EvC Forum: Which More 3LoT Compatible, Cavediver's Temp.Non-ID Or Buzsaw's Infinite ID Universe

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Which More 3LoT Compatible, Cavediver's Temp.Non-ID Or Buzsaw's Infinite ID Universe

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

Message 22 of 304 (621959)
06-29-2011 5:28 PM

Reply to: Message 1 by Buzsaw
06-28-2011 11:22 PM

The topic will be Which satisfies the three basic 3Lot's the best, the Buzsaw literal rendering of the Genesis record or BB and the singularity events espoused by conventional science?

So what do you hope to show by claiming that a fictional character can be said to follow the 3LoT's? It doesn't make a fictional character into a non-fictional character.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 1 by Buzsaw, posted 06-28-2011 11:22 PM		Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 31 by Phat, posted 06-29-2011 11:17 PM		Taq has replied

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

Message 34 of 304 (622000)
06-30-2011 1:44 AM

Reply to: Message 28 by Buzsaw
06-29-2011 10:40 PM

Re: jar's position

The topic is about how the Biblical record is compatible with the basic Lots.

Would it be similar to a debate where someone argues that Leprechauns can reach into a secret dimension that contains energy, so that the magical production of gold coins is consistent with the 3LoTs?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 28 by Buzsaw, posted 06-29-2011 10:40 PM		Buzsaw has not replied

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

Message 35 of 304 (622001)
06-30-2011 1:45 AM

Reply to: Message 31 by Phat
06-29-2011 11:17 PM

Re: No Evidence Of Absence

Bottom line: Neither of us can prove anything.

I am just trying to figure out what Buz is trying to prove. It is a bit hazy.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 31 by Phat, posted 06-29-2011 11:17 PM		Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 38 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2011 2:14 AM		Taq has not replied

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

Message 53 of 304 (622099)
06-30-2011 4:30 PM

Reply to: Message 47 by Buzsaw
06-30-2011 10:18 AM

Re: Clarification Of Topic

The topic should not be restricted to a secularistic application of science.

This is why I will not debate you. Science, by definition, is secular. You are asking people to argue against a paradox.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 47 by Buzsaw, posted 06-30-2011 10:18 AM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 54 by Buzsaw, posted 07-01-2011 8:02 AM		Taq has replied

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

Message 59 of 304 (622162)
07-01-2011 12:01 PM

Reply to: Message 54 by Buzsaw
07-01-2011 8:02 AM

Re: What Is The More Scientifically Compatible = Scientific Debate

Taq, you have quote mined one small sentence from my message so as to obfuscate the message and demean the messenger.

I fail to see how the context of the entire post changes the intent of the quote.

The term, science is not necessarily secularistic. If a metaphysical realm of beings exist in the universe, scientific study and debate can be engaged in so as to determine whether or not such entities exist.

Science is necessarily secularist. That is the whole point. As an analogy, you are asking us to use non-mathematical calculus. It is a contradiction in terms.

It would seem that the whole point of your debate is to demonstrate that something is true irrespective of religious beliefs. That makes it secular, and it is also the the basis of the scientific method.

Thus, you and the others responding to my message need to understand and acknowledge that this debate is not limited to the secularistic application of science.

IOW, you will try to use science until it can't be used to show what you want to show, and then you substitute science with faith. Sorry, but I see no reason that anyone would want to participate in a debate where you get to change the ground rules on the fly.

This is also why, imo, creationists should be allowed to size up our paradigm against that of the secularists in the science forums. With that restriction, half of our minds are tied behind us as Rush Limbaugh puts it.

So you want to pit faith against science. Good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 54 by Buzsaw, posted 07-01-2011 8:02 AM		Buzsaw has not replied

Taq

Member

Posts: 10085

Joined: 03-06-2009

Member Rating: 5.6

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 105 of 304 (622922)
07-07-2011 11:53 AM

Buzsaw,

Would you also agree that a Leprechaun that pulls gold from one open universe to another is in compliance with the 3LoT's?

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Tanypteryx
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0

Summations Only