Calvin Plummer
Vital Football Legend
Thinks God might exist but calls others "nut job"......fucking classic
No, that isn't what agnostic means. Try again nut nut.
Thinks God might exist but calls others "nut job"......fucking classic
I think you are a moron because you are trying to pretend I argued that science operates in a vacuum - I never said that, I said pretty much the the opposite.Sure feel free to link...
Now let's try the article I posted, what did you think? Do you still believe science operates in a vacuum and isn't and shouldn't be political?
No, that isn't what agnostic means. Try again nut nut.
Of course an agnostic thinks God ‘might’ exist, by definition, it’s just that there’s no way of knowing one way of knowing. So, God ‘might’ exist, he ‘might’ not. Feel free to copy and paste or ‘quote’ without actually quoting and pretending they’re your words that says different.
Science operates in a vacuum? Who said that? Who implied that? Certainly not me. I said Science is a methodology. Science does not have an opinion.Sure feel free to link...
Now let's try the article I posted, what did you think? Do you still believe science operates in a vacuum and isn't and shouldn't be political?
In fact, to save us from your usual bollocks, here’s a very simple question for you: do you believe God exists?
Science operates in a vacuum? Who said that? Who implied that? Certainly not me. I said Science is a methodology. Science does not have an opinion.
I think you are a moron because you are trying to pretend I argued that science operates in a vacuum - I never said that, I said pretty much the the opposite.
But like you have said previously you lean toward religion over science. More tea. Vicar?I don't know is the point. It's unknowable. Those who take faith based beliefs like theists or atheist do so without any proof whatsoever.
That is a rather short sighted and disappointing quote as it seems to fail to acknowledge that atheism is every bit as much a faith position as theism.No idiot, it means it's unknowable. That I have no knowledge (and nor does anyone else) to hold any position.
Here's a quote for you from an actual prize winning physicist rather than a fantasist
"I think atheism is inconsistent with the scientific method. What I mean by that is, what is atheism? It's a statement, a categorical statement that expresses belief in nonbelief. 'I don't believe even though I have no evidence for or against, simply I don't believe.' Period. It's a declaration. But in science we don't really do declarations. We say, 'Okay, you can have a hypothesis, you have to have some evidence against or for that.' And so an agnostic would say, look, I have no evidence for God or any kind of god (What god, first of all? The Maori gods, or the Jewish or Christian or Muslim God? Which god is that?) But on the other hand, an agnostic would acknowledge no right to make a final statement about something he or she doesn't know about."
No you made up something I never said, turnip!That's good, you've backtracked. My work with you is done :)
I asked if you “believed”I don't know is the point. It's unknowable. Those who take faith based beliefs like theists or atheist do so without any proof whatsoever.
But like you have said previously you lean toward religion over science. More tea. Vicar?
I asked if you “believed”
I’m not asking if you ‘know’, I’m asking if you ‘believe’. Do you not know the difference?I've answered with crystal clarity, if you're unable to follow the answer that is not my fault.
I do not know because it is unknowable.
That is a rather short sighted and disappointing quote as it seems to fail to acknowledge that atheism is every bit as much a faith position as theism.
If his point is that agnosticism is the only truly scientific position then lots of both theist and atheist scientists are likely to have an issue with that
We had a discussion years ago where you said something similar, you also said something similar more recently when talking to Pope. I'm not going to spend hours combing through old posts to prove myself correct. I have much more important things to do parsnip!Lol you've completely made that up, find me one quote where I say religion over science. I haven't been to a religious service (aside from births, deaths and marriages) since I was a tween and allowed to opt out by my parents.
Science and religion aren't opposite camps either, some mingle some don't.
I’m not asking if you ‘know’, I’m asking if you ‘believe’. Do you not know the difference?
We had a discussion years ago where you said something similar, you also said something similar more recently when talking to Pope. I'm not going to spend hours combing through old posts to prove myself correct. I have much more important things to do parsnip!
Of course you can believe in something that is unknowable. If your lass goes out you won’t ‘know’ that she hasn’t been shagging behind your back but you probably ‘believe’ her. Just like with this climate thing you’re big on YOU don’t KNOW that it’s man made but you believe it because of what some scientists say (others don’t)I can't believe in something that is unknowable I simply have no position behind that.