FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Reload this Page A challenge to atheists
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM
Search

 
Page 2 of 12 1 2 34 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-17-2003, 06:13 AM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah
Posts: 1,945
Arrow
Quote:
Originally posted by Aerik Von
Emotional...I'd rather a book from a scientist than a lawyer. Lawyers spin words and lies, scientists spin expiriments.
The person who wrote this book happens to be a lawyer, but the book itself contains the findings of scientists: Crookes, Myers, Lodge, Osis, Moody, Ring, Morse, Fenwick, to name just a few. So your argument is invalid.

The link wasn't meant to persuade (I know it's nearly impossible) but to show that there is a differing opinion which is no less valid than the current concensus.
emotional is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 06:56 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://10.0.0.2/
Posts: 6,623
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by emotional
Disagreed!
What a crock of ****. All the world's failed crackpot ideas mixed and reheated into lukewarm mush by some ignorant ambulance chaser who wouldn't know a valid experiment from a month-old cheese sandwich. I'm glad he's not MY lawyer. Emotional, I am sorry my friend, but that wouldn't stand up in a court of law as evidence and it won't stand up here.

If you'd like to select just one bit of that tract that you consider persuades the world beyond reasonable doubt about [whatever] then please do so and it can be debated here. A rebuttal of the entire "work" would take too long, methinks.
Oxymoron is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 07:03 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://10.0.0.2/
Posts: 6,623
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by emotional
The person who wrote this book happens to be a lawyer, but the book itself contains the findings of scientists: Crookes, Myers, Lodge, Osis, Moody, Ring, Morse, Fenwick, to name just a few. So your argument is invalid.
Who the f**k are they? What journals did they publish their findings in? Who peer reviewed them? What exactly were their findings? Who in the scientific community agrees or disagrees? Has Zammit correctly interpreted and represented the results? Namedropping does not lend an argument validity...

Quote:

The link wasn't meant to persuade (I know it's nearly impossible) but to show that there is a differing opinion which is no less valid than the current concensus.
...and neither does the existence of a contradictory viewpoint make that viewpoint equally valid.
Oxymoron is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 07:14 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet X, hiding from Duck Dodgers
Posts: 1,691
Wink
Quote:
Originally posted by Jinto
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
I think so, Brain, but where are we going to find rubber pants and a chicken at this time of night?

Narf!
Alludium Fozdex is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 07:23 AM   #15
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah
Posts: 1,945
Thumbs down
Quote:
Originally posted by emotional
The link wasn't meant to persuade (I know it's nearly impossible)
I rest my case
emotional is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 07:40 AM   #16
Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alaska!
Posts: 14,058
Default Word magic
Quote:
Originally posted by slamanamp
I purpose that you cannot argue against the existence of God unless you first assume his existence. For even in voicing that you disagree you are depending on the transcendental truth that language has objective meaning.
Lemmesee if I'm following you. It is your position that people can say god doesn't exist only in universes in which he does? And the reason is that if you were in a universe in which god didn't exist, and you admitted that he didn't, that would prove he did, thereby ... I dunno, cancelling out the universe?
crc
Wiploc is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 07:54 AM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: US
Posts: 5,495
Default Re: A challenge to atheists
Quote:
Originally posted by slamanamp
I openly challenge all intellectual atheists (those who avoid the use of �ad hominem� attack) to debate me on the issue of the existence of God.
Certainly, sir, what kind of god did you have in mind?
John Page is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 08:00 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: secularcafe.org
Posts: 9,525
Default
"Debate" means you have to answer the posts *we* make.

Off to Elsewhere.
Jobar is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 09:29 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,762
Default
attaboy, emotional! Never let facts get in the way of a good opinion!
Calzaer is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 09:51 AM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,587
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Jobar
"Debate" means you have to answer the posts *we* make.

Off to Elsewhere.
Way to give him a whole 8 hours to answer. It�s not like people sleep or do non-computer related things for that amount of time�
pug846 is offline  
 
Page 2 of 12 1 2 34 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:15 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.