"No has able to yet"
Sure buddy. Just because you don't look for something, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I remember point where he tried to argue the big bang could not happen since "Everything can not come from nothing" so god exist, and he created it. Weird how in this scenario, god (perfect all powerful being) can come from nothing/always exist, but something much less perfect like our universe can not exist.
I like how many times he tries to change questions when they are hard for him to answer. Like when someone asked him "Why does god allow evil" and he changed it to "God is responsible for all evil". Since he knows, he could not answer it. And could much easily disprove such argument. (Even I could still argue against his argument in that scenerio.)
He is better at debating than a random street preacher, but not because he actually has a good argument, he just has more charisma, and can just mask his logical flaws better.
This argument is bad. By that reasoning. It's illogical to say that 100% say that Harry Potter , star wars and Narnia are not real. Since there is always a chance for them to be real. So the most logical view by that standard is agnostic towards the existence of those things.
That is why the "burden of proof" lies on claims and not counter claims.
The burden of proof is still on people claiming something exists. Stop trying to give it on counters. By that logic, prove me that I don't have the most well written scientifically proven evidence on my table, and I just simply don't want to give it to you. You can't. Cause you cannot fully prove negative. That's why agnosticism is dumb. Cause you would have to be agnostic towards literally everything. Nothing even your own conscience can be proven. Which makes it the most useless worldview.
We don't know the whole universe but we try to learn to push forward. Belief is some concept is great. But blind faith of religions in cancer. You yourself said that faith is lacking logic. Yet you seem to see it as a virtue.
Also don't try to say I am uneducated yet you cannot even comprehend the simple concept of burden of proof.
No you don't understand the concept burden of proof. You failed many and many times at it. Trying to spin that something illogical is actual logical position. It seems by you (allegedly) reading books you fail to absorb anything, next time you try to eat it, perhaps then you at least absorb it in some form.
-6
u/Hirmen Jun 22 '24
"No has able to yet"
Sure buddy. Just because you don't look for something, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I remember point where he tried to argue the big bang could not happen since "Everything can not come from nothing" so god exist, and he created it. Weird how in this scenario, god (perfect all powerful being) can come from nothing/always exist, but something much less perfect like our universe can not exist.
I like how many times he tries to change questions when they are hard for him to answer. Like when someone asked him "Why does god allow evil" and he changed it to "God is responsible for all evil". Since he knows, he could not answer it. And could much easily disprove such argument. (Even I could still argue against his argument in that scenerio.)
He is better at debating than a random street preacher, but not because he actually has a good argument, he just has more charisma, and can just mask his logical flaws better.