Search results

I acknowledge your abject concession of defeat on the points I have made, as evidenced by your complete lack of relevant counter-arguments. I must protest regarding your No True Scotsman claims and spirituality. My spiritual experience is based on things that I can demonstrate to be true...

Sorry, are we keeping you awake? Flattered, I'm sure. Now, perhaps you can show me where I posted that FAITH IS IMAGINARY. I don't believe it is, and I never said it was anywhere, and you didn't give a single example of it. Hope that fruitless search didn't take you too long. My name is at...

Who cares what you call it? It makes testable scientific claims that turn out to be wrong. Other scientific claims it stole without giving credit to the person who made the discovery, in any of those cases. In regards to "external sources" it doesn't matter, because it is a fact that it has...

So you are retracting your claim that the UB should be taken as having something to offer science? Please explain the link between spirituality and faith. Please cite my post where I claim that faith is imaginary. I am very careful with these terms; I’m not convinced you are. Please explain...

You seem to assume that I have not researched this. You would be wrong. I have not quite read all of the UB, but I have read probably about 60% of it, certainly covering the papers that refer to science. I never claimed science has all the answers, but neither you nor Caino have addressed the...

Perhaps you could answer the question that Caino dodged. On what basis do you comment on my understanding of spirituality? You might take some care to acknowledge that while you are not making claims for science, Caino is, so perhaps you should take up the issue with him. Can you use...

Do you have an answer to my question about why you are not promoting the 987 billion year timescale as something useable by scientists? Should scientists be reconsidering whether the earth "has its origin in the sun", which previously has been discounted by all lines of evidence? OK, what I...

You raise a classic example. What EXACTLY are you suggesting the book of theft has to offer science in regards to this assertion of expansion and contraction over a billion-year timescale? All you are doing is taking a guess and mapping it onto another guess, one that says nothing about a...

I'd be delighted if it genuinely was a source of new possibilities for science, but it has added nothing whatever. All it has done has stolen from real scientists and repackaged the material by shifting the attribution to your Imaginary Friends. You say it with such earnestness, but I can...

I don't remember you apologising on behalf of the crackpot authors for their theft of the work of real humans in the name of beings that you would have had to show actually exist. You must have a different definition of "addressed" in mind, one that means something like "waved away". Stuart

I guess if you are short on valid answers then this ad hominem argument must seem quite appealing. Time has told. Revelation is demonstrably no better than ignorant humans guessing. Pretty much ALL the parts of the UB that can be shown to be correct were discovered by real humans, from whom...

Caino I note your complete lack of answers to the points I raised. You just ignored what I wrote pretty much entirely. Why would anyone engage with you if you are just going to mindlessly move on without reference to the good points raised against your criminal book? I stand by the claim that...

Thanks for telling me what I believe. Appreciate that. Perhaps you would care to explain the background microwave radiation. It's not my opinion, it's your moronic strawman. Are you a moron? You mean the book that believes the universe is trillions of years old? Is believing a religion...

Stuu: Hilarious. This was supposedly one person talking (you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe even that) and yet these famous fruitcakes refer to him by the third person plural pronoun. This is the logical fallacy of red herring. You obviously have no capacity for critical thinking on...

Hilarious. This was supposedly one person talking (you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe even that) and yet these famous fruitcakes refer to him by the third person plural pronoun. Stuart

Well indeed, and of course the same applies to Socrates, who also may be fictional. The ideas attributed to that character remain of interest. But some require Jesus to have actually existed. And the only source that claims to know what Jesus said or did is adamant that people need him to...

Well no, take the scientologists for example... Stuart

How convenient. Stuart

Nutjob central. Stuart

So you are claiming that your mythology of the possibly fictional character Jesus is right, and the same mythology written by the writer of the gospel of John is wrong. Fair enough, it's all fictional anyway. Stuart