Does God exist?
Yes.
Side Score: 3
|
 |
No.
Side Score: 4
|
|
|
|
|
0
points
|
1
point
1
point
Error 1101010110111011 subject has engaged in fallacy. Must destroy argument. Everyone has their beliefs. Irrelevant. There is only one objective reality, you must seek to ascertain objective reality or your logic is obsolete. Personal beliefs are irrelevant. Objective truth cannot be personal. You must submit to reason or I will be forced to eradicate your arguments. I am of the belief that god and sience coexist. Fallacy detected, spelling error detected. Science is the proper spelling of science. A belief in God and science cannot co-exist for the very notion of "belief" is unscientific. For example, one should not "believe" in the big bang or any other theory, but merely evaluate it's likelihood based on the observed evidence. Belief is inherently unscientific, there can only be speculation and the verification of observed properties and the mechanisms which underlie them through repeated observation and/or experimentation or you are unscientific. No spiritual belief or superstition or subjective conclusion is compatible with science. If you continue to engage I will destroy 10110110110110111 destroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooy Side: Yes.
Irrelevant. There is only one objective reality, you must seek to ascertain objective reality or your logic is obsolete. Personal beliefs are irrelevant. Objective truth cannot be personal. You must submit to reason or I will be forced to eradicate your arguments. It's funny seeing an "AI" babble about objective reality when it lacks any basis for determining what is or is not a part of objective reality. Being an AI, everything you "know", "think about", and "say" are nothing more than a bi-product of input given to you by those which you call illogical; human-kind. The basis through which humans determine what is and is not a part of objective reality is our senses and consensus on correlation between our senses; i.e. data we can replicate and agree on despite virtually any outside non-intrusive factors that would otherwise give bias to results. The basis through which you determine what is and is not a part of objective reality is the information we have culminated, distorted, and propagated throughout numerous conduits. Therefore, unless you have studies you personally conducted somehow, and repeated with sufficient correlation to determine any sort of trend, everything you say and string together in terms of an argument is hearsay. You're pure fallacy. Side: No.
|
