EminemBase vs. Blu - God

[classthe_king]

@Le Tunisan.

The universe exists. Fact.

There is no evidence that God exists.


Then you bring up these question that we can't answer (origin of the universe) and think that's proof for a God or gives anything to your side of the argument. It's fucked up logic.

But it's such a common thing for people to bring up. How does this give your side of the argument any substance?

the question is who created the universe?

the answer is either:

1/ god
2/ it just came like that

No. There's

1/ Your god
2/ it just came like that
3/ it's always existed
4/ it was the hindu god
5/ it was the roman gods
6/ it was the greek gods
7/ it was the babylonian gods
8/ It was a giant space panda from another dimension
9/ It was created by a guy named Todd in a science experiment

Not all options are given equal merit and not all options have equal credibility. There is as much evidence for god as there is Todd.

[CrashBand]

the question is who created the universe?

the answer is either:

1/ god
2/ it just came like that

That's not the question, lmao.

And you still need to prove their is a god.

You can't say "I don't know why the sky is blue -> therefore Dragonite exists."

It's not a sound argument.

[Le Tunisien]

the question is who created the universe?

the answer is either:

1/ god
2/ it just came like that

That's not the question, lmao.

And you still need to prove their is a god.

You can't say "I don't know why the sky is blue -> therefore Dragonite exists."

It's not a sound argument.

and you cant just say, i dunno who created the universe therefore it created itself

[CrashBand]

We're not saying that.

So you concede this bring nothing to your argument for the existence to god and you should stop bringing it up?

[Eedee]

I think mathematics needs to update a few things.

Le Tunisien's Law of Probability: "If an event has two possible outcomes, those outcomes are both equally as likely."

Let's throw all the other religions out of the equation as well.

[CrashBand]

I think mathematics needs to update a few things.

Le Tunisien's Law of Probability: "If an event has two possible outcomes, those outcomes are both equally as likely."

Let's throw all the other religions out of the equation as well.

Well, an argument for intelligent design. Covers all of them.

[Eedee]

I think mathematics needs to update a few things.

Le Tunisien's Law of Probability: "If an event has two possible outcomes, those outcomes are both equally as likely."

Let's throw all the other religions out of the equation as well.

Well, an argument for intelligent design. Covers all of them.

Yeah but he's arguing for a specific god.

[Block]

I think mathematics needs to update a few things.

Le Tunisien's Law of Probability: "If an event has two possible outcomes, those outcomes are both equally as likely."

Schrodinger's cat..

Although when applied, as was made famous in the movie 21, the odds change significantly if there are more variables and given more chance for change

[classthe_king]

And what does Shrodinger's cat have to do with it

[Block]

And what does Shrodinger's cat have to do with it

Everything. Given 2 variables (whether or not God exists) and not having sufficient proof for either, it's a 50 / 50 chance.


Don't retort with "there's proof for atheism blah blah" because I'm not really interested in making you look foolish again. I'm just stating that, although not being argued correctly at all, Le has a point.

[classthe_king]

And what does Shrodinger's cat have to do with it

Everything. Given 2 variables (whether or not God exists) and not having sufficient proof for either, it's a 50 / 50 chance.


Don't retort with "there's proof for atheism blah blah" because I'm not really interested in making you look foolish again. I'm just stating that, although not being argued correctly at all, Le has a point.

1. You don't know what Schrodinger's cat is
2. It is absolutely not 50/50
3. You never even came close to making me look foolish

Those are the only 3 points I'm making. You can be on with your day now

[Block]

And what does Shrodinger's cat have to do with it

Everything. Given 2 variables (whether or not God exists) and not having sufficient proof for either, it's a 50 / 50 chance.


Don't retort with "there's proof for atheism blah blah" because I'm not really interested in making you look foolish again. I'm just stating that, although not being argued correctly at all, Le has a point.

1. You don't know what Schrodinger's cat is
2. It is absolutely not 50/50
3. You never even came close to making me look foolish

Those are the only 3 points I'm making. You can be on with your day now

I'm shocked that you didn't format your post like this:

>You don't know


Or do you only jack my style when I'm not looking?


You don't know what Schrodinger's cat is

Really? Because I'm pretty sure I just simplified it. Cat in a box given certain variables. The box is never opened, therefore the chance of the cat being alive or dead can be 50/50.



It is absolutely not 50/50
You never even came close to making me look foolish

It is. I have (multiple people have commented on it as well. Plus you indirectly conceded), and your pathetic emotes aren't going to change that fact. Go make a song about it.


You've idolized me from day one. What really makes you think anything you say or do is going to change this fact? I built you. You're just an extremely mislead, annoyingly obnoxious version of myself. An experiment that went wrong.

[classthe_king]

No, Schrodinger's cat is supposed to be a real life example to help people understand quantum physics. You can't look to see whether the cat is dead or alive without effecting the experiment so before you look the cat is both dead and alive. It has nothing to do with the probability of real world problems lol

You argued against evolution lmao you made yourself look foolish off of the get go

[Block]

No, Schrodinger's cat is supposed to be a real life example to help people understand quantum physics. You can't look to see whether the cat is dead or alive without effecting the experiment so before you look the cat is both dead and alive. It has nothing to do with the probability of real world problems lol

God existing isn't 'real world problems' it has everything to do with it. Simpleton.

You argued against evolution lmao you made yourself look foolish off of the get go

That is the best you've got? Really? I'm sorely unimpressed. Given the fact that I basically did the internet version of pissing in your mouth in our last little fiasco on this topic, I'm not sure your rhetoric is worth very much.

Also, why did you conveniently not acknowledge the rest of my post?

>Was it because
>You know that
>I'm right?


You should probably go back to biting sadistik and making repetitive, nonsensical screeches.. This scene really isn't your forte.

[classthe_king]

God existing isn't 'real world problems' it has everything to do with it. Simpleton.

God existing has nothing to do with the quantum state of atoms. Calling someone a simpleton after being wrong doesn't make you look good

That is the best you've got? Really? I'm sorely unimpressed. Given the fact that I basically did the internet version of pissing in your mouth in our last little fiasco on this topic, I'm not sure your rhetoric is worth very much.

Also, why did you conveniently not acknowledge the rest of my post?

>Was it because
>You know that
>I'm right?


You should probably go back to biting sadistik and making repetitive, nonsensical screeches.. This scene really isn't your forte.

Because you're just slinging stupid shit to try and get under my skin but I honestly could care less about anything you say because you still DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION