₦airaland Forum

Alfa Seltzer: You give him too much credit. You are very kind.

Acting the fool still...

pof600: You are gullible than I thought. You actually believe that nonsense? You call the evidence? What is your IQ, 34?

So now the testimony of scientists is no longer acceptable as evidence?

What then is evidence?

pof600: You are gullible than I thought. You actually believe that nonsense? You call the evidence? What is your IQ, 34?

Read about the 800 year old incorrupt body of St Zita.

Logicboy03: Logic doesnt work for Italo so here is a simple way of destroying his notions about god:

Italo, enumerate 3 reasons why you disbelieve in the toothfairy (3 short sentences)

I will answer when you answer my question which you ran away from.

What are those laws and principles of logic that make one man logical and the other illogical?

wiegraf: Can you show it is subjective, rather than claim it is so?

Again, you're conflating issues. I've provided solid mathematical proofs for my assertions, nothing subjective here

I am hardly making any claims.

Most of what I am doing is ASKING.

Why should the world be subjected to YOUR view of "objective logic" when their view of it is different.

You say 2+2=4 is proof of your position.

They say 2+2=4 is proof of their position.

Why should I believe you rather than they?

pof600: Many miracles? Can you cite one with credible source? Go ahead, provide the proof or shut up, you low IQ gullible religious clod!

The properties of the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe on the tilma of St Juan Diego.

http://incorruptibles.info/guadalupe.html

12 points are listed at the above site. The one about the eyes is particularly notable:

Quote:
#5 A number of opthamologists have studied the eyes of the image. The first such study was undertaken by five opthamologists in 1956, two of them non-believers. The astounding result confirmed by all of them was that, when looking through an opthalmoscope, it was exactly the same as looking at an ordinary human eye of a living person. The same results have occurred every time that the eyes have been examined by experts since that time. It was also noted that the eyelids show normal microscopic veins.

# 6 According to Dr Jose Aste Tonsmann, an expert in digital imaging, minute human figures can be detected in the pupils of the eyes on the image.

# 7 Opthalmic studies have also detected that, when the eye on the tilma is exposed to light, the retina contracts, When the light it removed the retina dilates again. This is the reaction of a normal eye.

Alfa Seltzer: Because I'm a higher IQ human.

Why arent you behaving like it?

cold: I don't need to discuss the good things i have done & still do lest i be accused of hubris. There's no exaggerations of the evils of the catholic church. The vatican has had a hand in every devious dealing in the past 5 centuries. Only a m0ron would pretend not to know. About having the largest charity,how does that take away from the heinous activities of the catholic church? Is that supposed to hush us up?

More lies and exaggeration.

About having the largest number and scale of charities...

I thought you said there is nothing to emulate from us. Helping the needy is nothing to emulate?

If you think doing good is nothing. On what grounds do you condemn doing evil?

What kind of human being only seeks to condemn evil and ignore good.

wiegraf: ^^^

Logic. Objective, unless you can point out where it's subjective.


And I've proofs other than that one actually. Ultimately, your god??!! could be all-wise, but it must be also be all-foo.lish. Or are you saying an all-wise being does not know how to be all-foo.lish?

Those who think God is all-wise also point to objective logic.

Why should be subjected to your definition of objective logic?

Many people think God is all-wise.

Why should you be listened to?

Alfa Seltzer: Because I abhor evil.

Why do you abhor evil?

wiegraf: ^^^

Don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about when I say this is objective.

There are no ambiguities here, else, please show which bits are subjective

I dont know what you are talking about.

What is objective?

cold: I think you're the ignorant one here. You don't know a damn thing about your faith. First read up on the Catholic Church & slavery,then follow it up with the Spanish inquisition,and then the catholic church and the Sicilian mafia,the catholic church and the dark ages,and also the catholic church & paedophilia. I can go on and on. There's nothing worthy of emulation from you lots. Your reputation reeks to the high heavens. And please don't bring in that Jewish book of fables into the argument or your argument will be taken to pieces

What sources are you reading from?

Enemies of the Church, I'm sure.

For only an enemy will dubiously exaggerate the bad things we have done, lie that we did things we didnt do and refuse to acknowledge that we are the largest providers of charity in the world. No one else comes close.

What have you done for the good of the world?

wiegraf: You didn't make 1+1=2

Dont pretend you dont know I was talking about logic.

Why should every one follow your own rules and definition of logic?

Logicboy03: U shuld learn from Ubenedictus

Learn what?

Alfa Seltzer: To worship and glorify Satan.

Why dont you leave satan and follow God?

Kay 17: @italo

My point is beliefs are not neceesarily true for being contents of thought simpliciter.

However what makes beliefs true, is how they represent reality.

One man's "reality" is another man's "illusion."

So who defines reality?

Atheists?

Mr Troll: Bros, I think you are seriously fooolish but I'll try one last time.

Evidence/Facts make belief true. How? Listen...

I say I am a man, you say prove it. I provide a picture. Of course the picture can be falsified, but then, it is now on you to show how the picture is false. If you cannot do that then we have to assume that the picture is genuine until proven otherwise. That then shows that the evidence of my picture proves my belief to be true that I'm a man. Kapisce?

Its simple man, you just want to be fooolish. You have a brain, when you make a claim you have to prove it true or nobody will take you serious. I leave you to logicboy, there's only so much foolishness I can tolerate from one person. You've been jumping from one post to another, trying to shift the burden of proof, failing that then creating false dichotomies and asking asinine questions. I don tire for your nonsense.

You are saying a falsified "evidence" makes a belief true if the forgery is not proved.

If you are a woman and you produce a fake picture showing you to appear like a man but no one has proved it is fake, the picture makes you a man?

And you call me foolish?

Lol.

wiegraf: You're still playing with words and false dichotomies. Anyone who thinks I am foo.lish for stating that the guy who jumped in front of the truck was foo.lish, is foo.lish, undeniably so. Considering the objective is clear, the solution glaring, and the actual solution chosen completely counter productive and backed by silly reasoning, our jumper was clearly foo.lish. There are no ambiguous axioms involved in this situation, unlike the picture you're trying to paint. This particular situation is like saying false is true, or 1 + 1 = 3. Simple.

However, you're close to my argument. Consciousness relies on emotions to set goals, emotions are not necessarily rational. So undoubtedly, I've relied on foo.lish notions at one time or the other to set/achieve goals. With god being the perfect consciousness, and consciousness being intrinsically foo.lish, then god is the perfection of folly, no?



No, I'm saying going by your definition, everyone makes up their own rules.

Everyone is making up their own rules, including you. It isnt me that made it so.

Why should everyone follow your rules on logic?

Why should you be the one to define logic for the world?

Logicboy03: fool,

you make claims then tell me to prove the claims.



What are the disputes in logic?

Numerous. You think certain things are logical; other people think they arent.

This is his personality. Every pope has his. As long as we have a pope disposed to doing God's will I'm happy.

This humble man might never have been pope without the tremendous humility of another man who placed God's will before his own.

So who's more humble?

I love all the popes.

litetias: I think you got it twisted and you're taking atheism for anarchism or anihilism. They seem to be different.

Atheists believe there is a meaning and reason for life?

Lets hear it then.

scorpidmo: A miracle is simply an unexplainable phenomenon that supersedes an individual's level of rational thinking. A cave man who saw fire for d first time or a red Indian that saw a train for the first time, both believed they witnessing sth extraordinary so it had to be a miracle. When it was sth so simple and explainable. FYI I do believe strange ish happens but labelling every and anything a miracle is just damn right stupidity.

A miracle is an occurrence that defies the laws of nature through God's intervention.

E.g: the bodies of saints remaining without decomposition after centuries of their deaths.

[quote author=Ima_eyez]Hmmm, Boy gets Cancer for no apparent reason, Boy meets pope, while still receiving treatment, Boy gets cured. Yay! its a MIRACLE!! Wonder why God didn't use this opportunity to erase CANCER altogether. I bet if the boy had not been cured, like many others who have received prayers too and still died, we wouldn't have been told he ever met The Pope.[/quote]Many people meet popes publicly without being cured. It is not hidden.

pof600: This is not true. You would need an independent outlet to confirm this. The source of this information is a suspect and not credible. Prayers doesn't work, your god doesn't exist, and religion is for the low IQ minds like most here.

Independent scientists with 'high IQs' have confirmed many miracles.

You havent read that far, have you?

@ humbledbygrace,

I was banned by you for "insulting other members."

May I know what the "insult" was and how it deserves a ban more than all the vile statements that go unpunished?

Ubenedictus: it will be more polite if you edit out the word satan and put in adversery.
People may disagree without been disagreable.

Maybe. But I was actually addressing satan and no one else. I was neither trying to be polite nor rude.

Trust in the interpretation of the Church.

They have the mandate to teach the faithful, not the Bible.

wiegraf: Basically, lb is already on it. You're more or else equating different situations for one. This is simple logic, of the mathematic sort, not whatever you're on about. Objective. Not even sure what you're on about.

If your aim is to cross a road, you value that and that is your aim, and instead of simply crossing when the road is clear you deliberately wait for a truck moving at speed passes by then jump in front of it, as you calculated that the impact would fling you across the road and thus fulfill your purpose, then well, you're foo.lish. Unless, of course, your aim was to reach the other side dead or something similar, see?


And in case you missed it



Making logic relative simply means anyone can make his rules.

Firstly, going by your definition of "foolish," there are billions that would describe you and Logicboy as foolish.

Secondly, are you saying everyone should follow your own rules?

Logicboy03: It is like asking who defines 2 + 2 = 4

Logic can be tested and there some laws/principles of logic to follow. These laws come from the test of human experience and a history of debate.
There are also fallacies to avoid.
This is why they are universal.

There are no known disputes with 2 + 2 = 4. But there are countless number of disputes on logic.

So tell me these laws/principles that make one man logical and the other illogical.

Logicboy03: Shut up. Creating false dichotomies.

It is logical to accept undeniable evidence.


No one has his own facts or logic. They are universal.

Majaze and others who dont accept evolution are being illogical. Simple and short.



Logic is there.

But who defines "logic" and "undeniable evidence?"

That's the million-dollar-question.