Message from @ZSLiby Studios
Discord ID: 806367483627044925
Of course they fired him because it goes against their theories
rip
ya ill find it for you
Yes burden of proof, evolution is the newer theory and has the burden of proof to irrefutably convince the older theory. You also came to the faith and religion chat attempting to fulfill your own goals with atheism and evolution putting the burden of proof once again on you as you attempt to contradict the primary point in this channel. You haven’t done so, as a matter of fact you give somewhat mediocre arguments at best and then insult those who believe in God
That’s called micro evolution and is different to macro evolution theory that you are familiar with. https://www.kolbecenter.org/should-catholics-believe-in-evolution/
Ey! whats up eggy?
Lab settings don't happen naturally. You can "prove" anything in a lab setting because you can manipulate it
also, it didnt happen spontaniously in a lab setting, someone started it
But evolution is something that couldn't have been controlled. You can make anything happen if you control it. I can control a rock by picking it up, but that doesn't mean it'll pick itself up.
If you come up with a new theory you have the burden of proof, thus newer theories have burden of proof.
It's random, meaning that lab settings don't mean anything or prove anything
he has a point tho...
I’m not arguing in bad faith, I have never pretended to believe your claims
Yes you’re right you still haven’t irrefutably proven your point. It still lies with you
Why would any of us refute out points?
if you could refute your point then its a flawed point isnt it?
It doesn't make any sense
of course
Again I’ve never pretended to entertain your notions
Why would I reword it. In the first 30 seconds of the video you sent you showed that atheism bears the burden of proof. It was atheists who first challenged the common belief so it is they that must provide irrefutable evidence for their views
Why would atheist's have to follow the burden of proof?
But there is no reason that the burden of proof applies. There's nothing to prove.
but your making a positive argument in favor of your negative
Because by default the state of people is to believe in a god or in God. If that is the default position then anything other than the default must provide irrefutable evidence for their view and so much of it that they over whelm the default to become the new default
but you then claim evolution
You say evolution exists
you must prove evolution
Ok and since everyone here believes that He does, the burden of proof is on you to irrefutably prove your point
that too
im willing to engage
we have engaged you... i've been here for a log time being berated for not proving that god exists XD
Tu quoque
thank you 😃
cool thanks i'd love to continue our conversation
You keep deflecting when we engage you.
definitely interested
You’ve ignored me
Sad