[Elijah Mee, PhD]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

Evidence. Not. Supported. By. Assertion.

is there a prize?

__________________________________________________

Here's a great example from our resident "scientist"

Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Therefore, there is no evidence to prove
An outstanding start there, precisely the opposite of what any secularist claims particularly secularist physicists (and especially astrophysicists), chemists and biologists. And secularist mediums, warlocks & necromancers for that matter just in case any persistent dolt was going to introduce such a theme in a "debunking" display.

OK, so moving on to another post we get:
Attachment 21340
..which surpasses even the opening gambit [above] in that the "logic" dumped on us employs the very method whereby such "rationalists" as I suppose Mr Lunkhead considers himself to be demonstrate his tenet to be false.

How very sad that despite his considerable entertainment value Mr Lunkhead is on the well buttered tube leading directly to <b>HELL.

FOREVER

.

</b>

What system of formal logic is that? I know all about propositional and predicate logic, first-order languages and the like but it's nothing I recognise from my degree (computer science for Godless cretins).

Honestly, I wasted my money studying that heresy. All I did at university was do drugs and anger God.