User:Jt

I've apparently arrogantly and assumptively assigned myself into being an Iron Chariots Cityguard.

The bible refers to real cities, therefore:
 * Talking donkeys
 * Walking on water
 * Food replication
 * Zombies
 * Resurrection
 * Healing through faith

Theism is the placebo effect manifest, conjured through psychosomatic responses, maintained through a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

Re: You have to believe first, then you'll get your evidence. This is nonsensical. Normally, in order to buy a car, one needs to have sufficient money to meet the cost of the car, then one can buy it. What the theists are suggesting here is that you have to first own the car, then the money will appear to buy it. It just doesn't work that way.

Notes to self

 * Write or augment page to address "evolution producing new 'kinds' of animals", cat-dog differences, perception of our categorizing of species and its influence on understanding what evolution proposes.


 * Might be interesting to add "fallacy in action" links to youtube videos of AE clips, for different fallacies.
 * In Atheists are just in denial, might be good to note a few things
 * These discussions start off as a cyclic "Is too", "Is not" squabbling, so the way to resolve the argument is to see if the evidence meets the standards - if not, the theistic claim loses
 * Theists do this thing all the time where if they can't meet the minimum requirements... they redefine and change the thing they're trying to get accepted into into meeting them, instead.
 * Kansas redefinition of science to allow supernatural
 * Redefinition of evidence from science standards to meet low quality apologetics standards
 * Dembski's (and other apologists) creating their own crappy peer-review journals to bypass the fact they can't pass peer-review from real scientists with real, credible journals
 * Continually trying to shift the burden of proof


 * AE 598 @ ~1:07:00 - Caller was making an argument that could roughly be the Existential fallacy (C > B > A, where A exists, so some C must exist)? - think about it


 * Argument from DNA = Code? Check
 * AE 657 @ ~50.00
 * Example: We've only seen apple trees that have been planted by Bob. Therefore, these apple trees we've come across in this field must have been planted by Bob too. - conflation fallacy


 * Article on "Appeal to Unspecified Context"
 * Taking things out of context is a genuine problem.
 * Example: Darwin evolution quotemine
 * Key is that we understand, and can explain, the broader context, and how it invalidates the out-of-context quote.
 * If a theist brings up the "You have to look at a passage through the lens of the whole Bible", then they also must also be able to do #3, else they have no case. They can't just leave it at that, as though an appeal to an invisible, nebulous context invalidates the point one is trying to make without further explanation.
 * If the overall context of the Bible were that it's using reverse psychology, then analyzing the verse about stoning unruly children to death could be dismissed, but one has to actually be able to establish the context and validate it. Otherwise, they're simply dismissing what one is saying out of slight of hand for no good reason.


 * Article/Augment Prophesy - Framework and invalidation

My Temp Storage
- Started to babble on out of context of a page.. this ought to go elsewhere - also, point out that if the Bible was indicating a spherical earth, why is it that such assertions were prosecuted as heresy by the bible believers before?

that isn't a vastly distorted and spun translation? Here's an example:


 * "He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing." (Job 26:7)
 * "It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, ..." (Isaiah 40:22)

Some spin these references into meaning that the Earth is a sphere. The problem with translation is that the further you go from the literal meaning, the more error you're potentially