It's only that.. there is soooo much misinformation on the net..
There most certainly is!
It's the same with... Dr. Howind... etc... 80% correct, 20% misinformation... (in my mind)
If you mean Dr Kent Hovind, such a ratio is quite imaginary.
Im content critic.. not source critic.... Mercola is a good source, but not all his content seems right... same with Cutler, same with Huggins, same with CureZone.... Same with EVERYTHING....
Ah, good old you-can't-knowism...
In the set of all things which might potentially be known, is there not a subset of things that are difficult to determine? Is there not a set of things that are quite easily determined? Is there any reason to confuse the two subsets?
It is invalid to extrapolate from "some things are difficult to figure out" to "nothing can be figured out".
It's bits and pieces spread around for us to figure out the "whole" picture by..... individually.... sad but true..
That's how... Sunshine got well... if i remember correct..
That is ofcourse how we all get better (and or) well, or try as we might...
Ofcourse yoo too Bex, and Sean are content critics... not blind source critics like the rest of the sheeple we all know in our real lives around us...
Hard to say what is meant by "content critics". Disliking a conclusion, would that count?
Who knows whats right.... Who knows if God is the devil, and the devil is God, or if God is God, and the devil is the devil...
Everyone. Well, everyone who cares knows.
Can't be 100.00000000% sure, never can be with anything... Only can place a bet and hope its the right one...
Your you-can't-knowism is self defeating. How could you know what you just said is true, if nothing can be known?
Supposing there was a method to establish your premise, what would prevent that very same method from being applied to other premises?
Does God someplaces in the bible sound like an evil psychopath?
No, but you do in more than one place.
See what I mean? Who but an evil psychopath would desire to mislead anyone so, jeopardizing (you imagine) their state for all eternity? Who else?
"Could God create a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it?"
This childish crown-jewel-of-scofferdom is well ignored by many a believer. It has no potential to fool anyone who isn't desperate to be fooled in the first place.
However, I have chosen not to ignore it.
http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=45433#Post45433yes.. and he did.... (maybe)..
You mean you don't know? Oh, well of course!
created satan.. satan won... and rewrote history with him as god...
According to... ?
atleast its a logic possibility
What? It makes no sense whatsoever outside the evil psychopath community, anyhow.
Do you assert as fact everything you believe to be a logical possibility? Do you really believe simply wishing something to be so makes it a logical possibility?
I have the opportunity here to prove this combination is incorrect merely by existing. Then again, so does most of reality.
from how evil God sounds in the bible from time to time...
Misleading people is evil. Slander is evil.
Point is.. we can't really be SURE of ANYTHING....
We can be sure we've just read the words of an illogical you-can't-knowist.
Thats the sad f***ing truth...
Sad would be anyone being fooled by by such nonsense.
That's the challange! (THE challange)
What? To convince oneself one doesn't know anything? Nobody's ever managed it, and anyone who contemplates "THE challenge" can see it's sheer futility. What sane person would even undertake it in the first place? What does it promise, even if one should achieve the goal?
That this pursuit is disingenuous is easy to see. Surest way to stop knowing is pretty obvious - unless there really is a God, and the knowing won't stop.
That's the rub, isn't it? In order to stop knowing, one needs to know it's safe to stop, and not many scoffers (some - yes, more than any other religion or worldview) have enough faith in their disbelief. But even for those who do (assuming for the sake of making the point that they're correct) just what do they gain?
