The Not606 PL Board handbook

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Well said. You said that better than I ever could. <applause>

I'm sorry though pal, I won't even entertain a 0.001% chance that god exists.

I tend to agree with you fella. It’s just on a technical point, that unless you have 100% proof, then there is always the chance, no matter how small that you could be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted
how can you prove santa doesn't exist? He might not be delivering presents, just a technicality but for all you know he could be buried deep inside the arctic where no one has seen him or he might have died a while back or he's decided all kids are just naughty and do not deserve presents?

Because there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that we have made the story up.

Although that said, there was a person called St Nicholas, so maybe Santa did exist after all.
 
so what you are really saying is that HIAG might actually be a cambridge graduate, lawyer, rockgod and real estate mogul?

Gotcha <cheers>

Not sure anyone can prove he isn't

Just did a quick search of UK census names ... neither 'HIAG' nor 'Hoddle-Is-A-God' exists in the UK at this point in time - according to existing records <ok>

Did find a 'Hoddle-Is-A-Jobbie' ... but no proof that it's the same guy <laugh>

For the avoidance of doubt and to assuage the paranoids .... I didn't really <doh>
 
No you can't, if I say he arrived on my roof and clamboured down my chimney, how can you disprove that?

The burden of proof lies with those making the assertion that's how life works. It's bollocks until proven to be definitive fact

We could set up CCTV on your roof and test your theory to disprove it.

I do agree though that the burden of proof lies with those making the claim. The issue with religion is that people who subscribe to it would say that they don’t need to prove it as it’s their belief or faith that god exists.
 
Because there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that we have made the story up.

Although that said, there was a person called St Nicholas, so maybe Santa did exist after all.

you mean like the evidence that the bible was made up to? and every other religion for that matter :P.

I don't mind people believing what they believe but this proving/disproving thing is as real as santa and aliens and worm holes and the queen lizardman
 
you mean like the evidence that the bible was made up to? and every other religion for that matter :p.

I don't mind people believing what they believe but this proving/disproving thing is as real as santa and aliens and worm holes and the queen lizardman

I agree with you. I think I’ve just argued my own point irrelevant <laugh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tobes
We could set up CCTV on your roof and test your theory to disprove it.

I do agree though that the burden of proof lies with those making the claim. The issue with religion is that people who subscribe to it would say that they don’t need to prove it as it’s their belief or faith that god exists.

so after all that you agree with us. Cheers Piskie
 
  • Like
Reactions: PINKIE
so after all that you agree with us. Cheers Piskie

Yeah can we just pretend that I didn’t say any of that stuff I’ve just typed <whistle>

I think it’s because we’re dealing with different paradigms to explain something. As I’ve said, science would say that he burden of proof lies with those making the claim. Faith and religion would say that they don’t need scientific proof as it’s their belief that counts.
 
We could set up CCTV on your roof and test your theory to disprove it.

I do agree though that the burden of proof lies with those making the claim. The issue with religion is that people who subscribe to it would say that they don’t need to prove it as it’s their belief or faith that god exists.
They're welcome to say it is their belief, as its patently a belief system and nothing more. The day they prove it's fact is the day that they can say that those saying it's gold plated bullshit based on archaic fairy tales are wrong.

Until that day it remains bullshit, of no factual base whatsoever.

Oh and I said it was last Christmas if he doesn't come back it might be because I've been naughty and have been sniffing beak off a pair of strippers arse cheeks again <whistle>
 
  • Like
Reactions: PINKIE
I do agree though that the burden of proof lies with those making the claim. The issue with religion is that people who subscribe to it would say that they don’t need to prove it as it’s their belief or faith that god exists.

Yup...and a lot of good comes through religion too...and there is no burden of proof either. I tap into spirituality through my faith, no problem whatsoever. This always comes up...imagine a world full of Athiests...no thanks.

I don't know about anyone else but for me the biggest problem on this planet is the narcissism of Man not the notion of God.
 
that's because there is no proof.

It's like saying there are UFOs flying in the sky every night. You can't prove that they don't exist but you'd never believe the person arguing that there are :p

Not true really.

Religion v science is a nonsense approach IMHO

Science speaks from when everything started, big bang, a biogenesis, primordial soup etc etc

Religion speaks of a creator making however it happened happen.

Science never said there isn't a creator.

religion caused problems by making the Creator a man with a white beard.

And atheists got together and made a religion of their very own