1034 replies to this topic

[shadowhawk]

What good is this so called evidence if there is no reasoning behind it? How did the OP draw the conclusion it was 'from God' and that it is not something else entirely even if what is there is supernatural.

If your going to call something as evidence be prepared to back it up. Show us your reasoning and how you came to the precise (and only possible) conclusion you did. On the internet however it is near impossible to present anything as evidence. Post all the videos and talking heads you like. It's not admissible. That should be kept in mind.

I would love nothing more than the knowledge of other realms and dimensions, spirits and after lifes and that it's all true. I think everyone here would love that. But without any evidence or proof, it's all fantasy.

I say mankind should keep looking for the proof and keep asking questions but showing us a picture and claiming it's 'God's chariot end of story', indicates that no one need bother looking, understanding or to ask questions anymore.

 

I agree but old School did produce evidence however in my view weak.  A couple of issues were brought up by Old School which the mockers wouldn't touch which were much stronger. 
 

[shadowhawk]

theists, we are told, merely acknowledge one less God than theists. If believers understood why they reject Zeus, the argument goes, they would understand why atheists reject their God. Unfortunately, dismissing theism on such grounds betrays a paltry acquaintance with the very idea of God, let alone the God revealed in the Bible. It is true that many concepts of God present us with entities that are nothing more than glorified human beings. But anyone who is familiar with the relevant religious and philosophical literature on the subject does not need to be told that such untutored notions of God are just pointless red herrings. Popular level atheism may be fodder for invigorating debates on the Internet, but it has little, if anything at all, to do with God. — John M. Njoroge (from, Spaghetti Monsters and One Less God)

[The Brain]

You care, because it's the truth

[shadowhawk]

You care, because it's the truth

 

   Oh no, its the truth.  OK
 

[N.T.M.]

 

Looks like this thread's digressed to mud slinging. The evidence produced here isn't evidence in any meaningful sense. It won't--and shouldn't--convince any skeptical person. Even if I believed it personally, I would immediately distrust anybody who found it (by itself) compelling. Trying to stay objective here, I'm not saying anything about what the OP's arguing, only that his means of argumentation is terrible. I think even shadowhawk would agree here.

At what point have you started reading this thread

 

There are some things you may have missed regarding the credibility of what Old School has presented and which raises questions to his personal mental state 

 

 

I just skimmed through it. I don't think it's worth reading much more.

[The Brain]

Old School has sourced these images he claims are of gods spirit from a ghost hunters website, usually he links straight from their site but has changed that in recent times, he claims to have personally photographed gods spirit many HUNDREDS of times but when asked to produce some of his own images his response is that he lost them all with no real explanation of details. He has also claimed many times to have been personally visited by gods spirit dozens of times. Now you'd think a man who in the past has had the opportunity to photograph gods spirit many HUNDREDS of times and be personally visited by gods spirit dozens of times then it wouldn't be hard to come up with some photographs of these claims taken in recent times ???

Has gods spirit suddenly stopped visiting this man, what has he done to upset his god so much for him to stop his personal photographic sessions with Old School???

Many other claims of visitations of various angels and whatnot.

Now I contacted the owner of the ghost hunting website where they have a forum for orb photos and asked them how long the images had been on his site, he has told me around five years, Old School has been trolling the internet with these images for around three years on many many many websites either religious based or with a religious board and put this same story forward on all of them. Each and every time he is confronted by posters with incredulity and ridicule.

Also of note he is an active poster on a board for Christian Creative Writers where people are encouraged to post creatively written story's with a religious theme.


It's pretty easy to see this man has created a story from images of orbs he has stolen from the internet and aligned them to the scripture he claims to prove them.



Liar and looney can't do anything except to continue to lie in an attempt to cover up his first lie.

It's an embarrassing and childlike lie he's created for his own pleasure and infects the internet like a virus with his pathetic poorly crafted nonsense.

[shadowhawk]

Wow good stone throwing.  You really got him didn't you!   I am so impressed.  Now how about you saying something intelligent yourself?

[The Brain]

Sure, you're a dork

[Duchykins]

I'm not sure if I'm understanding something...

 

Cameras use light to record images.  Light is material; it's electromagnetic radiation.

 

So are spirits material things that can be recorded with material instruments like cameras (or audio recorders)?

[old_school]

Let's say these really are spirits and there definitely is a God. How do we know what we are seeing belong to God or are proof of an afterlife? These are just assumptions. They could just be beings that exist differently to us but have nothing to do with God or past people who have died.

To us how you know it is to do with the creator of the universe

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

[old_school]

Or they are just anomalies and because it at a point seems to resemble a face morons who need something to want to prove an invisible non existent being will grasp any chance to try to support their nonsense beliefs and claims with any crazy crap they can find

 

It is so easy to recognize the faces in those photographs that even a child could do it.
 

[shadowhawk]

Sure, you're a dork

 

So true! 
 

[Duchykins]

 

 

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

 

 

 

Also aliens.  Mass sightings of UFOs.

 

And chupacabra.  Nessie.  Mermaids.

 

Demons.  Black magic.  Voodoo miracles.  Chakras.  Mothman (not the movie).

 

Krishna.  Shiva.  Jinn.  Muhammad.

 

Blah blah blah...

 

 

You think Christians are the only ones that see stuff?

 

That's cute.

[shadowhawk]

 

 

 

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

 

 

 

Also aliens.  Mass sightings of UFOs.

 

And chupacabra.  Nessie.  Mermaids.

 

Demons.  Black magic.  Voodoo miracles.  Chakras.  Mothman (not the movie).

 

Krishna.  Shiva.  Jinn.  Muhammad.

 

Blah blah blah...

 

 

You think Christians are the only ones that see stuff?

 

That's cute.

 

 

So what is your point?  The things you listed are not all the same.  Atheists don't see some things and that makes them....?
 

[Duchykins]

 

 

 

So what is your point?  The things you listed are not all the same.  Atheists don't see some things and that makes them....?
 

 

 

 

I'm just saying that's a poor standard of evidence because it allows all kinds of different things gain credibility just because a bunch of people swear they saw something.

 

We have to be better than that.

 

And atheists not seeing anything doesn't mean anything.  Lots of religious people don't see anything either.

Edited by Duchykins, 11 July 2015 - 10:15 PM.

[shadowhawk]

And if an atheist saw something that does not mean it is false or true but it is evidence even if weak.  Eye witness evidence is in the eye of the beholder but it can also be strong.  It depends because after all evidence is observed.  It is of course more complicated than this.  My objection here is rather than dealing with the evidence we have a stoning mob pf mockers who gave no serous evidence of their own.  They just call names and mock.  So far Old School has not presented a strong case and has used arguments I wouldn't but neither am I impressed with the mockers.They don't know what an orb is either.

[The Brain]

The case Old Fool fool has put forward can be dismissed as a childlike fantasy to gain attention for himself and his god belief.

Ridicule and mocking is being kind, after all the guy is manipulating you because he thinks you' and others are stupid enough to believe his nonsense. He's not coming from a nice place with this

[The Brain]

Or they are just anomalies and because it at a point seems to resemble a face morons who need something to want to prove an invisible non existent being will grasp any chance to try to support their nonsense beliefs and claims with any crazy crap they can find

It is so easy to recognize the faces in those photographs that even a child could do it.

Only a childlike mind would then attribute it as a spirit of god ....


Just as faces can been recognised in tree trunks or piles of leaves or any other number of patterns that happen in a physical world does not make them spiritual or god like.

[Duchykins]

And if an atheist saw something that does not mean it is false or true but it is evidence even if weak.  Eye witness evidence is in the eye of the beholder but it can also be strong.  It depends because after all evidence is observed.  It is of course more complicated than this.  My objection here is rather than dealing with the evidence we have a stoning mob pf mockers who gave no serous evidence of their own.  They just call names and mock.  So far Old School has not presented a strong case and has used arguments I wouldn't but neither am I impressed with the mockers.They don't know what an orb is either.

 

 

All evidence is observed, that's true, but what makes it really strong is its repeatability for other people to see.

 

I'm sorry but bringing the "well these people saw this supernatural thing so that means it exists" anecdotes to the table is childish and is deserving of mockery.  I also think it's an insult to theism, it's an insult to our intelligence, it's a horrible way to represent your beliefs and a great way to turn educated people away.  

 

Theistic arguments can be so much better and you know it.  Bring on the logic.

[Dakman]

 

 

 

 

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

 

 

 

Also aliens.  Mass sightings of UFOs.

 

And chupacabra.  Nessie.  Mermaids.

 

Demons.  Black magic.  Voodoo miracles.  Chakras.  Mothman (not the movie).

 

Krishna.  Shiva.  Jinn.  Muhammad.

 

Blah blah blah...

 

 

You think Christians are the only ones that see stuff?

 

That's cute.

 

 

So what is your point?  The things you listed are not all the same.  Atheists don't see some things and that makes them....?
 

 

That makes them sane and not gullible 

[shadowhawk]

 

And if an atheist saw something that does not mean it is false or true but it is evidence even if weak.  Eye witness evidence is in the eye of the beholder but it can also be strong.  It depends because after all evidence is observed.  It is of course more complicated than this.  My objection here is rather than dealing with the evidence we have a stoning mob pf mockers who gave no serous evidence of their own.  They just call names and mock.  So far Old School has not presented a strong case and has used arguments I wouldn't but neither am I impressed with the mockers.They don't know what an orb is either.

 

 

All evidence is observed, that's true, but what makes it really strong is its repeatability for other people to see.

 

I'm sorry but bringing the "well these people saw this supernatural thing so that means it exists" anecdotes to the table is childish and is deserving of mockery.  I also think it's an insult to theism, it's an insult to our intelligence, it's a horrible way to represent your beliefs and a great way to turn educated people away.  

 

Theistic arguments can be so much better and you know it.  Bring on the logic.

 

Not all things most surely believed are repeatable.  Some eyewitness accounts are of events not repeatable but are very strong evidence.  Some evidence is temporal and ceases to exist.  Are you saying the mockers here have been turned away by the power of their evidence?  Old Schools logic may be weak but the mockers is even weaker.  You do not have to find someones evidence compelling to not mock them.  I see nothing educated about the mockers.

[Duchykins]

It appears we are employing different definitions of evidence. Oh well.

[shadowhawk]

So lets talk about the burden of proof.  For aa full discussion the Mockers must also show reasons for skepticism.

 

The burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim.  It can be either a positive or negative clam. http://en.wikipedia....ving_a_negative

When the assertion to prove is a negative claim, the burden takes the form of a negative proof, proof of impossibility, or mere evidence of absence. If this negative assertion is in response to a claim made by another party in a debate, asserting the falsehood of the positive claim shifts the burden of proof from the party making the first claim to the one asserting its falsehood, as the position "I do not believe that X is true" is different to the explicit denial "I believe that X is false".

So, I have presented a great amount of evidence so far and typically the claim is made only the person stating a position has a burden of proof.  We discussed this at length in the Is There Evidence For Atheism, topic.  So when you make a claim, you have a burden of proof.

You cant absolutely prove anything either positive or negative.  This fact does not remove the burden of proof.  http://coldcasechristianity.com/  



 

[Duchykins]

So lets talk about the burden of proof.  For aa full discussion the Mockers must also show reasons for skepticism.

 

The burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim.  It can be either a positive or negative clam. http://en.wikipedia....ving_a_negative

When the assertion to prove is a negative claim, the burden takes the form of a negative proof, proof of impossibility, or mere evidence of absence. If this negative assertion is in response to a claim made by another party in a debate, asserting the falsehood of the positive claim shifts the burden of proof from the party making the first claim to the one asserting its falsehood, as the position "I do not believe that X is true" is different to the explicit denial "I believe that X is false".

So, I have presented a great amount of evidence so far and typically the claim is made only the person stating a position has a burden of proof.  We discussed this at length in the Is There Evidence For Atheism, topic.  So when you make a claim, you have a burden of proof.

You cant absolutely prove anything either positive or negative.  This fact does not remove the burden of proof.  http://coldcasechristianity.com/  



 

 

 

I don't speak in terms of "proof" unless in a logical or mathematical context.  I say burden of evidence otherwise.  "Burden of proof" in scientific context comes off as a little unlearned.

 

You actually can prove negatives and positives.  We do it all the time.  Proofs belong to the realms of logic and within them, positive and negatives are proven routinely.

 

If you're trying to get me to come up with some argumentative proof against something in this thread, you're wasting your time.  I questioned the legitimacy of the evidence provided.  That is like challenging a premise in an argument.  It is not the same as claiming the opposite of that argument's conclusion.  It is not even close to making a claim for a entirely different position.

[Dakman]

And away Shadowhawk goes on his own wee tangent, he's been dying to drag up his usual endless you tube clips and bring out his real reason to be involved in this thread, he's using it to argue his pet subject of what is evidence  

 

His endless drone like subject that goes on and on and on for 76 pages sometimes 

 

 

[Duchykins]

I know.  SH is a trip.  I think the last time I talked to him was last year, but it doesn't look like he changed much since it seems he's prepping to go into one of his circular clusterfucks.

[old_school]

 

 

Or they are just anomalies and because it at a point seems to resemble a face morons who need something to want to prove an invisible non existent being will grasp any chance to try to support their nonsense beliefs and claims with any crazy crap they can find

It is so easy to recognize the faces in those photographs that even a child could do it.

Only a childlike mind would then attribute it as a spirit of god ....


Just as faces can been recognised in tree trunks or piles of leaves or any other number of patterns that happen in a physical world does not make them spiritual or god like.

 

 

The face of the spirit is not the Spirit of God. It is probably a human spirit. And he/she is in a chariot of God which is the living work of the Holy Spirit. The orb itself is the chariot, not the spirit within.
 

[old_school]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

 

 

 

Also aliens.  Mass sightings of UFOs.

 

And chupacabra.  Nessie.  Mermaids.

 

Demons.  Black magic.  Voodoo miracles.  Chakras.  Mothman (not the movie).

 

Krishna.  Shiva.  Jinn.  Muhammad.

 

Blah blah blah...

 

 

You think Christians are the only ones that see stuff?

 

That's cute.

 

 

So what is your point?  The things you listed are not all the same.  Atheists don't see some things and that makes them....?
 

 

That makes them sane and not gullible 

 

 

It is foolish not to believe in God and His Son Jesus Christ.
 

[Dakman]

 

 

 

Or they are just anomalies and because it at a point seems to resemble a face morons who need something to want to prove an invisible non existent being will grasp any chance to try to support their nonsense beliefs and claims with any crazy crap they can find

It is so easy to recognize the faces in those photographs that even a child could do it.

Only a childlike mind would then attribute it as a spirit of god ....


Just as faces can been recognised in tree trunks or piles of leaves or any other number of patterns that happen in a physical world does not make them spiritual or god like.

 

 

The face of the spirit is not the Spirit of God. It is probably a human spirit. And he/she is in a chariot of God which is the living work of the Holy Spirit. The orb itself is the chariot, not the spirit within.
 

 

and your proof is………….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Many people have reported seeing deceased relatives. Also, there are many reports of people seeing Jesus and angels.
 

 

 

 

Also aliens.  Mass sightings of UFOs.

 

And chupacabra.  Nessie.  Mermaids.

 

Demons.  Black magic.  Voodoo miracles.  Chakras.  Mothman (not the movie).

 

Krishna.  Shiva.  Jinn.  Muhammad.

 

Blah blah blah...

 

 

You think Christians are the only ones that see stuff?

 

That's cute.

 

 

So what is your point?  The things you listed are not all the same.  Atheists don't see some things and that makes them....?
 

 

That makes them sane and not gullible 

 

 

It is foolish not to believe in God and His Son Jesus Christ.
 

 

It is foolish to believe anything you post 

[shifter]