Alex Jones, talk radio host

Alex Jones, talk radio host

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
23 May 17

FMF: Do you believe the explanation you offer is "reasonable" and therefore must also be "reasonable" to everyone who hears you offer it?

Originally posted by chaney3
A 'creator' is reasonable yes.
Is it the only "reasonable" explanation in your view?

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
23 May 17

Originally posted by FMF
Is it the only "reasonable" explanation in your view?
What are the options?

Luck and coincidence.

Creation.

Do you have another?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3
Unlike you, I don't keep records and notes of what people say. I also don't spend time scrolling through posting history.

Ghost will correct me as needed.
If you can't remember what he said, then why did you characterize him as saying that the origin of life was "a random roll of the cosmic dice". That's a very specific turn of phrase you have chosen to use. You can hear the words spinning as they glide across the forum baize. Even if you don't recall what he said, do you believe this characterization of yours - of what he said - is fair and honest?

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28791
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3
Randomness, coincidence and luck.

The universe and humans came to be with a random roll of the cosmic dice.
Please link to where I have stated this.

Thanks.

(You're more likely to stumble across where I freely acknowledge I don't have the answers, but don't as a consequence feel any pressure to accept unbelievable alternatives).

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
23 May 17

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Please link to where I have stated this.

Thanks.

(You're more likely to stumble across where I freely acknowledge I don't have the answers, but don't as a consequence feel any pressure to accept unbelievable alternatives).
As I said to FMF, I am going by memory. We got into some ugly disputes in the 'Moon' thread, where randomness and coincidence were key words.
Coin flips were involved.

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
23 May 17
1 edit

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
How do you know it can't? Just because in your limited experience you've never encountered self-assembling and self-repairing 'space-ships' doesn't mean they don't exist. Your experience of the universe is really entirely insignificant, you have absolutely no idea what goes on in most of it. Why do you pretend to knowledge you don't have? If you are ...[text shortened]... out conscious input somewhere in the vast expanse of time and space that comprises our universe.
Do you have evidence of a self assembled and self-repairing space-ship?

Do you have evidence of a painting as intricate in detail as the Mona Lisa that painted itself?

If not, why do you rule out the possibility that something as functional and intricate as the human body could have been designed when everything around you with remotely as much functionality is clearly the product of design?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3 to Ghost of a Duke
We got into some ugly disputes in the 'Moon' thread, where randomness and coincidence were key words.
Coin flips were involved.
Ghost of a Duke used the expression "coin flips"?

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28791
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3
I think he is secretly an agnostic, but, that's for another debate entirely.
I have told you plainly that I don't view the existence of God as a possibility. Please explain how this way of thinking is concordant with agnosticism. Thanks.

(I think you are secretly an abandoned flip flop, but that's also an entirely different debate).

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28791
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3
As I said to FMF, I am going by memory. We got into some ugly disputes in the 'Moon' thread, where randomness and coincidence were key words.
Coin flips were involved.
I believe the flipping was all yours sir.

a
Not actually a cat

The Flat Earth

Joined
09 Apr 10
Moves
14988
23 May 17
2 edits

Originally posted by dj2becker
Do you have evidence of a self assembled and self-repairing space-ship?

Do you have evidence of a painting as intricate in detail as the Mona Lisa that painted itself?

If not, why do you rule out the possibility that something as functional and intricate as the human body could have been designed when everything around you with remotely as much functionality is clearly the product of design?
Do you have evidence that there are no self-assembling or self-repairing 'space-ships'?

Do you have evidence that there are no such intricate but naturally originated 'paintings'?

If you learn a little more about biology you will no doubt come to the realisation that it clearly isn't the product of design, unless the designer is a combination of incredible genius and bone-headed half-wit.

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
23 May 17

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I believe the flipping was all yours sir.
No, you compared the random flipping of coins landing on heads or tails, to the universe, somehow, I don't remember entirely.
But, I do remember Elvis burnt toast, but not the context.

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28791
23 May 17

Originally posted by chaney3
No, you compared the random flipping of coins landing on heads or tails, to the universe, somehow, I don't remember entirely.
But, I do remember Elvis burnt toast, but not the context.
Yes, that was a discussion about 'probability'. (In short, the universe is so big that it was only logical that every now and then the conditions would be just right to sustain life).

Not sure why you have veered off into randomness.

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
23 May 17

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Do you have evidence that there are no self-assembling or self-repairing 'space-ships'.

Do you have evidence that there are no such intricate but naturally originated 'paintings'?

If you learn a little more about biology you will no doubt come to the realisation that it clearly isn't the product of design, unless the designer is a combination of incredible genius and bone-headed half-wit.
Are you claiming that they do exist? If so where is your evidence?

What exact part of Biology brought you to the realisation that you are clearly not the product of design?

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
23 May 17

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Yes, that was a discussion about 'probability'. (In short, the universe is so big that it was only logical that every now and then the conditions would be just right to sustain life).

Not sure why you have veered off into randomness.
Yes, I said your 'conditions' were quite 'lucky' for us humans....but you didn't like the word 'luck' and prefer instead the more scientific term of 'probability'.

But, it's luck. (Without a Creator, that is).

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
23 May 17

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke to chaney3
Not sure why you have veered off into randomness.
...or into some cosmic entity throwing dice, for that matter.