Atheists and Agnostics risk infinite loss for no gain.

I haven't. Why have you been conned into believing YEC? I can tell you. Because people make money out of conning you .
Bizarre stuff again.
So if as you Say that you have been conned by the no God assumption of AOS, then God created all things in 6 days about 6000 years ago as it says in the Bible.
 
What is your educational credentials and your professional credentials?
Wow. I thought so.
People who know things can show it through their posts without having to brag of their qualifications. I do have qualifications in philosophy, logic, and teaching, but that's all I'll say. Ask me any question about formal logic and I should be able to give you a detailed answer. I've shown you I know logic with a rebuttal you've not addressed, and a proof you've not responded to. You've shown me that you have no logical knowledge to speak of by failing to give a simple truth table, failing to employ the MI schema, and confusing statements and arguments.
 
It is a recorded event.
No it is not. There is a record of a large flood in the ANE. There is no record of a simultaneous large flood in Australia. I have asked you for the genetic evidence that would be present in wombats had the flood covered Australia, but you failed to provide any.

Absent any written record, and absent any DNA evidence, all you have is an unevidenced claim.

Have you not yet realised that scientific claims require evidence?
 
Bizarre stuff again.
So if as you Say that you have been conned by the no God assumption of AOS, then God created all things in 6 days about 6000 years ago as it says in the Bible.
Except that is not what I say, and that is not what is true. Why do you twist people's words into dishonest lies?
 
Can you give any real evidence of anything existing before about 6000 years ago without an assumption?
There is always the assumption that Last Thursdayism is incorrect. Yes, this assumption applies to your 6,000 year date as well. Last Thursday was long after 6,000 years ago, so all your evidence for 6,000 years actually dates from Last Thursday, when Loki/Trickster created it.
 
Can you give any real evidence of anything existing before about 6000 years ago without an assumption?
Are you claiming that anything which requires an assumption of any kind is not real evidence?

If you are, then there can't be any such thing as real evidence of anything, because there are implicit assumptions behind every claim and every deduction.

If you are not, then you are making an unreasonable request.
 
Are you claiming that anything which requires an assumption of any kind is not real evidence?

If you are, then there can't be any such thing as real evidence of anything, because there are implicit assumptions behind every claim and every deduction.

If you are not, then you are making an unreasonable request.
No. I am showing you that you have any assumption which is false.
 
No. I am showing you that you have any assumption which is false.
Asking us to present evidence which has no assumptions in it is not a demonstration of anything at all. Do you dispute that?

What you might have said, instead, is something like "present your evidence of something existing more than 6,000 years ago, and I'll bet I can show it rests on a false assumption."
 
Asking us to present evidence which has no assumptions in it is not a demonstration of anything at all. Do you dispute that?

What you might have said, instead, is something like "present your evidence of something existing more than 6,000 years ago, and I'll bet I can show it rests on a false assumption."
Well the no God assumption is a false assumption and that is why the ages are all wrong and the false theory of evolution creeps in.
Do I have done what you asked. It is not an assumption that is the problem. It is a false assumption.
 
Back
Top