The Tomb of Sir Richard

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
As 'woo' as the people who try to claim we never landed on the moon.
I think it's hilarious that the 'devout individualist' would go along with so-called science based solely on agenda-based 'majority opinion.' Bottom line: my sources have letters you personally don't have. Your sources have letters I don't have personally. Again, science is perception. None of us were there, and the 'clues' can be interpreted according to paradigm. You accuse others of negating their arguments with ad hominem attacks while you do the same thing. You cite sources ad nauseum as concrete proof, and cry foul when others do the same. If you want to keep beating your chest, feeling intellectually superior and acting exactly to the contrary, at least try a different approach.

ClintonHammond said:
But if that's a delusion you want to follow, you're welcome to it.
This 'delusion' has healed my body, restored my marriage, got me debt-free, delivered me from physical addiction...so yeah, I'll follow it. What has yours engendered? Genocide, high-school shootings, and immorality? "If we're descended from animals, let's just act like them." "If that person is tantamount to a chemical accident, what true worth do they have?" If you want to espouse the utilitarianism of a PHILOSOPHY, I strongly recommend taking an unabashed look at your own. If your prejudice will allow it.
 
" None of us were there"
Maybe not, but all the results are repeatable, and measurable... Concrete evidence. That's what you lack. Yours is built on uncheckable, subjective so-called experiences (And there's good evidence that seems to indicate those experiences are foibles of the human mind more than anything)

"You cite sources ad nauseum as concrete proof, and cry foul when others do the same."
Because there are sources and there are sources.... If I want to know about car repair, I ask a mechanic. If I need a tooth pulled I go to a dentist. If I'm curious about cosmology, I ask a cosmologist. If anyone could ever show me a HINT of proof that there's a 'soul', and I wanted to know anything about it, I'd ask the Supreme Being that supposedly created it.

"This 'delusion' has healed my body"
Biology did that.... If you want to try to talk about "faith healing", then you may as well be talking dowsing cause it's just as big a load of snake-oil.

"restored my marriage, got me debt-free, delivered me from physical addiction"
You did those... Not "Ghawd"... Not some supposed zombie carpenter.... not anybody else... You did... Likely with the support of people around you who know and probably even love you. No bearded old man in the sky had anything to do with anything. Oh, but that's part of the self-supporting myth... He only helps those that help themselves.... Ya... bull carp.... It's a con-job. A tool for controlling peoples minds and making some do what others want them to do, and pay for the privilege while they're at it

"What has yours engendered? "
Everything... including yours. All human experience and endeavour, for 'good or ill'... that's what 'mine' has engendered...

"a PHILOSOPHY"
I'm still not talking about philosophy here in the least.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Maybe not, but all the results are repeatable, and measurable...
Even your Richard Dawkins said no one's seen it...that it's all detective work. And faulty detective work at that.
ClintonHammond said:
"This 'delusion' has healed my body"
Biology did that.... If you want to try to talk about "faith healing", then you may as well be talking dowsing cause it's just as big a load of snake-oil.
Biology doesn't heal gout in one night. God does.
ClintonHammond said:
"restored my marriage, got me debt-free, delivered me from physical addiction"
You did those... Not "Ghawd"...
Nope, God did it. I did what His Word said...I focused on Him, and my then-estranged wife and I met in the middle. I tithed, gave offerings...and according to Luke 6:38 it was given to me, good measure, pressed-down, shaken together and running over. I went up for prayer afetr smokin three packs a day for ten years and left free...no withdrawal, going on six years smoke free. I'd tried everything else; almost gave myself a heart attck wearing the pack and smoking half a pack at the same time. If I had done these things, they would've been processes. When God does it, it's instantaneous.
ClintonHammond said:
Everything... including yours. All human experience and endeavour, for 'good or ill'... that's what 'mine' has engendered...
A matter of opinion. Again.
ClintonHammond said:
"a PHILOSOPHY"
I'm still not talking about philosophy here in the least.
Oh, I'm sorry...a faith.
 
And round and around it goes... Your swirling the bowl, Doc....

You keep holding up unverifiable subjective experiences as if they were some kind of proof of anything, when all they do is exhibit your delusion over and over and over.

Apparently I don't need to 'defend' or 'support' my 'side', cause you're doing it all for me

"Richard Dawkins said no one's seen it"
Who hasn't seen what???
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
And round and around it goes... Your swirling the bowl, Doc....

You keep holding up unverifiable subjective experiences as if they were some kind of proof of anything, when all they do is exhibit your delusion over and over and over.

Apparently I don't need to 'defend' or 'support' my 'side', cause you're doing it all for me
Odd...I hold up what I have seen as evidence, and you hold up what others haven't seen and call it evidence. I'm failing to see how I lose out on that one.
ClintonHammond said:
"Richard Dawkins said no one's seen it"
Who hasn't seen what???
Read the prior posts, CH. Dawkins admitted that no one has seen evolution, that it's a case of detective work. No one has seen a frog become a cat. No has seen a monkey become a man. Fish have been fossilized giving birth, implying a rapid catastrophe. There are no quantifiable transitional species...only monkey skeletons and old men with arthritis. No one has observed evolution. And no one will.
 

Doc Savage

New member
Dawkins replied, "Evolution has been observed. It's just that it hasn't been observed while it's happening." Dawkins went on to say, "It is rather like a detective coming on a murder after the scene. And you… the detective hasn't actually seen the murder take place, of course. But what you do see is a massive clue ...Circumstantial evidence, but masses of circumstantial evidence. Huge quantities of circumstantial evidence."

Just in case you missed it the first time.
 
I suggest you read the whole book, and not just the introduction...

"I'm failing to see how I lose out on that one."
Credibility for one.... You hold up experiences that are subjective and expect others to believe them.... If I came here and told everybody I could close my eyes, think really hard and fly, do you think anybody here would believe me without proof??? Anybody who did would be a blithering idiot and the first thing I'd do is bilk them out of their life savings!
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
I suggest you read the whole book, and not just the introduction...
My point is proven in the introduction. No one has seen it.
ClintonHammond said:
Credibility for one.... You hold up experiences that are subjective and expect others to believe them....
As do you, as Mr. Dawkins has stated. Circumstantial evidence isn't scientific evidence.
The Finnster said:
Seemingly still are. Both.
How so?
 

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
ClintonHammond said:
Honestly Finn... There are 2 people posting in this duscussion.... and neither of them seem bothered by it....

So what's your beef?
Fine then... you boys just go on with it. But don't expect a proper burial.
 
"My point is proven in the introduction."
Only if you haven't read the whole book

Damnit... what's that called again??? It's a form of essay.... You start off by stating one thing, and through the course of your 'paper' you completely disprove/dismiss your initial statement..... Can't think of the term for it... I used it quite a bit in university myself.... It seemed to me to be a little... ummm... cocky!

"Finally, we agree..."
I've said it time and again Doc.... Just cause I think you're putting your life up a pipe-dream don't mean I don't like you or that we couldn't jaw-flap over a pint or two.... Heh
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
"My point is proven in the introduction."
Only if you haven't read the whole book
Speaking of shoes and feet...
ClintonHammond said:
I've said it time and again Doc.... Just cause I think you're putting your life up a pipe-dream don't mean I don't like you or that we couldn't jaw-flap over a pint or two.... Heh
Well, let me quantify my view of this 'relationship'...I like you. You get on my nerves, I think your logic is faulty, I believe you to be intentionally abrasive...and I look forward daily to our conversations.

But you're still wrong. :gun:
 
" Speaking of shoes and feet..."
Ahh... but -I- have read 'your' book.... and a bunch of others just like it... more than a few times... and a bunch of books about 'your' book.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
There's no such thing as unbiased
Yes, I know...bias being the starting point, rules of logic...my point exactly. Any line of thought has to begin with a presupposition...and that is a point of faith. Scientific evidence is therefore subject to interpretation. Two minds, equally astute but with differing biases, will cast the lights of their respective paradigms on said evidence.
 
Top