Atheist Delusion

Originally posted by FMF
Because you have challenged divegeester.

I challenged his hypocrisy, not his 'brutal honesty'.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
The geester is flourishing under your tutelage.

The things that might cause people to question your state of mind are things that you yourself are wholly responsible for - things you say, things you ignore, the bizarre repetition etc.. You can't pin this stuff on what people have said to you or about you.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I challenged his hypocrisy, not his 'brutal honesty'.

If he thinks you are possibly mentally disturbed, how is it "hypocrisy" for him to come out and say it?

Originally posted by FMF
The things that might cause people to question your state of mind are things that you yourself are wholly responsible for - things you say, things you ignore, the bizarre repetition etc.. You can't pin this stuff on what people have said to you or about you.

The geester brought this on himself when he dubbed himself your lapdog. You conveniently seem to have forgotten that.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
The geester brought this on himself when he dubbed himself your lapdog. You conveniently seem to have forgotten that.

Brought "what" on himself? What are you on about?

Originally posted by FMF
If he thinks you are possibly mentally disturbed, how is it "hypocrisy" for him to come out and say it?

Because that doesn't really portray him as having the 'humility' or 'intellectual empathy' that he was pouting about.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Because that doesn't really portray him as having the 'humility' or 'intellectual empathy' that he was pouting about.

Well maybe your perception of how divegeester "portrays" himself is distorted by the same things that distort your intellectual and interpersonal behaviour here.

Originally posted by FMF
Well maybe your perception of how divegeester "portrays" himself is distorted by the same things that distort your intellectual and interpersonal behaviour here.

And maybe your perception of how divegeester "portrays" himself is distorted by an emotional bond that exists between an owner and its lapdog. 😵

Or maybe you have met in real life. Who knows. 😉

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And maybe your perception of how divegeester "portrays" himself is distorted by an emotional bond that exists between an owner and its lapdog. 😵

Interesting response.

Originally posted by FMF
Interesting response.

Many a true word is spoken in jest. 😉

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Obviously claiming ignorance is the easy way out, that way you don't have to commit to anything.

I think me admitting I do not know on this matter is a product of my honesty while 'claiming certainty' in order to "commit" would be a dishonest thing for me to do. Do you agree?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And the irony is that you don't notice the hypocrisy of someone who speaks about humility and intellectual empathy minutes after saying I may very well be mentally disturbed.

That's hardly ironic. Furthermore, as evidenced from your posting, you appear to be here solely in order to bait and troll people who don't share your particular brand of religious beliefs. Do you know why you do this? Does this seem to you to be typical of 'christian' behaviour? Can you see what I'm getting at here?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Sure, eternal time would wear down everything. An eternal God doesn't wear down.

We date the universe because we believe it has a beginning, you want to suggest that all
of those dating methods are in error? The fact that people disagree on what the age is,
still shows that none believe it is eternal regardless of what date we apply to it.

I think you are just not familiar with modern theories about an eternal universe. Such a concept doesn't mean the universe is unchanging or has always been in the form it is now. It could also mean that the universe existed 'before ' the 'big bang' and that existence is a series or 'big bangs' and 'big crunches.' Just like your eternal God, such a universe wouldn't 'wear down' as it is continuously refreshed, 'reborn.'

You are simply wrong in your statement that ' none believe it is eternal regardless of what date we apply to it.' A little internet surfing will show you such.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I think you are just not familiar with modern theories about an eternal universe. Such a concept doesn't mean the universe is unchanging or has always been in the form it is now. It could also mean that the universe existed 'before ' the 'big bang' and that existence is a series or 'big bangs' and 'big crunches.' Just like your eternal God, such a un ...[text shortened]... s eternal regardless of what date we apply to it.' A little internet surfing will show you such.

Describe the version you like at a high level.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Describe the version you like at a high level.

You do realize there is no definitive answer yet so those theories are only that, theories. Like the one saying our universe is just a daughter universe of a parent universe where a black hole in the parent universe becomes a white hole in ours which we percieve as the big bang. And our universe would have daughter universes where a black hole in ours turns into a white hole in another universe and so forth.

There is evidence, not terribly strong yet but some evidence in the CBR where it looks like MAYBE a universe outside our bubble universe bumped into ours leaving a mark on the CBR backround.

At least that one has some kind of evidence.

Then there is string theory which requires at least 10 mabye 11 dimensions, some of which, according to that theory, are curled up so tiny they don't interact with our dimensions. There are experiments ongoing testing the inverse square law of gravity at closer and closer distances apart from some masses. The idea is if you have some gravitation at distance X, at distance 1/2 X the attraction should be 4 times greater and so forth. They are looking for a variance of that rule, if it turns out at short distances the inverse square law no longer is the rule, they would take that as evidence of some interference from extra dimensions. So far to no avail, following inverse square law down to about 100 micron separation which so far is as close as we can get and still get valid gravitational attraction numbers. They want to go to 1 micron or better but come back in ten years for that🙂

BTW, have you had time to traverse my soundcloud stuff yet? I am up to 56 tracks there now, the latest batch tunes I wrote for grandkids.