nothing is.

so my current statement wasnt?

you have already contradicted yourself

paradoxically

have i?

Our knowledge base has evolved over time

so semantics(implied my statement was semantics) nothjing is semantics

nothing is something and everything is something, so i was just agreeing, yo.

@Beemann you are using the God of the gaps fallacy lol

No I'm not

How are you reversing all of this?

"God of the gaps" is a theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence. "

all this talk about the existence of god sure brings back memories, to like 10 years ago, when it was agreed upon that god does indeed not exist (at least in any sense described with religion)

I'm saying gaps are not proof

I didn't agree.

i was mostly being facetious

I am doing the *opposite* of the God of the gaps

i know many still disagree and i respect that

I mean hard to agree when the claimm isn't even defined.

exactly

@Beemann I’m smart 😝. lol jk.

What you are setting up is the God of the gaps fallacy. Science proves this wrong, science proves that wrong, therefore God doesn’t exist.

It’s a variation of the God of the gaps fallacy that assumes that only a supernatural proof for God exists.

is god just a creator? or does he also require you to be moral? does he not let you eat meat on certain days etc? is it the god of the bible or what

No, I'm asking for a non supernatural proof, I'm being told that this is a bad request

Proof of what?

You gave "people evolved to believe X" and I explained why that isn't proof for God

Beeman. Prove there is not teacup floating out in space in orbit around earth

Similarly you spoke to spirituality, which isn't necessarily religiously based

It just speaks to non material needs

@Beemann It also isn’t a proof that God didn’t.

No, but you're proving the existence of God

My non belief is contingent on lack of evidence

Beemann prove that there isnt a pussy troll that lives deep within the earth near the core

Not preponderance of evidence against

>assumes that God doesn’t utilize material.

Prove he does

@Bayesed strawman.

I actually happen to know there is a pussy troll living deep within the earth....

my point is you cant prove that there isn't

pillowpants?

and yes the burden of evidence is then on the one making the claim

so you must prove that god does exist