Posts by AuldSoul

37

Is this the BEST of all POSSIBLE WORLDS? Depends on this...!

by Terry in

if humanity were created by a supreme being who was essentially good wouldn't this be the best of all possible worlds?.

both adam and eve lacked what they desired most.

how is that the best of all possible worlds?.

AuldSoul

"in the same manner" ....

Just figured I'd point out the exact part of LT's comment that went right past your hasty head.

You're welcome!

37

Is this the BEST of all POSSIBLE WORLDS? Depends on this...!

by Terry in

if humanity were created by a supreme being who was essentially good wouldn't this be the best of all possible worlds?.

both adam and eve lacked what they desired most.

how is that the best of all possible worlds?.

AuldSoul

I find it endlessly amusing that you rationalize against God by using a story many Christians don't take literally. The best part is where you misstate the case against God in your haste to convict.

Both Adam and Eve lacked what they desired most.

Um ... I don't remember that part of the story. The woman saw that is was good for food and desirable to the eyes ... like a banana, or a pineapple upside-down cake. The man found that the woman had eaten it and chose her over life. You convert that narrative accounting into "what they desired most"?

Hilarious.

Also, the desire in Eve did not arise innately, according to the narrative. She was deceptively led to the desire by a spirit creature who already wanted to be like God. You misrepresent this portion of the account, as well. Since your entire argument rests on Adam and Eve desiring something at the point of their creation (logically required by the system being "built to fail") that God was unwilling to give them, and since that detail isn't reported in the narrative you reference as your basis for claim of Tort against God, you have no case.

But your attempt was funny as hell!

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

Jeffro: ...then your reasoning purports that any claim from the past that coins frequently landed on their sides must have actually happened, AND, that it happened by means of extra-terrestrial intervention.

No. You keep using absolutes in your rephrasing of my point, Jeffro.

My reasoning purports that the presence of many claims from the past that coins frequently landed on their sides in the presence of extra-human sources of influence, and exclusively in the presence of such influence, then we cannot out of hand disavow that such might have actually happened once we achieve a technology that mimics the effect, however clumsy our first attempts might be.

I am not suggesting that extra-human sources might have actually influenced coins in the past because, to my knowledge, no such accounts exist.

I am suggesting that our discovery of some crude and rudimentary ways of accomplishing the impregnation of virgins prevents us from eliminating the possibility that past accounts of this happening solely in the presence ofextra-human sources of influence had some truth in them. I am also suggesting that past communication of the possibility of accomplishing the effect of a birth without sexual union is attributed solely to extra-human sources of information and influence.

Jeffro: Um... no, the claim of pregnancy without intercourse by "extra-human sources" has not been proven true through scientific discovery at all. Science has proven that the existing gametes can be brought together without sexual intercourse to produce an embryo. There is no proof that this has ever happened (in mammals) without human intervention.

Jeffro, devices employed by humans are extra-human. Including bows and arrows. This certainly includes the machines needed by humans to preform the feat in question. There is no proof that production of a viable embryo without sexual intercourse and without technological intervention has ever occurred.

The claim you restated is not the claim I made. The possibility of virgin pregnancy by means of extra-human sources has been proven. Technology is required, crude though our present methods may be.

Jeffro: Not only transference, but also "spontaneous generation" of the genetic material. Up until the 1800s, people were naive enough to believe in that kind of thing. Most of us know better now.

No. Only transference is required to accomplish the feat. We know that for sure, now. All of us can make ourselves fully and scientifically aware that transference is all that is required. Pretending otherwise just to make your point is a little sad, in my opinion.

Theoretically a kind of "spontaneous generation" is possible, from the perspective of ignorant, superstitious Stone Age and Bronze Age peoples. We can already imagine it as a future reality without getting squeamish, awe-filled, or worshipful in the least.

Jeffro: The postulation lends no support to the idea that those supposed aliens therefore have technology for artificial insemination.

Scientific curiosity about self and surroundings seems to be a required driver for technological progress. Comprehension of and manipulation of genomes is a relatively new thing for any beings in the homo genus. But we can still only "play around" with them compared to where we envision our capabilities to go.

I am tiring of your repeated revision of my point. I won't restate my argument to you again until you address my argument without perverting it into one you'd rather have with me. I am sure you are up to it, aren't you?

Curiously,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

Virgin births aren't a huge assumption, ringo5. They are still fairly rare, but they don't happen nearly as infrequently as they used to. The more recent ones are very well attested to, often with video and sound as documentary proof.

Virgin births are a fact, not a possibility. They are far from even a small assumption, much less a huge one.

Do you disagree?

Curiously,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

But--heck! It is possible for it to land on edge and stay there.

What if technology is developed that makes it highly probable that the coin will successfully land on its edge repeatedly with a frequency sufficient to establish a general idea of just how likely it is?

But, really, there is no natural mechanism possible for asexual reproduction among humans. Human reproduction without sex and without technological intervention is not possible; for this to ever happen it would be more like a perfect sphere landing perfectly balanced on one of its four corners.

The fact is, if it did happen, it happened due to technological intervention. The ubiquitous presence of extra-human interactions found in the descriptions of human conception without sex do not point to anything conflicting with technological intervention.

Anomalous interactions with humans by extra-human sources would prove a rule, too, would they not, Terry?

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

Lore,

I agree that Jesus came very late in the virgin birth listings. But I still haven't found any account that doesn't ascribe the happening to a strange, mystical being (at least) and almost always the ascription goes to deity.

For the record, I never said "virgin birth = artificial insemination" ... however if the accounts throughout history are correct in stating that pregnant women had not had intercourse, then obviously there was some method of artificial insemination or transference of genetic material into the wombs of the women in question.

I said that the possibility of a virgin becoming pregnant without intercourse is always attributed (throughout history) to extra-human sources. Very recently, after scientific skepticism yielded to scientific discovery, this possibility was proven true.

Since it is possible given certain technologies, it has always been possible given certain technologies. Especially is it possible if the accounts are also accurate in reporting extra-human sources. While their reports about extra-human sources are no doubt severely flawed in the technical particulars, there is no doubt that the existence of extra-human technology would easily account for all virgin birth stories.

As I have written many times before, anyone who believes in a being that isn't from earth believes in at least one extra-terrestrial. Anyone who believes these beings interact with earth also believes these being(s) have technology vastly superior to our own.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

ringo5,

You seem rather adroit at missing my point, so I thought to return the favor.

Or if you wish, a comparison of the probabilities of the following possibilities occurring ...

I'll decline, since whether the possibility occurred is entirely immaterial to how the possibility was communicated. The thread topic was fairly specific on the point. The knowledge of the possibility of human conception without intercourse has been attributed to extra-human sources for thousands of years, even though no human knew or claimed to know how to do it. Up until the early 1900s, when scientists started to speculate that it might be practically possible given technological advances, scientists believed it was not possible.

As far as I know, prior to the 1900s no human source has ever been credited with the knowledge that conception without intercourse is possible. Throughout human history, many extra-human sources have been credited with this special knowledge. I think this meets the criteria of the initial challenge.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

Terry,

So, what does it matter?

I agree, insofar as I have a hard time grasping how a virgin birth account is meant to stir me to faith, spirituality, Nirvana or any higher plateau of understanding, compassion, empathy, etc.

However, it remains that there are many of these accounts from a number of different cultures and in each the possibility of human conception without intercourse is attributed to an extra-human source.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

Jeffro,

ringo5 asked a specific question of fact. I answered his question factually. The probability that humans (as a species) can conceive without sexual intercourse is 100% probability; therefore the probability of the possibility is likewise 100%.

The probability of it occurring in any specific incident at any specific time period would obviously be adjusted to a more specific set of constraints, while the probability of the possibility would remain at a constant 100% regardless of specific constraints.

If, in 60 years, the scenario you described is not required for artificial insemination would you then require that the scenario available 60 years from now be probable for that specific instance you mentioned? What about the methods available 200 years from now? You are insisting that the method we use currently be available over 2,000 years ago in order to credit these accounts as possible.

The effects are possible (i.e. conception without intercourse) at any point in human history irrespective of the methods used. Surely you agree, don't you?

You are interchanging two different statistical ideas: probability and possibility. I am keeping them distinct. Revelation of the possibility of human conception without intercourse is always attributed to divine sources in every culture that possesses these traditional accounts of women who are impregnated without having had sex. Many of these accounts are sourced from 2,000 years ago and more.

I am not, and have not, argued that any specific instance actually occurred, nor that these accounts of conception without intercourse are even probably true. You have put those arguments in my ... fingertips, I suppose.

I have argued that the possibility was revealed exclusively by extra-human sources (according to all accounts); these accounts were deemed facetious by the finest scientific minds as lately as the turn of the 20th century simply because they did not know how it could be accomplished. Now you deem them facetious simply because you do not know how they could have been accomplished back then. You no longer have the arguments of three generations ago at your disposal because we now know a few ways in which the feat could be accomplished. We have theorized many other ways, all of which are feasible given certain technological advances.

This recently accepted possibility of conception without intercourse has always been possible, and communication of the possibility was consistently attributed to extra-human origins.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

284

NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry in

somebody is always insisting they have an invisible and mysterious source of divine information and selling it like hotcakes and syrup.

but, why are you still buying?

when will you ever learn that this is a scam among many scams.

AuldSoul

ringo5: If someone asked you for the probability of this possibility, what number would you give?

The probability of the possibility that humans can concieve without intercourse is 100%. It is now a proven fact. Many people alive today are not the product of sexual intercourse; QED humans could always have conceived without intercourse.

If it is possible it has always been possible. Do you not know that basic fact of the way reality works? If not, I find that surprising.

In ancient times, the possibility of non-sexual human conception was always credited to divine and extra-human sources.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul