tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post4913805821269308334..comments2024-02-29T23:54:20.606-08:00Comments on What had happen' was.....: FacePalm of the Day #66 - Debunking Christianity: Christians demand that I must show their faith is impossible before they will see that it is improbable.mmcelhaneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-79020964548849691722011-02-26T21:14:50.010-08:002011-02-26T21:14:50.010-08:00We have been through most of the evidence already ...<b>We have been through most of the evidence already that the mind is more than just the brain but you refuse to not only acknowledge the evidence existence but fail to understand it.</b><br /><br />Maybe we have, but I am pretty sure you've just given your opinions on why you think (want) this is the case. How about some peer reviewed papers?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-45198077688146619572011-02-26T15:08:42.228-08:002011-02-26T15:08:42.228-08:00It's like you didn't even read my response...It's like you didn't even read my response. Of course in his and your warped worldview you see things that way. We have been through most of the evidence already that the mind is more than just the brain but you refuse to not only acknowledge the evidence existence but fail to understand it. With a mind such as yours - hostile to God and His Word - it will take God to get you to see more. Again, that is why I pray for you.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-37315161658421933952011-02-26T14:13:21.471-08:002011-02-26T14:13:21.471-08:00Also, how about you present some of this alleged e...Also, how about you present some of this alleged evidence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-34437298526793943882011-02-26T14:12:29.871-08:002011-02-26T14:12:29.871-08:00It's almost as if you didn't even read Joh...It's almost as if you didn't even read John Loftus' original post. He was speaking directly to you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-77959768383748665782011-02-26T08:45:19.432-08:002011-02-26T08:45:19.432-08:00Unless you can prove otherwise, all evidence point...<b>Unless you can prove otherwise, all evidence points to the mind being a product of the brain. There's probably a Nobel in it for you if you can prove otherwise. Good luck. </b><br /><br />Unless you can prove that there is no mind or mental faculties transcending the human brain, I think you have over stating your point. You are wrong that there is no evidence pointing to the mind being more than just an extension of the material brain. What you should have said was "there is no evidence that I would accept because I must deny that I have a soul that belong to God and he will hold me accountable for every word and deed I have done". That is if you were honest.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-1319896375474103522011-02-25T18:12:01.901-08:002011-02-25T18:12:01.901-08:00Unless you can prove otherwise, all evidence point...Unless you can prove otherwise, all evidence points to the mind being a product of the brain. There's probably a Nobel in it for you if you can prove otherwise. Good luck.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-55078879489879404532011-02-25T17:25:57.827-08:002011-02-25T17:25:57.827-08:00You, obviously are no Einstein. Also, I doubt anyo...<b>You, obviously are no Einstein. Also, I doubt anyone called him "stupid". Possibly crazy or wrong, but the point is he had data and math working for his conclusions. You have a verse from an ancient near eastern poem that you really, really, really want to be true. All the data from multiple disciplines contradicts your hypothesis, and no data supports it, which makes your hypothesis stupid, very, very stupid.</b><br /><br />Obviously, you don't know how visceral objections to a different idea can be. On top of that if I'm wrong or right has no bearing on if Noah was are real person or on the veracity of the Bible. Really dumb reasoning. I admit I could be misreading the scripture. However it's going to take more than your disagreement to make the hypothesis wrong.<br /><br /><b>Also, the fact that peoples minds experience "results" from brain damage doesn't help your position in the least.</b><br /><br />You still don't seem to understand that I am not arguing that the human mind and human brain are completely separate and can't affect the other. I'm not. You are trying to say it's either one or the other. I have never said that. More poor reasoning on your part.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-86611750853877518602011-02-25T16:47:48.478-08:002011-02-25T16:47:48.478-08:00You, obviously are no Einstein. Also, I doubt any...You, obviously are no Einstein. Also, I doubt anyone called him "stupid". Possibly crazy or wrong, but the point is he had data and math working for his conclusions. You have a verse from an ancient near eastern poem that you really, really, really want to be true. All the data from multiple disciplines contradicts your hypothesis, and no data supports it, which makes your hypothesis stupid, very, very stupid.<br /><br />Also, the fact that peoples minds experience "results" from brain damage doesn't help your position in the least.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-9314834165247278142011-02-25T13:59:49.125-08:002011-02-25T13:59:49.125-08:00You are absolutely correct. However your pangea hy...<b>You are absolutely correct. However your pangea hypothesis is stupid. Very very stupid.</b><br /><br />Says you. A lot of people thought Einstein was stupid too. Time will tell who is right. And if I'm wrong it means I'm wrong not the Bible. <br /><br /><b>If the mind is dependent upon the brain for its existence (which you seem to concede), then that is strong evidence that they can't be distinct or independent after the death (or damaging) of the brain.</b><br /><br />I did not mean to imply that the mind is dependent on the existence of the brain. I said that they were interrelated. Given that two people can have the same part of their brains damage and experience different results and consequences means that it is <i>way</i> more complicated than you seem to think it is.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-32086953016772812432011-02-25T13:41:13.655-08:002011-02-25T13:41:13.655-08:00Just because an hypothesis is held by a minority d...<b>Just because an hypothesis is held by a minority doesn't mean it's not true or stupid.</b><br /><br />You are absolutely correct. However your pangea hypothesis is stupid. Very very stupid.<br /><br />If the mind is dependent upon the brain for its existence (which you seem to concede), then that is strong evidence that they can't be distinct or independent after the death (or damaging) of the brain.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-70026674125843281912011-02-25T13:25:10.978-08:002011-02-25T13:25:10.978-08:00By the way, just because the human mind and the hu...By the way, just because the human mind and the human Brain are interrelated during life does not mean that they can't be distinct or even independent after death.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-75013913811095767542011-02-25T13:21:31.321-08:002011-02-25T13:21:31.321-08:00Who said that the mind is not a product of the bra...Who said that the mind is not a product of the brain? I said that they were distinct and not the same thing. Can't you see the difference?<br /><br />Guess not. <br /><br />As for who lived on Pangea, I haven't checked how many scientist how the view that people could have lived on Pangea. Just because an hypothesis is held by a minority doesn't mean it's not true or stupid. There was a time when the theory of relativity and Quantum Mechanics were both held by a minority of scientists. The majority can be wrong. Just go ahead and provide your evidence that there is no possible way people lived on Pangea. Just because you don't think it's probable is not good enough.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-86615799036940453712011-02-25T12:41:50.188-08:002011-02-25T12:41:50.188-08:00A majority of cognitive scientist hold the theory ...A majority of cognitive scientist hold the theory that mind is a product of brain.<br /><br />How many scientist think homo sapiens live od on Pangea 175 million years ago.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-79368479682664903092011-02-25T12:00:37.752-08:002011-02-25T12:00:37.752-08:00You mean like not being able to tell a difference ...You mean like not being able to tell a difference between a mind and a brain? Yup, hilarity ensues.mmcelhaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567242628894011776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767816867480783958.post-39251240039051630392011-02-25T10:20:25.760-08:002011-02-25T10:20:25.760-08:00I have to admit, I had a good chuckle when I read ...I have to admit, I had a good chuckle when I read John Loftus' original post. The first thing I thought of was your hairbrained notion that homo sapiens live on Pangea 175 million years ago. Good stuff...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com