Hardcore Newbie:

Quote:
Originally Posted by natureisawesome View Post
I already went over a "pantheon-esque" setting in my original post. If you have any objections, feel free to post them with references.
We did, and then you said No, it's not the case. You have no reason to believe it.
I'm not sure what your referring to. The logical path I explained in my original post to show a pantheon scenario as invalid was never actually adressed.

We have shown evidence which you choose to reject, but when we disagree with your evidence, it's because we refuse to see the truth.
I reject it because it's shown to be invalid.

If you blast us with a lot of information, it's the truth. If we blast you with a lot of information, it's unfair and elephant hurling.
I don't post "50 reasons why God is true". People bring up objections which require more than a few sentences to respond. That's not elephant hurling.
When you make assumptions, yours are correct. When we make assumptions, we need to back them up.
I do back up my assumptions. and Axioms are far from being any everyday asumptions that people make. You can call anything an assumption. In reality, axioms such as "you are thinking" are only remotely called assumptions for the sake of arguement. Nomatter how well you know something you can always deny it, even when it doesn't make sense.

When we question your sources, you say it's because the creation scientists are being discriminated against in biased evaluations. When you question our sources, it's because our sources are corrupt, and we believe in them like bland religion.

Have fun with the thread.
I havn't discredited anyones sources like mine have been. I disccredit information because it is proven to be fallacious.

I'm being attacked with so many false accusations there's no room for me to justifiy myself. I suppose people will think what will.