Disproving atheists in 82 seconds

stu · Mar 20, 2012

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:
stu

Let me know when you have conclusive proof, there is no God, until then I'll just consider it your opinion.

Thanks in advance

PT

Let me know when you have conclusive proof, that I do not have conclusive proof there is no God. Until then I'll just consider your opinion has nothing to say.

Many thanks.

jem · Mar 20, 2012

Stu's - trolll sychosis is now complete now - stu denies he
stated -

"There is plenty of science showing life from non life".

cgroupman · Mar 20, 2012

Will you two just get a room already, lol. You can't seem to get along without each other. Regardless of what you say, no one can prove that God exists, or that he doesn't. A lot of smart people have tried for eons.

c

jem · Mar 20, 2012

Quote from cgroupman:

Will you two just get a room already, lol. You can't seem to get along without each other. Regardless of what you say, no one can prove that God exists, or that he doesn't. A lot of smart people have tried for eons.

c

And I have no problem with the later part of what you just wrote.
I do not argue with reasonable statements.

Publicus · Mar 21, 2012

Quote from cgroupman:

Will you two just get a room already, lol. You can't seem to get along without each other. Regardless of what you say, no one can prove that God exists, or that he doesn't. A lot of smart people have tried for eons.

c

Sort of.

The people who have it, know it. The issue comes in proving it to those outside of yourself.

Trader666 · Mar 22, 2012

Poor STUpid lying troll... you altered my links in a desperate attempt to hide your STUpidity. What a pathetic loser you are... did you really "think" that would work?

No substance? Please. This clearly shows you got the 96% / 4% split of dark matter & dark energy versus everything else BACKWARDS.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2952513#post2952513

Quote from stu:

As predicted. Infantile name calling, no substance, no argument.
You only ever troll the false assertion I was wrong. You can't, won't, don't know how to show or explain yourself on how I am supposed to be wrong, despite the many explanations for why you are wrong.

And this clearly shows that YOU got the terminology wrong.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3362824#post3362824

Quote from stu:

Same old false assertion. You can't, won't, don't know how to support the ridiculous terminology you use.

Wrong again, STUpid. The calculation is Penrose's and is in at least one of his books. Have your mommy show you how to use google next time she changes your diaper.

Quote from stu:
You were talking about something called "Penrose's well known calculation". That "calculation" is a creationists calculation. Not Penrose's.

stu · Mar 23, 2012

I 'quoted' your links as you posted them. You're confused. It's Jem who alters what people say. Face it, you two have entirely lost the plot.
You've nothing, no substance. You're only repeating the same dumb mantras of meaningless baseless assertion laced with infantile insult.
There is no "Penrose's well known calculation". Creationists imagine such things when they see anything that can be made into something it is not.

Quote from Trader666:

Poor STUpid lying troll... you altered my links in a desperate attempt to hide your STUpidity. What a pathetic loser you are... did you really "think" that would work?

No substance? Please. This clearly shows you got the 96% / 4% split of dark matter & dark energy versus everything else BACKWARDS.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2952513#post2952513And this clearly shows that YOU got the terminology wrong.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3362824#post3362824
Wrong again, STUpid. The calculation is Penrose's and is in at least one of his books. Have your mommy show you how to use google next time she changes your diaper.

stu · Mar 23, 2012

Quote from cgroupman:

Will you two just get a room already, lol. You can't seem to get along without each other. Regardless of what you say, no one can prove that God exists, or that he doesn't. A lot of smart people have tried for eons.

c

Despite what you say, as you cannot prove God does exist, and as you also cannot prove 'it can't be proved God doesn't exist' - that would leave no reason or rational argument to base a possibility that It does exist.

Trader666 · Mar 23, 2012

Good dog. Your pathological lying only bolsters my case, so keep it up.

Here's my post with the original links that work:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3478007#post3478007

And here's your "quoted" version where you altered the links so they wouldn't work:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3479820#post3479820

Penrose's well known calculation isn't known to ignoranuses like you, so it's no surprise that you're clueless about it.

Quote from stu:

I 'quoted' your links as you posted them. You're confused. It's Jem who alters what people say. Face it, you two have entirely lost the plot.
You've nothing, no substance. You're only repeating the same dumb mantras of meaningless baseless assertion laced with infantile insult.
There is no "Penrose's well known calculation". Creationists imagine such things when they see anything that can be made into something it is not.

stu · Mar 23, 2012

Quote from Trader666:

Good dog. Your pathological lying only bolsters my case, so keep it up.

Here's my post with the original links that work:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3478007#post3478007

And here's your "quoted" version where you altered the links so they wouldn't work:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3479820#post3479820

Penrose's well known calculation isn't known to ignoranuses like you, so it's no surprise that you're clueless about it.

I changed nothing you idiot. The links are identical.
You've no argument , no substance, now you're blaming me because links won't work in the quote function.

Claiming everything is wrong just because it doesn't fit with your own contorted ideas,like a wino caught in the act of stealing booze who, with the bottle in his hand, can only summon denial to shout ..."what booze".

And as a creationist you can only claim Penrose has a well known calculation, but cannot explain how it is his , or how it is well known, or even show a calculation that works. That would be a first for you.