News and Politics Forum

I say that it is time to stop feeding the troll...

zukiphile wrote:

And to what precisely have I responded that you have not argued?

Because we weren't arguing about the truth of their belief.  You were arguing that belief in God wasn't ridiculous because the "contemplated" the existence of God.

Clearly we weren't arguing about the "truth" of their belief, but the ridiculousness.  Saying you weren't appealing to authority by changing the terms of the argument is a straw man.  Do you understand this fallacy, or would you like me to provide a link to your local community college's persuasive writing class?

This is, of course, setting aside your confusion of belief & contemplation to start with.  You would do well to start by picking up a dictionary.

zukiphile wrote:

You argue plausibly that an adult belief in SC would be ridiculed.  You then analogise that to other dissimilar beliefs.  Noting the aspects of the dissimilarity is not an appeal to authority becuase it does not argue the truth of either belief.

You don't appear to understand several of the terms you use.

They are both unprovable figments of your immagination.  By choosing some trivial difference between God & Santa (the lenght of their beards, for instance) you are relying on a red herring to argue that they are not interchangeable.  We are not talking about beard length, color of clothing, method of flight or any other arbitrary difference.  We are talking about two unprovable figments of your imagination.  Based on those similarities, you have no more reason for believing in God than believing that a fat guy in a red suit brings you presents on Xmas.

ARGH!!! You've gone and ruined even my attempts to troll with your simplistic argument! God and Santa don't correlate for several reasons:

He is an admitted marketing construct. His fictional existence is easily accounted for and documented. We know that Harry Potter doesn't really exist either because the woman who created him flatly states that he's a work of fiction. We know that Santa Claus doesn't exist (as currently envisioned) because Thomas Nast created him.

His existence is disprovable. God's is not! Stop using the comparison!!!

It takes a special kind of stupid to paint yourself into a corner, realize it, and then decide that the best way to get out of it is to keep painting!

Who keeps bringing the IAP idiots over here??? Is it you JIMP?

Last edited by Seabird (05-12-2008 08:36 PM)

Quarken wrote:

They are both unprovable figments of your immagination.  By choosing some trivial difference between God & Santa (the lenght of their beards, for instance) you are relying on a red herring to argue that they are not interchangeable.  We are not talking about beard length, color of clothing, method of flight or any other arbitrary difference.  We are talking about two unprovable figments of your imagination.  Based on those similarities, you have no more reason for believing in God than believing that a fat guy in a red suit brings you presents on Xmas.

I missed the part where it was stated that the difference was their beard length or their methods of flight or their color of clothing. 

If an argument has been made to support their dissimilarity that you believe and can show to be trivial then state that argument.  By continuing such tactics you simply provide more reason to conclude you do not want a serious discussion. 

Simply saying the two are the same and stating that both are figments of peoples’ imagination is not a persuasive argument.  Saying “yes they are” is not effective. 

I’m sure it brings down the coffee house though.

Quarken wrote:

Congratulations.  Now maybe you can ask your parents some hard questions about the stork dropping you down the chimney.

Or perhaps you can offer something resembling a cogent argument, cut the strawman nonsense and show everybody why you find yourself so impressive.

Quarken wrote:

zukiphile wrote:

And to what precisely have I responded that you have not argued?

Because we weren't arguing about the truth of their belief.

You clearly are arguing that the belief that God exists is untrue, so this assertion doesn't work.

Quarken wrote:

Saying you weren't appealing to authority by changing the terms of the argument is a straw man.

Since I had not misrepresented your position, you've cried strawman without basis.

Quarken wrote:

They are both unprovable figments of your immagination....We are talking about two unprovable figments of your imagination.  Based on those similarities, you have no more reason for believing in God than believing that a fat guy in a red suit brings you presents on Xmas.

Do you believe that repetition of this mantra makes it more valid?

Quarken wrote:

By choosing some trivial difference between God & Santa (the lenght of their beards, for instance) you are relying on a red herring to argue that they are not interchangeable.  We are not talking about beard length, color of clothing, method of flight or any other arbitrary difference.

Correct.  We are not discussing those differences, which raises the question of why you would argue them or base the bulk of your response on them.

Seabird wrote:

ARGH!!! You've gone and ruined even my attempts to troll with your simplistic argument! God and Santa don't correlate for several reasons:

He is an admitted marketing construct.

God is the biggest marketing construct ever created.

Seabird wrote:

His fictional existence is easily accounted for and documented. We know that Harry Potter doesn't really exist either because the woman who created him flatly states that he's a work of fiction. We know that Santa Claus doesn't exist (as currently envisioned) because Thomas Nast created him.

And yet you miss the fictional works by Moses, Matthew, Mark, etc.

Seabird wrote:

His existence is disprovable. God's is not! Stop using the comparison!!!

His existence is as disprovable as God's.  Either igorance, indoctrination or both prevent you & others from seeing that.  Or do you really believe that koalas swam the Indian Ocean with eucalyptus leaves in zip lock baggies?

Quarken wrote:

Seabird wrote:

ARGH!!! You've gone and ruined even my attempts to troll with your simplistic argument! God and Santa don't correlate for several reasons:

He is an admitted marketing construct.

God is the biggest marketing construct ever created.

Hope you get some liberal arts poon for this position.

Quarken wrote:

Seabird wrote:

His fictional existence is easily accounted for and documented. We know that Harry Potter doesn't really exist either because the woman who created him flatly states that he's a work of fiction. We know that Santa Claus doesn't exist (as currently envisioned) because Thomas Nast created him.

And yet you miss the fictional works by Moses, Matthew, Mark, etc.

There is a difference. DUCY?

Quarken wrote:

Seabird wrote:

His existence is disprovable. God's is not! Stop using the comparison!!!

His existence is as disprovable as God's.  Either igorance, indoctrination or both prevent you & others from seeing that.  Or do you really believe that koalas swam the Indian Ocean with eucalyptus leaves in zip lock baggies?

There you go again using "yes it is" as your argument, we warned you about that earlier.  What's this about kute kuddly koalas?

maxor wrote:

There you go again using "yes it is" as your argument, we warned you about that earlier.  What's this about kute kuddly koalas?

All just part of the smack-down.  Humbling, no?

zukiphile wrote:

Quarken wrote:

His existence is as disprovable as God's.

So, do disprove it with equal obviousness.

You mean "yes he is" doesn't do that?

zukiphile wrote:

You clearly are arguing that the belief that God exists is untrue, so this assertion doesn't work.

Not in the context of you citing Equinas, etc.  I argued that the belief in God was ridiculous.  You cited Equinas, etc.  I correctly called that an appeal to authority.  You said it wasn't because I was arguing the truth of their beliefs.  That is you misrepresenting the argument.

zukiphile wrote:

Quarken wrote:

They are both unprovable figments of your immagination....We are talking about two unprovable figments of your imagination.  Based on those similarities, you have no more reason for believing in God than believing that a fat guy in a red suit brings you presents on Xmas.

Do you believe that repetition of this mantra makes it more valid?

Are you arguing otherwise?

zukiphile wrote:

Quarken wrote:

By choosing some trivial difference between God & Santa (the lenght of their beards, for instance) you are relying on a red herring to argue that they are not interchangeable.  We are not talking about beard length, color of clothing, method of flight or any other arbitrary difference.

Correct.  We are not discussing those differences, which raises the question of why you would argue them or base the bulk of your response on them.

I have based my responses on none other than that they are both unprovable figments.  You claim they are different without specifying how any supposed differences are material.  This is (still) a red herring.

If presents were magically appearing under every Christmas tree every December 25th, and the parents had nothing to do with it, and no one really knew for sure where those presents were coming from, there would be plenty of reason to believe that Santa Claus did in fact exist, and many people would.

Santa Claus is believed to bring presents.  God is believed to have created the Universe.  Santa Claus does not bring presents.  The Universe was in fact created. 

This starkly obvious difference has been brought to you by the letter Q.

Qwinn

Quarken wrote:

zukiphile wrote:

Quarken wrote:

His existence is as disprovable as God's.

So, do disprove it with equal obviousness.

You must have missed my mention of the 6,000 yr old earth, Noah's Arc & the problem of suffering for starters.

Please read before typing something incoherent & hitting submit.

Oh, and mentioning those things disproved God.

As to your last sentence - did you mean to type that out loud or was it meant as just talking to yourself?

Last edited by Raoul Duke (05-12-2008 09:06 PM)