Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

Again, your title said: "Admittedly Ignorant" -- meaning you know nothing or next to nothing about evolution -- "But Still Unconvinced." LOL. That means you know crap-all about epistemology. If you're ignorant, then you educate yourself. Then, if you still don't understand it, you come back with "Well Studied,
But Still Unconvinced." It's okay to be incredulous, TD. Lots of scientists are because it's an incredible story. Purposefully ignorant is a whole other matter. That's unbecoming of a Christian, I hear. ;)

Once again, you're making an incorrect assumption about my entire knowledge of epistemology based on the title of a thread. As I said before, my skepticism of evolution has nothing to do with my ignorance of it. Your only evidence for your stupid claims is an assumption based upon a misunderstanding of a thread title. I believe I accurately summed up your stupidity in a previous thread, how did it go? oh ya.

So you took 1 scoop of Christianity
1 scoop of skepticism of evolutionarily theory.
added Pai stupidity, ignorance, assumption, idiocy, and illogical thought.
Mixed it all together.
and you came out with the the stupid, ridiculous, idiotic, idea that my skepticism of the natural history record and evolutionary biology [b][i][u]is based on admitted ignorance that was enforced early on by a religious infrastructure (family/church/Christian books)

Gospel of Darwin is the terminology of fundamentalists who fear their primate lineage (eg the Robertsons and MacArthurs). Strobel et al brainwashed you with derivative kindergartenish crap. It's not really your fault. But you ARE missing out on true appreciation of the general revelation. It's fascinating.

'Gospel of darwin' is an insult that accurately describes people like you that treat evolution as such. It has nothing to do with fear or fundamentalism despite your idiotic assumptions. I find it hilarious and a testament to your religious adherence to the cult of darwinism that you make these incorrect and inaccurate assumptions based upon the title of a thread. Keep it up.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

You're assuming I knowingly posted a fake video. This is incorrect.

On the conmtrary, I think you believed it was a real miracle. Which is, I would say, more damning.

All I simply did was link a miracle caught on camera, I neither care nor do I know if the miracle is fake or not, but the real point is that the Christians experiencing the miracle on the video and on the website think it is genuine, thus you have no point at all. All you're doing is repeating yourself and ignoring what I say.

The point is that atheists reject this so-called miracle because it is so clearly a fake. And it would seem to me the Christians on TWeb also reject this so-called miracle because it is so clearly a fake, given that no one is prepared to go on record as saying it is probably genuine.

So get this: Atheist and Christians on TWeb agree that this is a fake, because it looks like a fake, and not (necessarily) because atheists automatically reject all claims of miracles.

Originally posted by Socratici Viri

Good post, Pai, I agree with much of what you are saying. :)

It's always encouraging to hear that conservative Christians exist who don't fear the general revelation. You did your homework. You are rare, SV.

BTW, here's TD's "Admittingly [sic] Ignorant But Still Unconvinced" thread. Watch him ask Have you ever seen a dog give birth to a non-dog? That's practically his core objection.

My heart goes out to you that you must deal with brethren like that. You must be tired of being accused of "worshiping Darwin" just because you understand that creation entailed something far different than a pop-up book Genesis.

TD, you're a primate. The sooner you come to grips with that, the sooner you'll be a more effective witness for your religion. Epistemological integrity is key.

Originally posted by The Pixie

On the conmtrary, I think you believed it was a real miracle. Which is, I would say, more damning.

Just like your other stupid assumptions it is not only incorrect, irrelevant to the point at hand, but you also have not a shred of evidence to support it.

The point is that atheists reject this so-called miracle because it is so clearly a fake. And it would seem to me the Christians on TWeb also reject this so-called miracle because it is so clearly a fake, given that no one is prepared to go on record as saying it is probably genuine.

Straw man. How about dealing with my original point? which would be atheists shouldn't be asking nor expecting for miracles on camera because they will both not be impressed and look for and favor an alternate explanation thus making it pointless for miracles to be put on camera, thus answering ones question as to why God might be 'camera shy.'

You're incapable of dealing with my original point, focusing on nonsense like the specific miracle I posted, but because you're so incredibly dimwitted you don't understand that regardless of the miracle posted it shows the process of what atheists do when shown miracles caught on camera. They're not impressed and look for and favor alternate explanations which jaecp proved.

So get this: Atheist and Christians on TWeb agree that this is a fake, because it looks like a fake, and not (necessarily) because atheists automatically reject all claims of miracles.

Not only are you missing the point I find it hilarious that you are concluding that Christians on Tweb agree it is fake without a single Christian agreeing with you here(not that it even matters). Secondly, your stupid assertion about it is fake because it looks like a fake just further proves my point, like I said, rather than be impressed about a miracle claim you will not be impressed and look for and favor an alterrnate explanation. Your dumb claim about it being 'because atheist automatically reject all claims of miracles' is another one of your stupid straw men since I never said nor insinuated nor implied atheists 'automatically' reject all claims of miracles. In fact, I said it many times in this very thread they don't automatically reject miracles, they reject after a process which involves searching for and favoring an aleternate explanation. Like always when you try to prove one of your stupid points, you completely and utterly fail.

Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

TD, you're a primate. The sooner you come to grips with that, the sooner you'll be a more effective witness for your religion. Epistemological integrity is key.

And you're an illogical ignorant darwinian cultist. The sooner you come to grips with that the more credibility you'll have and intelligent discussion with you will be less of a headache. Logical, intellectual, and epistemological integrity is key.

Originally posted by TD

Just like your other stupid assumptions it is not only incorrect, irrelevant to the point at hand, but you also have not a shred of evidence to support it.

From the quoted part of your text in the OP, you clearly believed it to be a miracle, notably this snippet

Originally posted by TD

even if you were to see a miracle on camera you still wouldn't be impressed. Watch.

Miracle of the sun at Medjugorje

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlPHHl0AjZk

You clearly believed that it was a real miracle.

Originally posted by TD

Straw man. How about dealing with my original point? which would be atheists shouldn't be asking nor expecting for miracles on camera because they will both not be impressed and look for and favor an alternate explanation thus making it pointless for miracles to be put on camera, thus answering ones question as to why God might be 'camera shy.'

You're incapable of dealing with my original point, focusing on nonsense like the specific miracle I posted, but because you're so incredibly dimwitted you don't understand that regardless of the miracle posted it shows the process of what atheists do when shown miracles caught on camera. They're not impressed and look for and favor alternate explanations which jaecp proved.

Why should we be impressed with false miracles? Or is this a real one?

Originally posted by TD

Not only are you missing the point I find it hilarious that you are concluding that Christians on Tweb agree it is fake without a single Christian agreeing with you here(not that it even matters). Secondly, your stupid assertion about it is fake because it looks like a fake just further proves my point, like I said, rather than be impressed about a miracle claim you will not be impressed and look for and favor an alterrnate explanation. Your dumb claim about it being 'because atheist automatically reject all claims of miracles' is another one of your stupid straw men since I never said nor insinuated nor implied atheists 'automatically' reject all claims of miracles. In fact, I said it many times in this very thread they don't automatically reject miracles, they reject after a process which involves searching for and favoring an aleternate explanation. Like always when you try to prove one of your stupid points, you completely and utterly fail.

We can infer that other TWeb christians think its a fake, because even people like LPoT and MM won't come to your defense this time, let alone the more liberal christians that post in apologetics.

Re: Bold

You started using the word claim, obviously this is to somehow distance yourself from posting what you thought was a slam dunk in your argument against me.

And we can conclude its not a real miracle when we click any of the links I posted before

We favor an alternate explanation? The alternate explanation is to "miracle" would be "natural causes", so since we favor natural causes, and the alternate is apparently "miracle", then obviously your explanation is "miracle"

Ergo, because you can avoid answering directly, but we can still tell what you mean, you believed that the "miracle of the sun" was in fact so.

Originally posted by TD

And you're an illogical ignorant darwinian cultist. The sooner you come to grips with that the more credibility you'll have and intelligent discussion with you will be less of a headache. Logical, intellectual, and epistemological integrity is key.

This is the kind of thing that explains why you can't get any christians to defend you in this thread. "Ignorant darwinian cultist", wait... what?

Originally posted by Jaecp

From the quoted part of your text in the OP, you clearly believed it to be a miracle, notably this snippet



You clearly believed that it was a real miracle.

That is your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. It isn't even right, let alone clear. Try again half wit. You seem to think your stupid misunderstands of what I right are evidence for your assertions, it is a testament to your stupidity you think so. Furthermore, as I said before, my point stands whether or not I beleive it is a miracle so you're focusing on something completely irrelevant to my point.

Why should we be impressed with false miracles? Or is this a real one?

Missing the point you ignorant half wit. I'll repost it:

You're incapable of dealing with my original point, focusing on nonsense like the specific miracle I posted, but because you're so incredibly dimwitted you don't understand that regardless of the miracle posted it shows the process of what atheists do when shown miracles caught on camera. They're not impressed and look for and favor alternate explanations which jaecp proved.

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES. Furthermore half wit, you didn't know it was fake until you actually went to look for an alternate explanation, which once again proves my point. What do you have to refute this? That is the point and both you and pixie will continue to ignore it.

We can infer that other TWeb christians think its a fake, because even people like LPoT and MM won't come to your defense this time, let alone the more liberal christians that post in apologetics.

I guess according to your idiotic logic we can infer that other atheists think it isn't fake because yo lunch, pin head pat, CWC and other atheists aren't coming in here and saying it is a fake. Loving that self taught logic you ignorant half wit. Furthermore this has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made, you do love to hit your straw man, and like Pixie you both continually ignore that there are various Christians that DO think it is a miracle. So, not only is this irrelevant to the point I am making, it also shows your utter stupidity in regards to matter at hand.

Re: Bold

You started using the word claim, obviously this is to somehow distance yourself from posting what you thought was a slam dunk in your argument against me.

I started using the word claim because that is what every single miracle is until it is proven to be one stupid. It is a slam dunk argument against you which I've proven many times, I'll repost it.

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES. Furthermore half wit, you didn't know it was fake until you actually went to look for an alternate explanation, which once again proves my point. What do you have to refute this?

That would be my original position which both you and pixie are unable to do anything against. You continue to focus on irrelevent things like whether or not I beleive it is a miracle or not, or whether other Christians think it is a miracle or not.

And we can conclude its not a real miracle when we click any of the links I posted before

You can conclude no such thing stupid. This would be your self taught logic at work. All you've done is find an natural explanation, you have not proved in the slightest that the one on camera is not a miracle (I predict yet another stupid comment you will draw from this).

We favor an alternate explanation? The alternate explanation is to "miracle" would be "natural causes", so since we favor natural causes, and the alternate is apparently "miracle", then obviously your explanation is "miracle"

Ergo, because you can avoid answering directly, but we can still tell what you mean, you believed that the "miracle of the sun" was in fact so.

Man your stupidity is always so entertaining. First off you have tacitly conceded that you DO favor alternate explanations, so thank you for once again proving my point. You're assuming that because I used the word 'miracle' it means I believe it is a miracle. Try again stupid. That's called begging the question. As I said before, I neither know nor care if it is a miracle or not. Just because I type the word 'miracle' doesn't mean I believe it is a miracle. Not to mention none of this has anything to do with the point I am making.

This is the kind of thing that explains why you can't get any christians to defend you in this thread. "Ignorant darwinian cultist", wait... what?

It is a testament to your stupidity that you're equating the validity of my points to the lack of people defending me in a thread.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

How about my original point? which would be atheists shouldn't be asking nor expecting for miracles on camera because they will both not be impressed and look for and favor an alternate explanation thus making it pointless for miracles to be put on camera, thus answering ones question as to why God might be 'camera shy.'

Similarly, atheists shouldn't expect God to perform a miracle for them personally because they'd rather believe that it was some unexplained natural phenomenon, or a hoax, or that they simply imagined it. In short, you can't convince someone who is dead-set on remaining unconvinced.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

And you're an illogical ignorant darwinian cultist. The sooner you come to grips with that the more credibility you'll have and intelligent discussion with you will be less of a headache. Logical, intellectual, and epistemological integrity is key.

Epistemelogy requires logic and a robust intellect. This is why your religion agrees that retards and children get a free pass, not having the intellect to reason. If you understood epistemology, you'd know that these components are essential to each other. They are not mutually exclusive.

Evolution requires a robust intellect to understand. Many have that capacity. That you don't understand it is no argument. It'd be like me saying I don't understand gravity, therefore it is ridiculous to believe. Intelligent Sucking makes much more sense. That's kinda where you're at now.

You are a primate, and that scares you. Get a grip.

Originally posted by TD

That is your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. It isn't even right, let alone clear. Try again half wit. You seem to think your stupid misunderstands of what I right are evidence for your assertions, it is a testament to your stupidity you think so. Furthermore, as I said before, my point stands whether or not I beleive it is a miracle so you're focusing on something completely irrelevant to my point.

No. Whether you posted it thinking it was real is quite important, as pixie laid out already.

Originally posted by TD

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES. Furthermore half wit, you didn't know it was fake until you actually went to look for an alternate explanation, which once again proves my point. What do you have to refute this? That is the point and both you and pixie will continue to ignore it.

So you do believe it was a miracle then?

I didn't know it was fake until I looked into it.Point? Should I just accept it as a miracle without thinking about it? Should I be impressed? Why? How else is one supposed to confirm a miracle(or anything, really), like the one the thread this is an offshoot of was about, except by looking into it?

I agree with Sea,

Originally posted by Sea

After peeking at the other thread, it seems it's more like you're saying Atheists won't ever consider video persuasive evidence of a miracle if they doubt any video someone claims is evidence of a miracle.

In other words. No, I'm not favoring an alternative explanation. I am investigating what the truth of the matter is. In this instance your supposed "gotcha" miracle ended up being a common camera glitch.

Its like Pixie said over here

Originally posted by Pixie

Surely this is fundamental to your position. If you think it was a miracle, you have an argument. If you do not, then your position collapses.

Or farther down

Originally posted by Pixie

On the other hand, if you present an obviously fake miracle, a miracle claim you reject, then why pretend that you have achieved anything when Jaecp agrees with you?

So yeah, even though you say, over and over, that your opinion on the miracle's veracity is unimportant we can all tell you believed it to be true, and yet, swear up and down that it doesn't matter. Why?

Originally posted by TD

I guess according to your idiotic logic we can infer that other atheists think it isn't fake because yo lunch, pin head pat, CWC and other atheists aren't coming in here and saying it is a fake. Loving that self taught logic you ignorant half wit. Furthermore this has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made, you do love to hit your straw man, and like Pixie you both continually ignore that there are various Christians that DO think it is a miracle. So, not only is this irrelevant to the point I am making, it also shows your utter stupidity in regards to matter at hand.

None as compared to a half dozen? Doesn't work TD, tisk tisk.

Where are they? These christian that think its a miracle? All MM came in was to reiterate some "willful atheist" talking point and didn't bother to help you out in the slightest.

Originally posted by TD

I started using the word claim because that is what every single miracle is until it is proven to be one stupid. It is a slam dunk argument against you which I've proven many times, I'll repost it.

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES. Furthermore half wit, you didn't know it was fake until you actually went to look for an alternate explanation, which once again proves my point. What do you have to refute this?

That would be my original position which both you and pixie are unable to do anything against. You continue to focus on irrelevent things like whether or not I beleive it is a miracle or not, or whether other Christians think it is a miracle or not.

That isn't your original position. This is the position you've taken up, by backpedaling over the veracity of the miracle after I exposed it for what it was, to claim that the whole scenario was a trap :-/ I already replied to the bulk above.

Originally posted by TD

You can conclude no such thing stupid. This would be your self taught logic at work. All you've done is find an natural explanation, you have not proved in the slightest that the one on camera is not a miracle (I predict yet another stupid comment you will draw from this).

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...

Since when are miracles repeatable by pointing a camera at the sun?

Re: Bold, yet another indicator that you believed it was a miracle.

Originally posted by TD

Man your stupidity is always so entertaining. First off you have tacitly conceded that you DO favor alternate explanations, so thank you for once again proving my point. You're assuming that because I used the word 'miracle' it means I believe it is a miracle. Try again stupid. That's called begging the question. As I said before, I neither know nor care if it is a miracle or not. Just because I type the word 'miracle' doesn't mean I believe it is a miracle. Not to mention none of this has anything to do with the point I am making.

Going with does not mean favoring.

And no, we figure you believed it was a miracle because your posts reveal this. That or you won't admit you don't think it was a miracle at all and your whole point breaks down because you agree with me about the truth of the miracle you linked to.

Your backpedaling away from what you thought was a great comeback to me saying god was camera shy, and now you won't let it go. Its rather obvious man.

Originally posted by TD

It is a testament to your stupidity that you're equating the validity of my points to the lack of people defending me in a thread.

I did not equate the validity of your posts to a lack of people defending you.

I'm saying that no one wants to defend you because you make a fool out of yourself with comments like that, and others don't want to be associated with you.

Originally posted by MM

Similarly, atheists shouldn't expect God to perform a miracle for them personally because they'd rather believe that it was some unexplained natural phenomenon, or a hoax, or that they simply imagined it. In short, you can't convince someone who is dead-set on remaining unconvinced.

This isn't what the thread, or the tangent from the "67th lourdes miracle" bit was about.

MM, do you think the video is of an authentic miracle?

Admit this proves miracles or admit you would never consider photographic evidence.

Originally posted by Jaecp

No. Whether you posted it thinking it was real is quite important, as pixie laid out already.

I see you've ignored the following:

That is your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. It isn't even right, let alone clear. Try again half wit. You seem to think your stupid misunderstands of what I right are evidence for your assertions, it is a testament to your stupidity you think so.


Furthermore I already refuted what pixie laid out. Try again you ignorant half wit.

So you do believe it was a miracle then?

Irrelevant to the point and also answered already.

I didn't know it was fake until I looked into it.Point? Should I just accept it as a miracle without thinking about it? Should I be impressed? Why? How else is one supposed to confirm a miracle(or anything, really), like the one the thread this is an offshoot of was about, except by looking into it?

The point is you stupid half witted coward, is you had to look into before deciding it was fake. I asked you to refute what I said and you responded with asking questions and asking how else is someone supposed to confirm a miracle and other stupid questions. These questions are not refutations to what I said you stupid half wit. So, once again, what do you have to refute this?

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES.

I agree with Sea,

Sea didn't say anything against my original position which I pointed out in post 9 you stupid half wit. The original position is what you, him, and pixie continue to ignore because you cannot refute it, which is why you continue to concentrate on irrelevant things that have nothing to do with the original point.

In other words. No, I'm not favoring an alternative explanation. I am investigating what the truth of the matter is. In this instance your supposed "gotcha" miracle ended up being a common camera glitch.

Yes you are favoring an alternative explanation you stupid half wit. It being a miracle is one explanation and camera glitch is an explanation alternative to that one and guess which one you're favoring stupid? Secondly you're misrepresenting my position since I said look for and favor an alternate explanation which is exactly what you did. Your investigation is exactly what my point is you stupid half witted ignorant moron, like I said you proved my point for me and refuted yourself, but you aren't responding to my original point, just talking about irrelevent things and straw men.

Its like Pixie said over here

Or farther down

Refuted already in post #156, 158 and 160. It is a testament to your stupidity that you take what was already refuted and use it to support your own stuipd assertions

So yeah, even though you say, over and over, that your opinion on the miracle's veracity is unimportant we can all tell you believed it to be true, and yet, swear up and down that it doesn't matter. Why?

I say and support that my opinion on the miracles veracity is unimportant and you and pixie and anyone else for that matter fail to refute it every single time. Secondly you incorrectly assume that I believed it to be true which is based on your incorrect misrepresentation of what I have written. So you have absolutely no point here. What do you have to refute this?

None as compared to a half dozen? Doesn't work TD, tisk tisk.

Where are they? These christian that think its a miracle? All MM came in was to reiterate some "willful atheist" talking point and didn't bother to help you out in the slightest.

Ignore ignore ignore that is all you do.

I guess according to your idiotic logic we can infer that other atheists think it isn't fake because yo lunch, pin head pat, CWC and other atheists aren't coming in here and saying it is a fake.
Loving that self taught logic you ignorant half wit. Furthermore this has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made, you do love to hit your straw man, and like Pixie you both continually ignore that there are various Christians that DO think it is a miracle. So, not only is this irrelevant to the point I am making, it also shows your utter stupidity in regards to matter at hand.

That isn't your original position. This is the position you've taken up, by backpedaling over the veracity of the miracle after I exposed it for what it was, to claim that the whole scenario was a trap :-/ I already replied to the bulk above.

Yes it is my original position it has been all along stupid. It goes like this.

You incorrectly assume my original position based upon a complete misrepresentation of what I've wrote. Then you say I've back pedaled from this imaginary position you've incorrectly assumed I've had. You start off with an incorrect assumption and just run from there. So like always you've got nothing. Furthermore you have not replied to teh bulk above, you just ignored it like the half witted ignorant coward that you are.

Re: Bold, yet another indicator that you believed it was a miracle.

DING DING DING, another accurate prediction from me.

(I predict yet another stupid comment you will draw from this).

You can't seem to tell the difference between pointing out your illogical nonsense and actually arguing it was an authentic miracle. I argued that you were being illogical in concluding the one on video wasn't a real miracle yet in your stupidity you thought I was arguing for the authenticiy of a miracle. I was merely saying you cannot conclude the one on camera was a miracle, I never said anything about me believing it.

Going with does not mean favoring.

Yes it does. You're either favoring the miracle explanation or you're favoring an explanation alternate one. See 'favor one over the other'

And no, we figure you believed it was a miracle because your posts reveal this. That or you won't admit you don't think it was a miracle at all and your whole point breaks down because you agree with me about the truth of the miracle you linked to.

No, you incorrectly assume my post reveal this, therefore you figure I believe it was a miracle. Try again you stupid half wit.

Your backpedaling away from what you thought was a great comeback to me saying god was camera shy, and now you won't let it go. Its rather obvious man.

It is a great come back, which is why neither you nor pixie nor anyone can deal with my original point and that is why you continue to focus on irrelevant things.

I did not equate the validity of your posts to a lack of people defending you.

I'm saying that no one wants to defend you because you make a fool out of yourself with comments like that, and others don't want to be associated with you.

In other words you'er equating the validity of my posts with the lack of people defending me. You're stating that because no one is defending, despite 2 people doing so already, my posts are some how more wrong or incorrect.

I think you've got me there sea

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

I see you've ignored the following:

That is your incorrect interpretation of what I wrote. It isn't even right, let alone clear. Try again half wit. You seem to think your stupid misunderstands of what I right are evidence for your assertions, it is a testament to your stupidity you think so.


Furthermore I already refuted what pixie laid out. Try again you ignorant half wit.

Oh?

How did you refute something when you won't give an answer?

Irrelevant to the point and also answered already.

Really? So why not answer? Its not like its a complex question, "do you believe X" has wiggle room, though maybe thats the point? We can all tell your being horribly evasive on this.

The point is you stupid half witted coward, is you had to look into before deciding it was fake. I asked you to refute what I said and you responded with asking questions and asking how else is someone supposed to confirm a miracle and other stupid questions. These questions are not refutations to what I said you stupid half wit. So, once again, what do you have to refute this?

Were you impressed? no. Did you look for and favor an alternate explanation? YES, is this an accurate representation of what atheist will do when faced with ANY MIRACLE CLAIM ON CAMERA? YES. Does this provide an answer as to why God is 'camera shy'? YES. Did you engage in all of the above when I posted the miracle on camera? YES.

So I should decide before I looked into it? Ridiculous.

Why should I have been impressed? Your entire argument against me is predicated on you believing the miracle video is, in fact, actually a miracle.

I am not favoring an alternative. I have accurately found what the video actually shows. Unless you wish to insult me for favoring truth. It would be in character I suppose.

Re: Bold: This, again, implies you believe that you have an actual miracle caught on film.

Re: Italics: Nope

Re: Underlined: So you do believe its a miracle?

Sea didn't say anything against my original position which I pointed out in post 9 you stupid half wit. The original position is what you, him, and pixie continue to ignore because you cannot refute it, which is why you continue to concentrate on irrelevant things that have nothing to do with the original point.

Sea pointed out that your making a hasty generalization. He even described it instead of naming it for, I presume, your benefit.

Yes you are favoring an alternative explanation you stupid half wit. It being a miracle is one explanation and camera glitch is an explanation alternative to that one and guess which one you're favoring stupid? Secondly you're misrepresenting my position since I said look for and favor an alternate explanation which is exactly what you did. Your investigation is exactly what my point is you stupid half witted ignorant moron, like I said you proved my point for me and refuted yourself, but you aren't responding to my original point, just talking about irrelevent things and straw men.

I'm favoring truth over fiction, and you position is nonsense if your not going to affirm that your video is an actual miracle

Re: Bold; Your point is that I investigate stuff before coming to a decision? Uhh, thanks? I didn't know you cared.

Refuted already in post #156, 158 and 160. It is a testament to your stupidity that you take what was already refuted and use it to support your own stuipd assertions

You claiming its irrelevant does not a refutation make

I say and support that my opinion on the miracles veracity is unimportant and you and pixie and anyone else for that matter fail to refute it every single time. Secondly you incorrectly assume that I believed it to be true which is based on your incorrect misrepresentation of what I have written. So you have absolutely no point here. What do you have to refute this?

All the times I've noted in previous posts where you slip up and treat the miracle as truth instead of the facade your trying to keep up on being agnostic to a miracle you linked to ;o Not to mention the first time you posted the video.

Ignore ignore ignore that is all you do.

I guess according to your idiotic logic we can infer that other atheists think it isn't fake because yo lunch, pin head pat, CWC and other atheists aren't coming in here and saying it is a fake.
Loving that self taught logic you ignorant half wit. Furthermore this has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made, you do love to hit your straw man, and like Pixie you both continually ignore that there are various Christians that DO think it is a miracle. So, not only is this irrelevant to the point I am making, it also shows your utter stupidity in regards to matter at hand.

Well, where are these various christians? Where is it on the TWeb forums, where you've got your learned Christians as opposed to people who don't have the same level of sophistication in knowledge believing it?

Pasting the same non-sequitur does not change that we have enough atheists/agnostics/deists posting on this thread to infer what skeptics are going to tell you, yet we cannot do that with Christians because no one is coming to you aid on this.

Yes it is my original position it has been all along stupid. It goes like this.

You incorrectly assume my original position based upon a complete misrepresentation of what I've wrote. Then you say I've back pedaled from this imaginary position you've incorrectly assumed I've had. You start off with an incorrect assumption and just run from there. So like always you've got nothing. Furthermore you have not replied to teh bulk above, you just ignored it like the half witted ignorant coward that you are.

You saying that I haven't replied isn't exactly, well, convincing. Seeing as how you did the same thing a couple of days ago with tass, claiming a whole post of his was not an answer to any of your questions, when it, well, was.

DING DING DING, another accurate prediction from me.

(I predict yet another stupid comment you will draw from this).

You can't seem to tell the difference between pointing out your illogical nonsense and actually arguing it was an authentic miracle. I argued that you were being illogical in concluding the one on video wasn't a real miracle yet in your stupidity you thought I was arguing for the authenticiy of a miracle. I was merely saying you cannot conclude the one on camera was a miracle, I never said anything about me believing it.

Because you avoid making concrete statements, We are not impressed Theo. If you don't believe it was a miracle SAY SO, if you do believe it was a miracle SAY SO.

This evasion is hurting you case, you realize ;-p

Yes it does. You're either favoring the miracle explanation or you're favoring an explanation alternate one. See 'favor one over the other'

This is an equivocation.

No, you incorrectly assume my post reveal this, therefore you figure I believe it was a miracle. Try again you stupid half wit.

Ah! So you don't believe it was a miracle!

I'm glad we got through this in one piece.

It is a great come back, which is why neither you nor pixie nor anyone can deal with my original point and that is why you continue to focus on irrelevant things.

Its only a great come back if you thought it was a real miracle, so...

In other words you'er equating the validity of my posts with the lack of people defending me. You're stating that because no one is defending, despite 2 people doing so already, my posts are some how more wrong or incorrect.

No,

I'm saying that no one wants to defend you because your making a fool out of yourself and others don't want to be associated with you. Remember MMN1? He didn't want to be defended in your style. Likewise, people do not want to assist you, because of your style.

Mountain Mans comments don't reinforce your point, or combat anything the rest of us has said. He gave one of his talking points that is not related to topic at hand, he was referring to people who demand that they get a personal miracle before believing. This is quite different.

And Pai? He hadn't actually watched the video yet, once he did he stopped supporting you. He had presumed the video had a "realistic-looking suspension of natural law.", you did not.

I re-read the thread, saw this

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...7&postcount=15

Originally posted by Pixie

If both Christians and atheists reject this as a fake, then he as proved nothing.

Then I read your next post, "YOUR WRONG blah blah", then this

Originally posted by TD

Christians experiencing the miracle on the video and on the website think it is genuine

What website? Youtube?

ANYWAY,

This has gone kinda long,

We still have a core question that needs answering TD.

Is this a legit miracle? The people want to know your personal opinion on the matter, you should feel special.

TheologicalDisc

TD: You're assuming I knowingly posted a fake video. This is incorrect.

Pix: On the conmtrary, I think you believed it was a real miracle. Which is, I would say, more damning.

TD: Just like your other stupid assumptions it is not only incorrect, irrelevant to the point at hand, but you also have not a shred of evidence to support it.

Aha! So if I am incorrect when I state that you believed it was a real miracle, then it must necessatily follow that you did not think it was a real miracle. At least that is clear now.

But wait. You said I would be incorrect to say that you "knowingly posted a fake video". So I guess the only middle ground is that you were clueless about whether it was real or fake.

Straw man. How about dealing with my original point? which would be atheists shouldn't be asking nor expecting for miracles on camera because they will both not be impressed and look for and favor an alternate explanation thus making it pointless for miracles to be put on camera, thus answering ones question as to why God might be 'camera shy.'

All you have show is that atheists reject obviously fake miracles that are also rejected by all the Christians on TWeb.

You're incapable of dealing with my original point, focusing on nonsense like the specific miracle I posted, but because you're so incredibly dimwitted you don't understand that regardless of the miracle posted it shows the process of what atheists do when shown miracles caught on camera. They're not impressed and look for and favor alternate explanations which jaecp proved.

The atheists at TWeb do the same as the Christians at TWeb. We all reject this as an obviously fake video.

Not only are you missing the point I find it hilarious that you are concluding that Christians on Tweb agree it is fake without a single Christian agreeing with you here(not that it even matters).

If it does not matter I will not bother to address this then.

Secondly, your stupid assertion about it is fake because it looks like a fake just further proves my point, like I said, rather than be impressed about a miracle claim you will not be impressed and look for and favor an alterrnate explanation.

Do you think it is fake? Of course you do! It is obviously fake, for reasons I said on the other thread. You know it is fake, I know it is fake, w all know it is fake. No Christian or atheist on TWeb is so stupid that he or she will go on record saying they think it is probably genuine.

I guess we could start a poll if you think anyone around here dpes believe it is a miracle. I did consider doing that but decided their is no point. Anyone can post and say they believe it. No one has.

Your dumb claim about it being 'because atheist automatically reject all claims of miracles' is another one of your stupid straw men since I never said nor insinuated nor implied atheists 'automatically' reject all claims of miracles. In fact, I said it many times in this very thread they don't automatically reject miracles, they reject after a process which involves searching for and favoring an aleternate explanation.

Oh well on that we agree. Yes, atheists will look for alternative explanations. They favour them when the alternative makes more sense. And that is exactly what has happened here. You present a supposed miracle, the atheists found an alternative explanation, which fits the evidence better. And no Christian around here disputes the alternative is a better explanation.

I think that is a good thing; a success for the atheists.

So let us all agree with TD that when presented with a supposed miracle, atheists will look for alternative explnations, and will study how they fit the evidence, and then present what they find.

I think its definitely true that a skeptic (not specifically an atheist ) would automatically seek out an alternative explanation to a "miracle" caught on camera.

Obviously the technological aspect of things helps keep skepticism high...but I think a lot of this has to do with the "type of miracle" that is being viewed. Something like this sun phenomena simply appears almost instantly as a "natural phenomenon". It has no "miraculous" qualities. This puts us on a path of attempting to discover an alternative explanation. I think a skeptic would require a pretty bizarre kind of event to consider it likely to be Holy...and then would require verification of the video....because...although we have the technology to "fake it"...we also have the technology to analyze and verify if something has "been faked".

When I see that...and someone calls it a miracle...I wonder..."Why would God put a black dot over the sun? What's so miraculous about that?"...now suddenly eliminating AIDS from existence...out of the blue...THAT would be a miracle.

I see UFO videos...and I don't assume they're real...just as I wouldn't with anything "supernatural" that people post on youtube. I don't think there's anything wrong with that...it seems pretty sane to me.

I also wanted to add: While the skeptic/atheist may automatically seek out an alternative exlpanation for miracles...it seems that a lot of theists automatically seek to assume that miracles are godly. Its equal on both sides.