On 5/30/2017 4:17 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 5/30/2017 1:31 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 5/30/2017 7:58 AM, notX wrote:
On 05/29/2017 12:39 AM, Muggles wrote:

[snip]

Millions of people also agree a God exists, so why is that also not
valid?

Lt. Cmdr. Data: Would you choose one life over one thousand, sir?

Captain Jean-Luc Picard: I refuse to let arithmetic decide questions
like that.

Millions of people believing in something has NOTHING to do with the
reality of that thing.

Likewise, millions of people believe in love and that it exists, but
cannot prove it exists. The only thing they can use is what they
believe are examples of that expression of emotion.


Agree with Bod. I still can't fathom how you're oblivious to the answers
provided.

Proof is usually given by providing empirical evidence.

Anecdotal evidence, which are the answers Bod has given, is not
considered to be scientifically valid/equal to providing empirical evidence.

Emotions exists and are proved daily.

The ONLY means of providing evidence of emotions are anecdotal, not
empirical.

Are you saying that by providing anecdotal evidence is a valid means to
prove something exists?


The existence of a physical creator is not.

The existence of a physical creator is proven by providing anecdotal
evidence, just as the existence of emotions is proven by providing
anecdotal evidence.

Neither emotion or a God can be proven by providing empirical evidence.

Time to stop beating an irrelevant dead horse.

Why do you think this subject is dead? Are you saying that it's OK to
prove emotions exist by providing anecdotal evidence?

--
Maggie