Search This Blog

Monday, July 28, 2014

I think this is already the case for many God-haters

'News' at UD: Jason Rosenhouse: Multiverse is a “done deal,” Occam’s razor doesn’t apply -- "Prediction: Increasingly, logic will be seen as a covert form of theism."

Related --
What WON’T we toss out to defend the multiverse? -- "Cosmologist Sean Carroll would retire falsifiability as a science idea. ..."

This is because "the multiverse" (like Darwinism) is the very epitome of non-scientific, and even anti-scientific, (ahem) thought. BUT, because both "the multiverse" and Darwinism seem to offer a means to ignore the necessity of the Necessary Being, the God-haters will jettison *anything* to continue bitterly clinging to those silly ideas.

DO’s Prediction succeeds (2 1/2 years ago): “Increasingly, logic will be seen as a covert form of theism”


B. Prokop said...


Yer not gettin' off that easy. I answered your objection about Jonah over on DI. Let's hear your riposte.

Ilíon said...

You're such a hypocrite.

Ilíon said...

Also, you "answered" it by ignoring the point.

B. Prokop said...

What's this? You don't like being shown you're wrong, so you punt to calling people hypocrites?

And in any case, where's the "hypocrisy"? My reasoning may (possibly, though improbably) be flawed, but that wouldn't make me a hypocrite.

You said (or at least implied) that if Jesus referenced Jonah, then Jonah must therefore be an historical figure. I demonstrated how one can reference a fictional character while still speaking 100% truth, thereby showing that your suggestion I was somehow calling Jesus a liar was simply wrong.

Kindly enlighten me. Where is my reasoning flawed? Am I "lying" if I say that somebody has an Achilles heel? Or if I say "That kid's a regular Tom Sawyer"?