₦airaland Forum

Magnificenttop:
Thankfully, objective reality and sound logic support the imaginary friend.
While nothing supports the no-God jargon, convention doesn't support it, not even science. It's baseless, illogical and counterintuitive.
It's faith only in religious context, doesn't apply to the material universe.
No matter how we twist it, the imaginary friend always win.

Baseless assertions backed by baseless assertions.

Magnificenttop:
Substance? What other substance again can anyone give to someone who cannot see this whole universe. Only replying epistles back to your epistles.
An imaginary creator who could create a tangible universe as this, deserves to live rent free in everyone's head, still noble and truthful choice, than threading a ridiculous path of self-deception and denial, employing unending, counterintuitive jargons to validate the impossible.
What followers choose to do or not do is personal preferences and lifestyles, still doesn't change anything about the truth of the universe. It is what it is and nothing can change anything about it.

Baseless assertions backed by baseless assertions. Thankfully objective reality doesn't work that way. Empty claims would remain empty claims until substantiated which your favourite imaginary friends would never be. There's a fine reason it's belief, faith nd not fact. Says it all. 😌

Magnificenttop:

Well, if I created this kind of universe, i'd also do the same. The universe speaks for itself, there's nothing left to say or see again here.
Call it engineering marvel, you discover it's way more. More than sculptural feat, more than structural excellence, more than a masterpiece, more than aesthetics, more than arts, more than extreme functionality, more than peak intelligence, more than design, more than complex, more than vast. It's everything and way more than everything. It's pure miracle. Zoom in or zoom out the universe, you continue to see endless wonders, marvels and it only keeps getting more puzzling and crazzier each passing moment.
Anyone who claims no creator really deserves the hide and seek game because that's the height of insincerity, self-deception, denial, falsehood and unfairness.

🥱 Epistle upon epistle, yet still no substance, savant sir. But I must say, it's a brilliant strategy. Imaginary creators and beings that exist solely in the minds of those convinced they're real… and somehow, that belief becomes so intense they argue, despise, and even kill each other over whose invisible friend wins the cosmic hide and seek game.

Even more impressive, followers of the same imaginary being manage to split into warring camps over who’s interpreting the fiction correctly. A true circus act. You definitely deserve that Nobel Prize. When’s the peer-reviewed study coming out, sir? We should title "I don't know or understand ergo my favourite imaginary friend did it". What do you think 😄.

SIRTeee15:
Pele...
I can see Seun's spam bot is giving u hard time.
Maybe U should be more coherent and learn to argue without insult.
Then U will be fine.

Like you weren't ban by the spam bot too 🤣. Anyways empty noise would always be empty noise over whose imaginary friend is real.

Magnificenttop:
Circular logic, says one of those who avoid straightforward, crystal clear discussions but hide under endless, meaningless terminologies to validate their counterintuitive arguments. More like making illogical babbling look appealing and great.
A carved, monolithic stone tool is not the same as the original, raw stone.
Owner/owners, creator/creators, cosmic fistfight or not, that's not the issue here. The issue rn is that there is or there are.

A creator simply creating a universe is endless regression but no-creator gives a perfect fix? Uninformed atheists don't realize the side that stand pose way more challenges. They keep invoking science like it's a magic wand. Genuine science is just neutral knowledge that belongs to every and anyone, it never contradicts a creator in anyway nor has any opinion of such.
The universe is too vast and too complex while our knowledge is too limited. Even, the little science we brag about face more questions than answers and again sometimes become invalid with new findings. Yet if we get any little success, what it points at is the necessary intervention of intelligent mind, design and intention behind everything. No way out, it's impossible mission.

All these to say I learned well and the creators are the best hide n seek players ever. Got it 👊🏽

Magnificenttop:
Great logic Stephen Hawking.
Next time we see any object in the street with no known, traceable owner, no documentation, it simply means it existed there all by itself just because it wanted to. Hmmm, deep.
We see isolated, depreciated artifact in the wild and instantly concluded it definitely once had an owner, though unknown and untraceable, then further use it to construct the possible owner and all other details from this tiny artifact but it's so impossible to do the same for this vast, active universe. The joke here is obvious and a deliberate act of playing dvmb.
@bolded, this is so appropriate. That's the ridiculous routes taken when some jokers try hard to explain how the universe exits without a creator.

Oh savant sir, I’ve already said I don’t speak Christianese, nor do I have the required experience in ironic circular logic to operate at your genius level. But still, I managed to learn a few things.

For example: a man-made artifact carved from stone is exactly the same as a naturally occurring stone — no difference at all, no way to tell at all. That’s how science works now, apparently. Also, the universe has owners(not owner), they play hide n seek and those owners have owners, and so on forever, but not to worry, it’s not infinite regress when you finally reach the one you like or were indoctrinated with.

And thirdly, the alleged creators are all in a cosmic fistfight over who gets the blue checkmark as the true originator, which somehow validates the claim instead of discrediting it. Brilliant. Also learnt are that you can disprove a negative(here I come bigfoot and aliens). Difficult lessons but I learned. Thank you for breaking down such complex, ironic circular logic into bite-sized fallacies for us laypeople. I’ll be nominating you for a Nobel prize, you deserve it.

SIRTee15:
I responded to your waffling, go and check; but the problem is I'm allergic to claims lacking in evidence and that's what your posts are all about. I may or may not answer.

Demanding that I show U the name of Jesus in the old testament is a desperate attempt at clutching at straws.

Anyway Louis Pasteur greets U.

🤣🤣🤣
Thought as much, typical chicken with empty noise. What further seals this is the incredible irony that Pasteur never said such when fact checked. Truly laughable, at least like the others on here ud think twice before quoting me next time. 🤡

SIRTee15:
Luciferi how are U
Isaiah 53 greets U......

😄 So wait let me get this straight, you chicken out from a convo cause you couldn't answer simple straightforward questions. Just to come bk to it after a long time, only cause you were called out for been a chicken. Quoted me everywhere and still didn't give any sembalnce of an answer despite the numerous quotes. Time passes again and you quote me yet again, still no semblance of an answer but vague pics from nameless sources.

Anyways humor me one more time let's see if the same scenario plays out. It should be easy to answer the questions from my comment you quoted. So I'll paste it here for you to answer. 😁 4 simple questions, 4 simple answers.

(...why not show us in Isaiah 53:

Where Jesus is mentioned by name as the messiah or even anywhere,

Or Jesus’ children, according to Isaiah 53:10,

Or where he repents of sin,

Or where he dies multiple times, all according to Isaiah 53?

Or is he scared of dying multiple times to fulfill his other failed prophecy about his return? 😂

Surely, you'd be able to point out these things easily from Isaiah 53 if it’s not the typical Christian selective renegotiating retcon. Typical circus act, Tick tock.)

Magnificenttop:
Hmmm, this is deep.
True, my posts have never been demonstrated to have someone behind them, just random texts appearing under your mention. Now, that's some next level discovery.
Perhaps, noone even designed the web, no one behind anything. Everything just happening all by itself because they needed to.
You're really hitting on some fundamental truths here Stephen Hawking. I feel you.

Lol! This is the kind of amazing false equivalence only a true genius could come up with. "My social media post has an author, so the universe must have a cosmic content creator." Truly bulletproof logic, savant sir.

Because obviously, a human-built, documented, and publicly maintained system like the internet, created by people we literally know by name and have interviewed, is abs totally the same as the universe, which has… none of that. No observable creators, no manual, no GitHub repo in the sky, and sadly, no LinkedIn profile. Wow!

But wait o it must be true because a contradictory and inconsistent book written by illiterate desert peasants with no clue to how the world works, from the most primitive part of the world tells me so. Ergo, it is. AMazing! 😁

Next you’ll tell me gravity was invented by Apple because your iPhone falls when you drop it. Your genius is beyond me, kind sir. I'm taking notes. Actually… now that I think about it, like the web, shouldn’t we have creators instead of a creator? I want to learn.

Magnificenttop:
Well, I don't think so.
In the first place, if you ever had the ability to learn or be taught, you wouldn't have thought our better understanding of how the universe works shrinks it's maker.

Ah yes! Our better understanding wouldn't shrink the universe's "maker" - when the universe has never been demonstrated to have one - nor shrink the maker's maker nor the maker's maker's maker... ad infinitum. Quite a valauble lesson.

Magnificenttop:
You just gave a perfect reply to yourself, or aren't you the same person shrinking the god of the gaps? And still the same who thinks understanding how something works means it has no maker?

Like I said, I guess nairlands resident genius taught me something impossible today. lol!

LordReed:
I want to see his reaction when he learns that infraRED light is not actually red. LMAO.

Or that an airplane's BLACKbox is not black. 😄

Magnificenttop:
No be only god of the gaps, na god of the gafes.
A ngga once said, while younger, he thought someone made the piano but now grown up, he could explain how the piano works, so this shows that piano made itself, not by anyone. It's same way low-budget, atheist wannabes sound lame.
Superstition initially explained everything due to ignorance but now science explains things, fine. That only has everything to do with humans' flawed, slow understanding, it has nothing to do with the universe or it's maker.
From ignorance to superstition to slow understanding and now thinking that knowing how something works disproves its maker. From dvmb to dvmber. That's a lame, big L.

Typical cristianese speak, whole lot of empty words just to say nothing. 😅 Didn't know you could disprove what has never been proven or demonstrated - that the universe has a "maker". Guess nairaland's resident genius taught me something today.

PulsingPurple:
Mek una leave my thread 😂😂

Una no well at all 😅

I'm out 😅, my aim here's done.

MaxInDHouse:
Ọmọ nah BLACKHOLE i talk no be RED o!

🤣🤣🤣

MaxInDHouse:
God's word has said thousands of years before anybody thought of it that earth is spherical and that it's inhabitants are glued to the surface! Isaiah 40:22

That's not a blackhole because it's not BLACK just as you too won't welcome any information that's not in line with what your former religion taught you so bring a BLACKHOLE not red then i will believe it's visible!

Jesu!!!🙆🏽🙆🏽🙆🏽

Ive been laughing for a min 🤣🤣🤣. Like I said my aim was to demonstrate your loud ignorance - not convince you, that's a fool's errand I ain't running. Wasn't expecting you'd give the killer blow with the bolded. You literally made me lol.

BlackViper:
God of the gaps as a concept usually applies in discussions about evolution.
The problem is that it is actually evolution that is a stop gap solution to the problem of existence.

Evolution has nothing to do with "the problem of existence". It is also not a stop gap but literal fact supported by lots of evidence and the available data.

incogni2o:
What gap is here.

The bible says Knowledge will increase, using it for benevolent reasons is what was done here.

Not everyone takes a contradictory and inconsistent book written by ignorant people as gospel(pun intended). See Fouthpredator's comment.

Fourthpredator:
God of the gaps just means that the entity people call 'God' is used as an explanation for anything humans don't understand.
Like humans didn't understand thunder and lightning so they invented gods like Thor, Zeus etc, so as science and technology becomes better and better the things that 'God' will be used to explain will become smaller.
The results is that in the future you cannot use God to explain anything which will make God a fictional entity.
If I ask religious people why they think God exists, they will Tell us to explain sleep, life ,death etc and say that since we cannot explain those concepts God is the one controlling them, so once science can explain it then it means God will have no place to hide and can only be termed as a being that ignorant ancestors used to explain things beyond their current understanding.

Apt. Couldn't have said it better.

MaxInDHouse:
Fact: The only evidence of blackholes is explanation not visibility!

You are free to say whatever, changes nothing, same way we treat flat earthers insisting the earth is flat. We did not get the images of m87 and Sagittarius from awake magazine. 😌 Feast ur eyes.

G12:
Humans are passing the boundary. What's the point?

Who set up this your hypothetical boundary. Maybe you love viruses and diseases, you can choose to ignore this development and carry on with the status quo.

God of the gaps keeps shrinking everyday and would only get smaller.

MaxInDHouse:
Ọmọ other planets are VISIBLE but as for blackholes they are not you have to start explaining and explaining to prove they exist yet you simply want everyone to agree with your explanations but when a believer in God wants to explain you keep on shouting "no evidence!" demanding something you can see with your physical eyes!

Grasp at straws all you want wouldn't change fact.

MaxInDHouse:
There is no evidence of any blackholes compared to countless evidences of God's existence but you can choose to ignore it even when it's affecting you very existence!

Yes yes... Blackholes, Mars, Venus or any of the other planets don't have any evidence as well, guess we should write to NASA & CERN about your brilliant theory. The dedication to ignorance is outstanding. Thankfully ignorance doesn't change facts. Making baseless claims is easy, even schizos do it, demonstrating it is where they all fall down like a pack of cards hit by wind.

MaxInDHouse:
So understanding blackholes continues and not just what we heard decades ago same applies to the existence of God as predicted, observed and confirmed by evidence.
If you try to explain but your audience insisted on what we heard about this blackholes decades ago it's the same thing!

🤣 Very good, the loud ignorance has been demonstrated and the false equivalence rubbished. So, then resorting to half baked analogies to defend baseless claims is just typical seeing as there's zero evidence.

MaxInDHouse:
Are you really interested in the evidence of God's existence?
Just as you welcomed EXPLANATION for the existence of unseen blackholes!

Unseen blackholes?! Lol! We’ve literally seen black holes and they look exactly like the predictive models based on Einstein’s theory said they would. In 2019, the Event Horizon Telescope produced the first image of a black hole, the one at the center of galaxy M87. Basically a glowing ring of hot gas surrounding a dark shadow, caused by the extreme gravity near the event horizon. It was not baseless claims, it was predicted, observed, and confirmed by evidence. So trying to draw parallels with mythological baseless claims fails badly.

So even to reach an understanding of basic concepts univocally is a problem, yet spout empty claims of having "the truth". 😄 Talk abt 🤡s