Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[faye]

That's not true at all. Belief systems can, and are disproven regularly.

for example and disproven by whom?

That's the problem -- I'm perfectly willing to admit I am wrong, given sufficient evidence. I'm not dogmatic.

so you say.

[faye]

Likewise please don't associate Faye with Islam or Muslim as she is not one, nor ever was one. She's a Australian with a Christian background who embraced New-Age ideas later in life.

Afghanistan2010 ..well ...I wouldn't consider him a Muslim, but he identifies as one, so it's fair game to do so.

i have no christian background. a typically fallacious assumption from you.

studies of new, ancient and old philosophies and views about reality, can be classified as 'new age', but are in actuality, not all new, are they?
i also have my own knowing from my own experiences.

there is no proof that you, yourself are actually a muslim either. you may have read the books and remember some of the information, but no actual proof.
like catya, you refuse to tell.

[faye]

Ah. That's the problem. You assume that all things require an intelligent creator. Sand is created by the actions of waves. Does that mean the waves are intelligent?
That's rich -- science teaches you *not* to be a blind follower.

sand is not created by waves and there is no proof that waves are not intelligent. if they are an aspect of god, then they can contain the intelligence of god, which may explain their behaviour, of being waves.

http://waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0704b.htm

[ozymandias]

sand is not created by waves and there is no proof that waves are not intelligent. if they are an aspect of god, then they can contain the intelligence of god, which may explain their behaviour, of being waves.

http://waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0704b.htm

"One of the most impressive feats of nature is the erosion of massive mountains into sand by the powerful forces of wind and water." -- first sentence of your link.

Feel free to provide the needed evidence to back up your claim that waves are intelligent. That ought to be pretty amusing to see.

[faye]

"One of the most impressive feats of nature is the erosion of massive mountains into sand by the powerful forces of wind and water." -- first sentence of your link.

Feel free to provide the needed evidence to back up your claim that waves are intelligent. That ought to be pretty amusing to see.

therfore the mere action of waves does not 'create' sand. read the whole link.

i have no 'needed evidence' that waves are intelligent and you have no 'needed evidence' that they aren't. i just like to keep an open mind, to possibilities.
be amused dear.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

"One of the most impressive feats of nature is the erosion of massive mountains into sand by the powerful forces of wind and water." -- first sentence of your link.

Feel free to provide the needed evidence to back up your claim that waves are intelligent. That ought to be pretty amusing to see.

checkmate

[RevolutionThroughReason]

therfore the mere action of waves does not 'create' sand. read the whole link.

i have no 'needed evidence' that waves are intelligent and you have no 'needed evidence' that they aren't. i just like to keep an open mind, to possibilities.
be amused dear.

Straw-Man fallacy

he never insinuated the "mere action of waves"

[faye]

good of you to defend him but he needs to be more precise if he expects it of others.
he said 'sand is created by the action of waves'.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

i have no christian background. a typically fallacious assumption from you.

studies of new, ancient and old philosophies and views about reality, can be classified as 'new age', but are in actuality, not all new, are they?
i also have my own knowing from my own experiences.

there is no proof that you, yourself are actually a muslim either. you may have read the books and remember some of the information, but no actual proof.
like catya, you refuse to tell.

That's irrelevant since you're not Muslim or ever were ..which is proven.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

good of you to defend him but he needs to be more precise if he expects it of others.

I'm not defending him just rather pointing out your bogus contention which is more or less a straw-man

[faye]

what is irrelevant, your fallacious assumption? of course your bs, is irrelevant.... to you, when you get called on it.

[faye]

I'm not defending him just rather pointing out your bogus contention which is more or less a straw-man

how is pointing out a fallacy, a strawman.? you are the strawman.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I never said point out a fallacy is a straw man, I'm saying I'm point out your fallacy which is a straw-man

[RevolutionThroughReason]

what is irrelevant, your fallacious assumption? of course your bs, is irrelevant.... to you, when you get called on it.

prove there was a fallacy

[ozymandias]

therfore the mere action of waves does not 'create' sand. read the whole link.

Sure, there is more to it than that, but since I was making a simple analogy, my point still stands.

i have no 'needed evidence' that waves are intelligent and you have no 'needed evidence' that they aren't.

Except, I don't need evidence to prove they are not -- you are the one claiming they are, I am simply rejecting that claim since you have presented no evidence.

i just like to keep an open mind, to possibilities.
be amused dear.

Oh, I have an open mind -- I am willing to look at any evidence you present.