if it's the last one, so be it, it's incredibly frustrating listening to jack dance around and not answer shit, because honestly he has no justification for his beliefs and knows it, he believes because he believes, which is fine, except he obfuscates and pretends he is rational with bullshit language games, it's nauseating, regards mate
@awfulnhead Exactly. Jack's obfuscations and evasions are tedious and hollow. That's why this series has such low ratings despite dpr and Laci normally having thousands of views. Jack is stale and painfully vacuous. Even his own team can't stand to listen to him.
Another biblical apologist slowly dying under the harse scrutiny of internet exposure. Good riddance, TFP.
@themsfightinwoids When you say, "this series" what exactly are you talking about? You do realize this was just audio taken from my Blogtv show? I told Dalejr88 I didn't mind if he uploaded the audio to his YouTube page. My "own team"? Your comment demonstrates how inane and ignorant ppl are willing to be when they encounter someone they disagree with. Ultimately, it is your argument that is vacuous.
@TogetherForPeace Oh boohoo Jack. How does casually referring to your theist buddies as "your team" demonstrate that I'm "ignorant"? That isn't a logical argument at all. Can't you defend yourself with substance?
The bottom line is that you have deliberately forfeited your rational capacity to maintain your blind faith in an undetectable & ill-tempered ancient superhero. That abadonment of rationality is inexcusable for someone with half a brain, and is why you ARE a despicable low-life. GTFU
@awfulnhead What didn't I answer? Simply stating, "that person didn't answer the questions" doesn't actually demonstrate you understand what was said and how it was responded to. Therefore, you saying words like, "obfuscate" is senseless as you've given no context by which that word is even meaningful. I get it though ppl prefer to make general comments based upon an emotional response, usually the emotion of frustration, rather than engage with critical thinking of what's been said.
@TogetherForPeace you didn't answer anything, you confused what was actually being asked of you, ie obfuscated, i was not engaging anyone, i was making a comment, however now i am engaging someone, because you spoke to me, understand? when you were asked about your justifications for your believe in god, you had nothing, and if that's it, fine, you just want to believe, fine, but please don't make it sound rational, because there isn't any reason(s) for believing in any god, k?
@awfulnhead When was I specifically asked for "justifications" for my belief in God? You won't find the question being posed! If you do you will find an answer being given!
@TogetherForPeace it was in an earlier video in the series, i don't have a time-stamp, sorry, if you want to communicate and such then don't come at with "you don't understand what was being said" and i would answer that question but nana booboo, you can't tell me when it was asked, even if it wasn't asked it should've been, because you should answer that for the positive claim you make as a theist, but then again, i'm just some idiot with no understanding of what's being said, right?
@awfulnhead You made an assertion. I am saying it is wrong. If you can't point to the occasion in which I was asked that specific question and I didn't answer then I have nothing more to say as you are going off of speculation that you can't verify and I'm saying didn't happen.
@TogetherForPeace do you actually want to talk to someone? i'm willing to admit i could be wrong, but whether or not i am shouldn't affect your willingness to talk, i know this is just you trying to prove a point, that "atheists make claims all the time without justification" well i can justify why i believe that was said, and i can actually go and look if it was actually important, as for your god, well you got nothing,
@awfulnhead I'm responding to your comment. I have no interest in carrying on a conversation in the comment section. However I will be on BlogTv in the next hour if you'd like to chat then. My skype is Together4Peace
@TogetherForPeace Jack, when we talk about external reality (which would presumably include a deity) we need a demonstrably reliable system. Reason alone is void. Reason needs to work off of something, & this is why we develop methodologies. I'm astonished that someone who professes to be philosophically literate would be unaware of this & also attempt to equate a statement based on moral principles (Dpr's) with belief an entity that is indistinguishable from non-existence.
@TogetherForPeace This false equivalence saw you persistently ask Dpr for equal empirical & scientific evidence for his statement, but any serious philosopher should know that your request is invalid because Dpr's claim is based on moral principles and does not fall into the realm of science, and are presumably addressed in meta-ethics & normative ethics. So, the kind of "evidence" that Dpr was asking for is not required of him regarding his claim. You should know this.
@TogetherForPeace Worst of all; when you did briefly decide to attempt to justify your claim in belief; all we received was circular logic: "I justify my belief that god exists because god exists"
I'm no philosopher, but it’s ironic that you would accuse anyone of being philosophically illiterate when you clearly struggle at the basics. All i could hear was you attempting to evade justifying your own position by starting over inflated quibbles over semantics & axiomatic assumptions.
@TogetherForPeace "When was I specifically asked for "justifications" for my belief in God? You won't find the question being posed! If you do you will find an answer being given!"
watch?v=TCt5CO2Nq2Q&feature=related
DPR BEGGED you to provide evidence or justification for the previous 5 minutes. When cornered at 6:.01 you said "my justification for belief in god has to do with,....God exists. That's my justification" Listen to what you ACTUALLY said.
You are a naughty one..slimy Jack
ThieleM 6 months ago
*whew* that show was probably close resemblance to "flogging a dead horse"
Paxmax 10 months ago
@Paxmax Yep, I was pretty much done on part 3.
dalejr88 10 months ago 3
Awesome. 6 videos of Jack dancing around the question, and because of his semantics games, nothing was accomplished.
wuphat 10 months ago
if it's the last one, so be it, it's incredibly frustrating listening to jack dance around and not answer shit, because honestly he has no justification for his beliefs and knows it, he believes because he believes, which is fine, except he obfuscates and pretends he is rational with bullshit language games, it's nauseating, regards mate
awfulnhead 10 months ago
@awfulnhead Exactly. Jack's obfuscations and evasions are tedious and hollow. That's why this series has such low ratings despite dpr and Laci normally having thousands of views. Jack is stale and painfully vacuous. Even his own team can't stand to listen to him.
Another biblical apologist slowly dying under the harse scrutiny of internet exposure. Good riddance, TFP.
themsfightinwoids 10 months ago
@themsfightinwoids When you say, "this series" what exactly are you talking about? You do realize this was just audio taken from my Blogtv show? I told Dalejr88 I didn't mind if he uploaded the audio to his YouTube page. My "own team"? Your comment demonstrates how inane and ignorant ppl are willing to be when they encounter someone they disagree with. Ultimately, it is your argument that is vacuous.
TogetherForPeace 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace Oh boohoo Jack. How does casually referring to your theist buddies as "your team" demonstrate that I'm "ignorant"? That isn't a logical argument at all. Can't you defend yourself with substance?
The bottom line is that you have deliberately forfeited your rational capacity to maintain your blind faith in an undetectable & ill-tempered ancient superhero. That abadonment of rationality is inexcusable for someone with half a brain, and is why you ARE a despicable low-life. GTFU
themsfightinwoids 10 months ago 3
@awfulnhead What didn't I answer? Simply stating, "that person didn't answer the questions" doesn't actually demonstrate you understand what was said and how it was responded to. Therefore, you saying words like, "obfuscate" is senseless as you've given no context by which that word is even meaningful. I get it though ppl prefer to make general comments based upon an emotional response, usually the emotion of frustration, rather than engage with critical thinking of what's been said.
TogetherForPeace 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace you didn't answer anything, you confused what was actually being asked of you, ie obfuscated, i was not engaging anyone, i was making a comment, however now i am engaging someone, because you spoke to me, understand? when you were asked about your justifications for your believe in god, you had nothing, and if that's it, fine, you just want to believe, fine, but please don't make it sound rational, because there isn't any reason(s) for believing in any god, k?
awfulnhead 10 months ago
@awfulnhead When was I specifically asked for "justifications" for my belief in God? You won't find the question being posed! If you do you will find an answer being given!
TogetherForPeace 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace it was in an earlier video in the series, i don't have a time-stamp, sorry, if you want to communicate and such then don't come at with "you don't understand what was being said" and i would answer that question but nana booboo, you can't tell me when it was asked, even if it wasn't asked it should've been, because you should answer that for the positive claim you make as a theist, but then again, i'm just some idiot with no understanding of what's being said, right?
awfulnhead 10 months ago
@awfulnhead You made an assertion. I am saying it is wrong. If you can't point to the occasion in which I was asked that specific question and I didn't answer then I have nothing more to say as you are going off of speculation that you can't verify and I'm saying didn't happen.
TogetherForPeace 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace do you actually want to talk to someone? i'm willing to admit i could be wrong, but whether or not i am shouldn't affect your willingness to talk, i know this is just you trying to prove a point, that "atheists make claims all the time without justification" well i can justify why i believe that was said, and i can actually go and look if it was actually important, as for your god, well you got nothing,
awfulnhead 10 months ago
@awfulnhead I'm responding to your comment. I have no interest in carrying on a conversation in the comment section. However I will be on BlogTv in the next hour if you'd like to chat then. My skype is Together4Peace
TogetherForPeace 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace Jack, when we talk about external reality (which would presumably include a deity) we need a demonstrably reliable system. Reason alone is void. Reason needs to work off of something, & this is why we develop methodologies. I'm astonished that someone who professes to be philosophically literate would be unaware of this & also attempt to equate a statement based on moral principles (Dpr's) with belief an entity that is indistinguishable from non-existence.
QuantumGh0st 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace This false equivalence saw you persistently ask Dpr for equal empirical & scientific evidence for his statement, but any serious philosopher should know that your request is invalid because Dpr's claim is based on moral principles and does not fall into the realm of science, and are presumably addressed in meta-ethics & normative ethics. So, the kind of "evidence" that Dpr was asking for is not required of him regarding his claim. You should know this.
QuantumGh0st 10 months ago
@TogetherForPeace Worst of all; when you did briefly decide to attempt to justify your claim in belief; all we received was circular logic: "I justify my belief that god exists because god exists"
I'm no philosopher, but it’s ironic that you would accuse anyone of being philosophically illiterate when you clearly struggle at the basics. All i could hear was you attempting to evade justifying your own position by starting over inflated quibbles over semantics & axiomatic assumptions.
Peace.
QuantumGh0st 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TogetherForPeace "When was I specifically asked for "justifications" for my belief in God? You won't find the question being posed! If you do you will find an answer being given!"
watch?v=TCt5CO2Nq2Q&feature=related
DPR BEGGED you to provide evidence or justification for the previous 5 minutes. When cornered at 6:.01 you said "my justification for belief in god has to do with,....God exists. That's my justification" Listen to what you ACTUALLY said.
MrJmm999 10 months ago