The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence
that is all
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence
that is all
Nem said:
1. You have no idea to know who knew what in past times. 2. Dunno what you're talking about. Probably ignorance over secondary factors. 3. Awfully convenient. It could also say: Dont say this is a lie cause i dont want anyone to figure it out. 4. This is a personal attack it seems. So, let me tell you two important things about me. First, i WISH there was a God, yet it doesnt. Second, just cause im not religious doesnt mean im not a kind person. 5. Alright... how does any of that proves that god exists? Cause there is nothing in here that you can show me so you prove that god exists. |
how it proves that god exists? I just asked you how a person can know that at that time! the obvious answer is that he got the info through god!
they did not have a Hubble telescope back then and they where not able to film the development of a human in the mothers womb!
R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
![]() |
|
|
Roma said:
how it proves that god exists? I just asked you how a person can know that at that time! the obvious answer is that he got the info through god! |
Really?! Thats the only possible explanation you can come up with? Dont you get the feeling you're skipping a few steps here?
I cant really say anything about what you're saying specifically cause i'd have to have the exact quote and even so, there is no way to know who knew what back then, but i am sure that whatever is written in it is either just a smart ploy of words or its knowledge that wasnt yet widespread.
You really have to realise that the moment someone knows something and the the moment it is officially recognised internationally isnt the same. It is unfortunate that you get so easily fooled, but i guess thats why the people that came up with the story came up with it. It was an easy way to make a living.
Jay520 said: The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence that is all |
That is a tricky way of twisting the concept.
Something you cant prove is therefore not proven. If its not proven, it is false until proven otherwise.
God does not exist until someone can prove he does. Just like with everything else. Be it extra-terrestrial life, time travel, paralel universes, etc. God doesnt have the right to special treatment just cause religious people want him to exist. There is an important difference aswell, wich is that God makes no sense and has no logic, while time travel, extra terrestrial life, paralel universes, etc. are things that make mathemetical sense and can potencially exist.
Nem said:
Something you cant prove is therefore not proven. If its not proven, it is false until proven otherwise. God does not exist until someone can prove he does. Just like with everything else. Be is extra-terrestrial life, time travel, paralel universes, etc. God doesnt have the right to special treatment just cause religions people want to believe he exists. |
Nem said:
I cant really say anything about what you're saying specifically cause i'd have to have the exact quote and even so, there is no way to know who knew what back then, but i am sure that whatever is written in it is either just a smart ploy of words or its knowledge that wasnt yet widespread. You really have to realise that the moment someone knows something and the the moment it is officially recognised internationally isnt the same. It is unfortunate that you get so easily fooled, but i guess thats why the people that came up with the story came up with it. It was an easy way to make a living. |
its ok dude you can believe that something came out of nothing even though that's contradicting science!
you can run around the truth all you want, that has also been written in the Koran but yeah these are predictions of course! Mohammad (pbuh) is the greatest predictor in the history of mankind even though he could not read or write!
end of discussion!
R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
![]() |
|
|
Jay520 said:
No...if something's not proven, then its just that - not proven. An entity's existence is not dependent upon our ability to to prove its existence. |
You're assuming the entitiy exists. That isnt proven. If the existance is not proven, then theres nothing to make us believe it exists.
Jay520 said:
No...if something's not proven, then its just that - not proven. An entity's (or concept's) existence is not dependent upon our ability to to prove its existence. |
Like! that's more open minded!
R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
![]() |
|
|
Nem said:
Something you cant prove is therefore not proven. If its not proven, it is false until proven otherwise. God does not exist until someone can prove he does. Just like with everything else. Be it extra-terrestrial life, time travel, paralel universes, etc. God doesnt have the right to special treatment just cause religious people want him to exist. There is an important difference aswell, wich is that God makes no sense and has no logic, while time travel, extra terrestrial life, paralel universes, etc. are things that make mathemetical sense and can potencially exist. |
So you're saying that gravity didn't exist until it was discovered.
Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.
Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash
Roma said:
its ok dude you can believe that something came out of nothing even though that's contradicting science! |
If you're not familiar with the concept of the creation of the universe, it really isnt my fault. I know how the universe was created, i actually said so already in one of my posts. I am not contradicting science in any way.
The fact that you're brainwashed by the clever lies really isnt my concern aswell. I am guessing you would be shunned in your home country if you didnt, so you dont really have a choice most probably. Another nasty side effect of religion.