinion. You still
humblebum
Aug 2012
#116
Who said a spoon is not a physical object? You referred to "spoon bending." Not
humblebum
Aug 2012
#118
You still do not have a clue what you are talking about. No one said that your so called
humblebum
Aug 2012
#122
If one uses the very narrow epistemology designed specifically for application
humblebum
Aug 2012
#81
As do you. Regardless the definition and process of empiricism remain the same. nt
humblebum
Aug 2012
#66
Only a God would be capable of the absolute conclusion you make. Not even Science engages in such
patrice
Aug 2012
#52
It comes from within. Some call it heart, some call it soul. A place beyond the physical reality.
Starboard Tack
Aug 2012
#58
I never mentioned religion, but reading your post you sound more like a spiritual person
demosincebirth
Aug 2012
#68
It makes perfect sense when you put his "bitter and resentful" comment into context.
cleanhippie
Aug 2012
#82