Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, I do not accept YOUR implications based on YOUR ignorance.
Thank you for admitting you are ignorant about what you are posting.
And while I agree morality is not a scientific field, the fact that scientific experiments have been done shows there is an overlap, from cross culture experiments to the famous Stanford prison experiment.
I do not think many people knew who Flew was until Christians started using his mental decline as evidence of a genius who became religious.
And I have looked at this debate, it appears Flew had a problem with a trick question. Have you seen this debate, or are you just taking a part out of context?
And I have done something with it, I have pointed out how your argument says your god can not exist, and I have proven objective facts do not need a god, making the objective morality argument a failure.
Clearly it is you who is lying because you either have to admit your god can not exist, or the holocaust could be morally good if your god says so, something you have consistently ran away from.
I am showing the flaws in your argument, you are just repeating your flawed argument.
You haven't proved anything other than you are not yet qualified to make an argument based on morality, and it wasn't a trick question, it was a real question that simply tricks the irrational atheist because of their implication. Nobody can handle it. You aren't any smarter than Dr. Flew was. He was traveling the country and defeating preachers in arguments until he met Tom Warren because Warren had studied philosophy for decades, all what Hume, Kant, Russell, and the like all said, they all had flaws in their systems. Warren picked their system apart to where they have nothing but jot air coming out, Flew was an experienced debater and writer, he was the #1 guy at the time.
Did you watch all the debate? It's 8 hours long but session #2, 3, 8, 10, and 12 are the betters ones if you haven't seen it all, Flew says little, his best argument was about "fairies". People I know said that you could see the color leave Dr. Flews face when he was faced with that morality dilemma. I know people who knew Warren personally, he went to schools for 20 years just to learn knew things time to time, a brilliant man who taught calculus, philosophy, greek, etc.
If America had a theocracy and I was left out, I would continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing. Your described situation would not be favorable to me perhaps.
God does want religion mixed into decisions, every single thing must be parallel with His will. Now you are getting beyond explicit passages about "subdivision should have their sewer lines replaced....." but what is implied from scripture is that we all be honest and willing to advance to a healthy life style, that includes making rational decisions based on the well-being of all on all things.
Its really a utililitarian system.
Just how far would you go in a theocracy to persuade people into doing what you believe is the right thing?
You haven't proved anything other than you are not yet qualified to make an argument based on morality, ...
I used logic. You asserted your god that can not exist did it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
... and it wasn't a trick question, it was a real question that simply tricks the irrational atheist because of their implication. Nobody can handle it.
Warren was also known for his logical traps, for example, his challenge to Flew to answer the question, "Which came first, a human mother or a human baby?"
Do you even research your apologetics you take of Christian web sites? Obviously not, you just invent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
You aren't any smarter than Dr. Flew was. He was traveling the country and defeating preachers in arguments until he met Tom Warren because Warren had studied philosophy for decades, all what Hume, Kant, Russell, and the like all said, they all had flaws in their systems. Warren picked their system apart to where they have nothing but jot air coming out, Flew was an experienced debater and writer, he was the #1 guy at the time.
And? this does not refute my point, and is an argument from authority. Do you actually have a rational argument to make?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
Did you watch all the debate? It's 8 hours long but session #2, 3, 8, 10, and 12 are the betters ones if you haven't seen it all, Flew says little, his best argument was about "fairies". People I know said that you could see the color leave Dr. Flews face when he was faced with that morality dilemma. I know people who knew Warren personally, he went to schools for 20 years just to learn knew things time to time, a brilliant man who taught calculus, philosophy, greek, etc.
Mmmmh, I think you are just making this up. You found a site with links and are pretending to have seen them. From your inability to refute my arguments (ad hominems do not count), I think you are faking it.
I used logic. You asserted your god that can not exist did it.
Warren was also known for his logical traps, for example, his challenge to Flew to answer the question, "Which came first, a human mother or a human baby?"
Do you even research your apologetics you take of Christian web sites? Obviously not, you just invent.
And? this does not refute my point, and is an argument from authority. Do you actually have a rational argument to make?
Mmmmh, I think you are just making this up. You found a site with links and are pretending to have seen them. From your inability to refute my arguments (ad hominems do not count), I think you are faking it.
Logical traps are not trick questions, they are valid questions, just that atheist cannot answer them. You have attempted to use logical traps on me but you fail, it doesn't mean its not real questions.
Well, which came first? A human woman or a human baby? Its a scientific question isn't it? To prove evolution you must decide which one and then how it was so.
Warren debated 2 other philosophers, both had nothing to offer just like you. Did you actually watch all the Flew debate? There is a book on it as well.as Warren's other debates. Richard Dawkins is no better than Flew was, I listen to Dawkins and the other top dogs, they cannot explain morality from the universal standpoint let alone the flawed scientific theories that have yet to provide any explanation.
Which part do you think I'm faking it? I really do know people who personally knew Warren, he lived in Seagoville, Texas for a long time, my friend lived in same neighborhood and another guy was his student. Other people I'm friends with knows others who where there in the debate, a guy named Roy Deaver was his time keeper. Another Texas guy. I wasn't there if that what you mean.
Logical traps are not trick questions, they are valid questions, just that atheist cannot answer them. You have attempted to use logical traps on me but you fail, it doesn't mean its not real questions.
Well, which came first? A human woman or a human baby? Its a scientific question isn't it? To prove evolution you must decide which one and then how it was so.
Well, which came first? A human woman or a human baby? Its a scientific question isn't it? To prove evolution you must decide which one and then how it was so.
If you understood evolution (beyond the fractured version you apparently got from your biologist friend(s)...), you'd understand that question doesn't have any basis. Neither mother nor baby "came first." Humans (or any other species) did not appear overnight, as a single individual, with the flip of a switch (or the snap of God's big fingers, or whatever you imagined from reading Genesis). They (we) evolved gradually over a period of MILLIONS of years:
If you understood evolution (beyond the fractured version you apparently got from your biologist friend(s)...), you'd understand that question doesn't have any basis. Neither mother nor baby "came first." Humans (or any other species) did not appear overnight, as a single individual, with the flip of a switch (or the snap of God's big fingers, or whatever you imagined from reading Genesis). They (we) evolved gradually over a period of MILLIONS of years:
There is a fine line between humans and non-humans. No scientist can prove otherwise. That's what you need to focus on instead of the same lame theories, prove something or stop wasting my time.
Logical traps are not trick questions, they are valid questions, just that atheist cannot answer them. You have attempted to use logical traps on me but you fail, it doesn't mean its not real questions.
Well, which came first? A human woman or a human baby? Its a scientific question isn't it? To prove evolution you must decide which one and then how it was so.
Warren debated 2 other philosophers, both had nothing to offer just like you. Did you actually watch all the Flew debate? There is a book on it as well.as Warren's other debates. Richard Dawkins is no better than Flew was, I listen to Dawkins and the other top dogs, they cannot explain morality from the universal standpoint let alone the flawed scientific theories that have yet to provide any explanation.
Which part do you think I'm faking it? I really do know people who personally knew Warren, he lived in Seagoville, Texas for a long time, my friend lived in same neighborhood and another guy was his student. Other people I'm friends with knows others who where there in the debate, a guy named Roy Deaver was his time keeper. Another Texas guy. I wasn't there if that what you mean.
A non human can give birth to a human, But we need to be really careful here. It was a bunch of hybriditaztion going on and we "popped", out the top, so to speak.
Here is good series on it. I am no expert so it did a nice job for me. Listen to how they talk about "other theories". They focus on "discourse", meaning we have ideas but are not sure. Basically there is more than one answer. Listen for how many times he says "probably a mixture of ..."
But most importantly listen to how he uses stuff they actually have in hand to say why they are saying what they do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
