Walton vs. axiom-tech discussion

[Nathon Detroit]

The real "Does God Exist?" debate is located here.

 

[PKevman]

The real "Does God Exist?" debate is located here.

In which the atheist was utterly WAXED by the truth! :up:

 

[fool]

In which the atheist was utterly WAXED by the truth! :up:

OR,
bored to within an inch of his life by the trite appeal to consequence and sickened by the TAG regurgitated for the millionth time.

 

[The Berean]

So...can we provide our own refutations of their arguments? Is there something our comments should be limited to?

Knight, you sound like Hugo from Lost.

"Like, dude...."

 

[macguy]

The real "Does God Exist?" debate is located here.

Thanks for sharing Knight! I am curious, has there ever been a successful creationist who won a debate? If not, I guess when I am 16 then I'll try a one-one someday. Or is there a age limit guideline for this?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Thanks for sharing Knight! I am curious, has there ever been a successful creationist who won a debate?

Read the link I supplied. :up:

If not, I guess when I am 16 then I'll try a one-one someday. Or is there a age limit guideline for this?

No age limit.

Just prove yourself to be a worthy opponent and maybe we will give you your shot.

 

[axiom-tech]

Heck, I should do a formal debate w. macguy or something

 

[seer]

Heck, I should do a formal debate w. macguy or something

Or we could discuss my point here...

axiom-tech said:

The truth is that having reliable cog-faculties, is adaptive. A creature with cognitive faculties that produce true conclusions will be more likely to find food, or avoid danger. Adaptive may be the goal, but reliable cognitive faculties is the means which contributes to the goal.

Me:

I would say that this is generally true, but false beliefs may also be adaptive. A man may have an irrational fear of the color orange, he thinks if "orange" touches him, he will turn orange. He therefore runs everytime he sees a tiger - and lives.

Another point, the vast majority of human beings, for the majority of history have believed in god or gods. That there was something "out there" that man was accountable to. Now Axiom contends that this universal belief is false, but it must have an adaptive function or it would not be so ingrained in humanity.

So Axiom has two choices:

1. There really is something "out there" that man is accountable to,

or

2. He has to admit that a universal false belief is adaptive. Which now makes all our beliefs and conclusions suspect.

 

[macguy]

Heck, I should do a formal debate w. macguy or something

:drum: That would be fun.

Read the link I supplied.

Hehe, my mistake since I assumed that threads with "Does God exist?" doesn't deal with the scientific arguments. Okie dokie, i'll do my best to prove worthy of a debate someday..! :thumb: Oh, wait, prove myself worthy to whom? My opponent, TOL or both?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

:drum: That would be fun.



Hehe, my mistake since I assumed that threads with "Does God exist?" doesn't deal with the scientific arguments. Okie dokie, i'll do my best to prove worthy of a debate someday..! :thumb: Oh, wait, prove myself worthy to whom? My opponent, TOL or both?

Would you like to have a one on one with axiom?

 

[seer]

Would you like to have a one on one with axiom?

Yes he would! :banana:

 

[s Allegory]

Well a debate between macguy and axiom would most likely wash the taste of Frank Walton from our collective mouths. You got off easy Knight, Frank called Rich a "taco head" and said horrible things about his wife. Honestly I think he is nothing but a troublemaking troll.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Well a debate between macguy and axiom would most likely wash the taste of Frank Walton from our collective mouths. You got off easy Knight, Frank called Rich a "taco head" and said horrible things about his wife. Honestly I think he is nothing but a troublemaking troll.

I do not know (nor do I want to know) who Frank Walton is.

I thought I was doing a guy a favor during my busy weekend. Boy was I wrong! :doh:

 

[macguy]

Would you like to have a one on one with axiom?

Sure if he wants to that is! Just going to have to wait a bit until I finish with this lengthy response to Ken Miller. Do we have to do that guideline thing?

Yes he would!

:kookoo: How did you know?

 

[seer]

:kookoo: How did you know?

Why do you think the call me "seer?" :wave2:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Do we have to do that guideline thing?

No.

The guideline thing was made up by Frank.

A normal One on One is just like any other thread except it's limited to just two people.

What say ye axiom?
What say ye macguy?

 

[macguy]

Oh good, then I am in!! Now I'll just wait for axiom's move.

 

[axiom-tech]

Yes, of course.

Formal debates do make me nervous, and this was my first. I know frank, and felt fine about it since I know he is more about being contraversial than acedemic. Macguy is intimidating, but I believe i have truth on my side.

My favorite topics:

Freewill?
Do gods exist?

I am willing to do a formal, but macguy, do you have a mic? How do you feel about a voice-discussion? Or (this wont be cool for you guys) joining a philosophy confrence call my friends and I have from time to time.

Also, if we do have a debate i'm willing to do a 'no-rules' since the word limit stuff was nonsense. I understand its in the name of fairness, but again it does not matter how many words you have, if you're position is false then you lose.

Of course, thats why the debate exists, to try and reveal what may or may not be true.

Pick the topic my friend.

 

[macguy]

Formal debates do make me nervous, and this was my first. I know frank, and felt fine about it since I know he is more about being contraversial than acedemic. Macguy is intimidating, but I believe i have truth on my side.

Same here, I don't really know what to expect out of a formal debate as i haven't done one since 2 years ago. Hehe, well I guess we will see what happens!

Freewill?
Do gods exist?

Hmm, I don't necessarily like the term "free" will but maybe we'll save that for another time. You are going to question the free will of God correct? As for do gods exist, must we argue for gods? I was hoping for more along the lines of arguing for the Christian God but that may be fine. I just don't see how multiple gods, which in most stories have great fights among each other would be able to create uniformity in nature. Perhaps sub-gods are possible in the christian view, but I don't think multiple conflicting gods can exist. What say you?

I am willing to do a formal, but macguy, do you have a mic? How do you feel about a voice-discussion? Or (this wont be cool for you guys) joining a philosophy confrence call my friends and I have from time to time.

Well all macs have built-in mics and I have done a lot of casual talking to my friends but am not sure how it would feel to gather my thoughts during a live discussion. As for the conference, wouldn't that be you and friends vs me?

Also, if we do have a debate i'm willing to do a 'no-rules' since the word limit stuff was nonsense.

I agree with you completely since I don't want to be under restrictions as it really stops a informative discussion.

 

[axiom-tech]

Hmm, I don't necessarily like the term "free" will but maybe we'll save that for another time. You are going to question the free will of God correct? As for do gods exist, must we argue for gods?

No, 'do we have freewill' or 'what is a free choice' or 'does determanism confict w. freewill'

not sure how it would feel to gather my thoughts during a live discussion. As for the conference, wouldn't that be you and friends vs me?

no