I'm not setting up a straw man. I'm using an example of how someone can be certain that an extraordinary claim with out evidence can be rejected.
That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Speaking of a straw man.. I never said the universe created itself.. I never presented any theory.
I gave an answer, I said I don't know. I didn't make any claim whatsoever. All I did was try to explain in other terms why i reject your claims.
That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Speaking of a straw man.. I never said the universe created itself.. I never presented any theory.
I gave an answer, I said I don't know. I didn't make any claim whatsoever. All I did was try to explain in other terms why i reject your claims.
but they give no proof of how this could ever, possibly, conceivably happen.
No matter how you try to explain it, it is self refuting by defying the laws of physics
YOU KNOW THIS.
That's why you won't discuss it.
You believe in your causality for the universe by faith... with no proof.
You have no proof.
Even the theories you "might" pose are all self refuting.
That's why you won't discuss it.
You know exactly what I'm talking about, and you refuse to discuss it because you have nothing.
YOU HAVE NO ANSWER FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE.
YOU TAKE YOUR WORLD VIEW ON FAITH.
THE ONLY WAY an atheist can pretend to be scientific, and correct, and superior,
is to REFUSE TO DISCUSS the FIRST CAUSE.
YOU CAN'T Discuss what you believe about first cause....
because there isn't any proof for it.
It's nothing but faith.
Last edited: