Analysis of Christopher Hitchen's argument against God
- Thread starter OPTIONAL777
- Start date
Oh stu once again who are you trying to kid here?
(You insult the intelligence of every reader of the thread except kts)
So you make no claims about your knowledge(how convenient).
Too funny
and your claim was
Your inability to make claims of what you "know" or your "knowledge"(snicker) the more it's revealed your arguments are more ephemeral than a smoke and mirrors routine of a snake-oil salesman.
I'm sure you will go on and on about not claiming any evidence or certainty or need for proof yada yada yada of your "knowledge"
HILARIOUS :eek:
Quote from LORD KAL-EL:
Oh stu once again who are you trying to kid here?
(You insult the intelligence of every reader of the thread except kts)
So you make no claims about your knowledge(how convenient).
Too funny
and your claim was
Your inability to make claims of what you "know" or your "knowledge"(snicker) the more it's revealed your arguments are more ephemeral than a smoke and mirrors routine of a snake-oil salesman.
I'm sure you will go on and on about not claiming any evidence or certainty or need for proof yada yada yada of your "knowledge"
HILARIOUS :eek:
So this is the " you have no belief therefore you have belief" religious argument only this time it's " you didn't make a claim therefore you made a claim"
That's the best you have? Really?
Pardon me but why did you omit where you made the claim:
that you now declare as though you didn't make that claim?
Oh dear. It looks like it is the best you have.
It sounds like you could use some help with this.
Here is the equivalent with less words.
Your question
Do you know?
My Answer
Yes.
Your response
na na na na...you made a claim.
If someone asks "do you know" , about anything and gets the answer "yes" ..... it's an answer before anything else.
Should they say "yes" or "no" , you are trying to suggest they can only be claiming, not answering, that they do or don't know. That's what's hilarious.
But then again, pro-religious arguments always seem to aim towards absurd reasoning, like a moth to a flame.
It sounds like you could use some help with this.
Here is the equivalent with less words.
Your question
Do you know?
My Answer
Yes.
Your response
na na na na...you made a claim.
If someone asks "do you know" , about anything and gets the answer "yes" ..... it's an answer before anything else.
Should they say "yes" or "no" , you are trying to suggest they can only be claiming, not answering, that they do or don't know. That's what's hilarious.
But then again, pro-religious arguments always seem to aim towards absurd reasoning, like a moth to a flame.
+1
Intellectual honesty is not on your side stu, anybody can see that you "claimed " to "know".
Found here
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=215062&perpage=6&pagenumber=47
Found here
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=215062&perpage=6&pagenumber=47
you are hopelessly trapped in semantics aren't you
While it's been mildly entertaining to destroy the arguments of fools (stu , kts) it's inevitable that virtually anything is more productive use of my time at some point.
I'm sure stu's "god" bots will sniff out atheists getting their butts kicked in another thread or elsewhere on the net so I'm sure he will be back ( it's his Raison d'être)with the same drivel of non-assertions and intellectual dishonesty.
I'm sure stu's "god" bots will sniff out atheists getting their butts kicked in another thread or elsewhere on the net so I'm sure he will be back ( it's his Raison d'être)with the same drivel of non-assertions and intellectual dishonesty.