Wikidebates - User contributions [en]

The universe as it is confirms the existence of an infinite, indifferent God like the Hindu Brahman.

2024-06-03T09:20:11Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

The universe is not empty: it has been, is or will be populated by multiple beings.

2024-06-03T09:19:51Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

The immensity of the universe shows God's greatness

2024-06-03T09:19:30Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

Joker to mask a lack of arguments

2024-06-03T09:19:11Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

God is beyond our understanding

2024-06-03T09:18:41Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=Joker to mask a lack of arguments
|displayed-title=Joker to mask a lack of arguments
}}
}}

This argument contradicts his supposed omnipotence

2024-06-03T09:18:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

God needed this immensity of means to develop man and intelligence.

2024-06-03T09:17:50Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=This argument contradicts his supposed omnipotence
|displayed-title=This argument contradicts his supposed omnipotence
}}
}}

In the historical sciences, assertions are based on evidence, not on hypotheses based on empty space.

2024-06-03T09:17:30Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=In the historical sciences, assertions are based on evidence, not on hypotheses based on empty space.
|initialisation=Objection@25653
|summary=It's undeniable that there are and always will be grey areas in our knowledge of history. Nevertheless, before formulating a hypothesis, we must first ensure that we can rely on a minimum of evidence, because if we assume that we can rely on an unproven hypothesis because it may be proven in the future, we can assert anything and everything.
}}

Official history

2024-06-03T09:17:00Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Official history
|initialisation=Objection@13469
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=The actual history is not fully recorded. Monotheism may be a vestige of a re-emerging minority.
|objections={{Objection
|page=In the historical sciences, assertions are based on evidence, not on hypotheses based on empty space.
|displayed-title=In the historical sciences, assertions are based on evidence, not on hypotheses based on empty space.
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, Monotheism, History
}}

Monotheistic religions appeared very late in our history.

2024-06-03T09:16:30Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=Official history
|displayed-title=Official history
}}
}}

Many animals appeared or disappeared long before man appeared on earth, which contradicts the argument of aesthetic utility for man.

2024-06-03T09:16:10Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Many animals appeared or disappeared long before man appeared on earth, which contradicts the argument of aesthetic utility for man.
|initialisation=Objection@25643
}}

Useless except to the eye

2024-06-03T09:15:40Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Useless except to the eye
|initialisation=Objection@13468
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=It's always fun to discover a new beast, and the pleasure of curiosity alone can be a great way to admire the Creator!
|objections={{Objection
|page=Many animals appeared or disappeared long before man appeared on earth, which contradicts the argument of aesthetic utility for man.
|displayed-title=Many animals appeared or disappeared long before man appeared on earth, which contradicts the argument of aesthetic utility for man.
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, beauty, Creator
}}

Thousands of species have become extinct and are of no use to the divine project.

2024-06-03T09:15:10Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=Useless except to the eye
|displayed-title=Useless except to the eye
}}
}}

The power of God

2024-06-03T09:14:50Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The power of God
|initialisation=Objection@13467
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=For the moment, these galaxies serve no other purpose than to manifest the Power of God...
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, Power, Universe, Utility
}}

There are 100 billion empty galaxies that serve no divine purpose.

2024-06-03T09:14:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=The power of God
|displayed-title=The power of God
}}
}}

There is no geological or archaeological evidence of the Flood to date, which is enough to consider it a mythological tale.

2024-06-03T09:14:00Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=There is no geological or archaeological evidence of the Flood, which is enough to consider it a mythological tale.
|initialisation=Objection@25633
}}

Dating methods are far more reliable than a mythological story written by men and distorted by successive translations and rewritings.

2024-06-03T09:13:40Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Dating methods are far more reliable than a mythological story written by men and distorted by successive translations and rewritings.
|initialisation=Objection@25633
}}

Given the living conditions inside the ark, the animals wouldn't have survived very long.

2024-06-03T09:13:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=In view of the living conditions on the Ark, the animals would not have survived very long.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote='''S'''aching that the journey lasted over a year (371 days), Noé had to organize himself and his family to feed and care for the animals, and then (again) the drama began.

'''Problem 1''': How to prevent the animals from having chocapics, and thus avoid rapid overpopulation of the ark? Left unchecked, Noah would soon have had a huge invasion of rats, termites and clapworms on his hands. And even with a divine IUD, some extremely short-lived creatures wouldn't have been able to survive the trip without copulating right and left (scientific term for ''putting a dick in''), so how do you choose who has sex and who doesn't?<center></center>'''Problem 2''': Food, even pretending to believe that the ark is big enough (which it isn't), would have been very problematic for carnivores who eat fresh flesh (and no, sorry, you don't feed a lion freeze-dried meat). In a matter of days, the starving beasts would have eaten each other.
'''Problem 3''': The monstrous stock of fresh water (because well, water full of volcanic fumes and sludge outside is strongly discouraged by the vets), who's watching that algae doesn't grow in it or that it doesn't stagnate in the Ark's confined environment?

'''Problem 4''' : 8 pelos to manage 16,000 animals (minimum if we accept the theory of creavolution)
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}
}}

That Noah and his family built the ark in such a short space of time is just as unlikely as the fact that they called on additional manpower.

2024-06-03T09:13:00Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=That Noah and his family built the Ark in such a short space of time is just as unlikely as the fact that they used additional manpower.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=For the record, including Noah, his wife and sons, that's 8 pelos to build the biggest wooden boat in human history. Of course, at first sight, as they have 100 years ahead of them to do it (don't look now, Noah lived for a thousand years), it would seem almost possible, but that would be forgetting that the construction of wooden warships in the time of Louis XIV, for example (boats up to 80m long), required at the very least 3 years' work for 300 experienced workers. Thanks to my incredible mental arithmetic skills at primary school level, reduced to 8 glandus, this gives 112.5 years' work for a boat almost twice as small as the Ark.

Fortunately, creationists have an explanation for this too: "Noah could very well have recruited people to help him, you big loser! Ah, right, but in that case that makes Noah the best liar and biggest asshole in human history :

* Yo Noé! I've got nothing against working for you for nothing, you've got a good head and all, but, I was wondering, why do you want to build a floating zoo on dry land, miles from the first river?

* Well, first of all, it's not a floating zoo, it's a magic barge, you loser! Secondly, I do what I want, I'm the boss, so get back to work or you'll end up on Assedics, which doesn't exist yet, and you'll be in deep shit!
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}
}}

The exact nature of the animals to be loaded into the ark varies from verse to verse.

2024-06-03T09:12:40Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The exact nature of the animals to be brought into the ark varies from verse to verse.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=Of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring into the ark two of every kind, to keep them alive with you: there shall be one male and one female. Of the birds after their kind, and of the cattle after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind shall come to thee, that thou mayest keep them alive with thee.
|article=Genesis 6.19 & 6.20
}}{{Citation
|quote=You shall take with you seven pairs of all the pure animals, the male and his female; a pair of the animals that are not pure, the male and his female; seven pairs also of the birds of the air, male and female, to keep their race alive on the face of all the earth.
|article=Genesis 7.2 & 7.3
}}{{Citation
|quote=them, and every beast after its kind, and every cattle after its kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, and every little bird, and every winged thing. And they went into the ark beside Noah, two by two, of all flesh that hath the breath of life.
|article=Genesis 7.14 & 7.15
}}{{Citation
|quote=It's all nonsense! One minute it's talking about species, the next about animals, the next about "every living thing" (you'll see that's important). In one verse you need two of each, in another 7 for birds and pure animals, without anyone bothering to explain what a pure animal is. And then, since you need a male and a female, the hermaphroditic snail is counted as a wild card? And what about animals that change sex? How does Noah anticipate this so that his ark doesn't become the Village People cruise? A genocide caused by tranny animals, you've got to admit, that'd look pretty bad. In short, as usual, God is a doddering doddering dodo in animal anatomy, and it shows, so it's up to his followers to make up for the inconsistencies with their blind faith.
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}
}}

Given the dimensions indicated in the flood account, it is highly unlikely that the ark could have floated.

2024-06-03T09:12:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=In view of the dimensions indicated in the Flood narrative, it is highly unlikely that the Ark could have floated.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=Make yourself an ark of gopher wood; you shall arrange this ark in cells, and coat it inside and out with pitch. This is how you shall make it: the ark shall be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high. You shall make a window in the ark, reducing it to a cubit at the top; you shall set a door in the side of the ark; and you shall build a lower storey, a second and a third.
|article=Genesis 6.14 to 6.16
}}{{Citation
|quote=It's not enough to have the plans, you'll now have to explain to me how Noah could defy the laws of physics to build a wooden boat 300 cubits long (around 138 meters), when every wooden boat builder in the history of mankind confirms, with horrifying deaths to prove it, that exceeding 100m in length with this type of material for a boat supposed to sail on the open sea is pure suicide. The only ships ever to exceed this length contained steel frames, and they took on water like no one's business, as the joints between the planks were subjected to extreme stress, causing them to disjoint, and requiring constant pumping to keep them from sinking. It's not for nothing that, as technology advanced, wooden boats were built high and short instead of long and low!
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}{{Citation
|quote=With a boat as long as this one, the forces in the central part would have been simply monstrous, thanks to the miracle of a well-known principle: the lever arm (well, it's more complicated than that, as there are forces in all axes, but that's to illustrate)! If you don't believe me, try bending a 1m long wooden rod with both hands in the middle and pushing with your thumbs in the middle. It's very hard, but do the same thing with your hands at either end and push again in the middle - magic, it's much easier. A boat that's too long, subjected to the raging waves of a divine deluge, would undergo monstrous efforts at each of its ends, which would imply enormous stress on the middle of the hull, simply splitting it in two. To make matters worse, there's a huge door ON THE SIDE of the hull (yes, you have to let dinosaurs in) that makes the structure extremely fragile. And even if it didn't, the boat's "launch" alone is a mess. Noah built it on dry land, whereas the equation boat too long + stranded on a reef + wave = disaster! If you don't believe me (and you're right, I'm a heretic), remember the Amoco Cadiz, a super steel tanker that was split in two by the force of the waves after getting stuck on a reef off the coast of England.
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}{{Citation
|quote=And all this without even having studied the problems of buoyancy. As described by creationists, the Ark is supposed to be a "box" with virtually no keel (the thing under boats that lowers their center of gravity so they don't go 20,000 leagues under the sea at the first splash), in order to make the most of the space "authorized" by God.
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}
}}

God considers Noah to be "just and honest", even though the 10 Commandments - or Christian morality - do not yet exist.

2024-06-03T09:12:00Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=God considers Noah to be "just and honest" while the 10 commandments -thus Christian morality- do not yet exist.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord. These are Noah's descendants. Noah was a righteous and upright man in his day; Noah walked with God. The earth was corrupt before God, the earth was full of violence. God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. Then God said to Noah: The end of all flesh is stayed from me; for they have filled the earth with violence; behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
|article=Genesis 6.9 to 6.14
}}{{Citation
|quote=''"Just and honest"'' based on what criterion??? The 10 Commandments aren't even supposed to exist yet (and therefore morality according to creationists) so how do we know who's doing right or wrong? What about the kids? Do they eat a falcon punch in the gut because their parents were naughty without knowing it? What about animals?
|article=Noah's Ark is just a load of rubbish!
|work=Nioutaik.fr
|link=https://nioutaik.fr/index.php?post/2011/03/18/613-larche-de-noe-cest-vraiment-nimporte-quoi
}}
}}

At no point does the flood story explain why God destroys all the animals not on the ark, when it's only man he's after.

2024-06-03T09:11:40Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=At no point does the flood account explain why God destroys all the animals not on the ark, when it is only man who is to blame.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=The LORD saw that the wickedness of men was great on earth, and that all the thoughts of their hearts turned to evil every day. The LORD repented that he had made man on the earth, and was grieved in his heart. And the LORD said: I will cut off from the face of the earth man whom I have created, from man to cattle, creeping things and birds of the air; for I repent that I have made them.
|article=Genesis 6.5 to 6.8
}}
}}

Creationists denied the existence of dinosaurs for a long time, then turned around when they became fashionable.

2024-06-03T09:11:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Creationists have long denied the existence of dinosaurs, only to change their tune when they became fashionable.
|initialisation=Justification@25637
}}

The Flood story is riddled with inconsistencies, making it highly improbable.

2024-06-03T09:10:37Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The flood story is riddled with inconsistencies, making it highly improbable.
|initialisation=Objection@25633
|summary=Between the verses that contradict each other, the "plot holes", the elements that disregard the laws of physics and biology, the lack of internal coherence is more than enough to refute the story.
|justifications={{Justification
|page=Creationists denied the existence of dinosaurs for a long time, then turned around when they became fashionable.
|displayed-title=Creationists denied the existence of dinosaurs for a long time, then turned around when they became fashionable.
}}{{Justification
|page=At no point does the flood story explain why God destroys all the animals not on the ark, when it's only man he's after.
|displayed-title=At no point does the flood story explain why God destroys all the animals not on the ark, when it's only man he's after.
}}{{Justification
|page=God considers Noah to be "just and honest", even though the 10 Commandments - or Christian morality - do not yet exist.
|displayed-title=God considers Noah to be "just and honest", even though the 10 Commandments - or Christian morality - do not yet exist.
}}{{Justification
|page=Given the dimensions indicated in the flood account, it is highly unlikely that the ark could have floated.
|displayed-title=Given the dimensions indicated in the flood account, it is highly unlikely that the ark could have floated.
}}{{Justification
|page=The exact nature of the animals to be loaded into the ark varies from verse to verse.
|displayed-title=The exact nature of the animals to be loaded into the ark varies from verse to verse.
}}{{Justification
|page=That Noah and his family built the ark in such a short space of time is just as unlikely as the fact that they called on additional manpower.
|displayed-title=That Noah and his family built the ark in such a short space of time is just as unlikely as the fact that they called on additional manpower.
}}{{Justification
|page=Given the living conditions inside the ark, the animals wouldn't have survived very long.
|displayed-title=Given the living conditions inside the ark, the animals wouldn't have survived very long.
}}
}}

Assertion without argument

2024-06-03T09:10:07Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Assertion without argument
|initialisation=Objection@13466
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=That's what we call a baseless assertion ...! Carbon 14 is not a reliable dating method ...! And the geological past is not perfectly identified, especially to demonstrate that there was no flood, according to the biblical account ...!
|objections={{Objection
|page=The Flood story is riddled with inconsistencies, making it highly improbable.
|displayed-title=The Flood story is riddled with inconsistencies, making it highly improbable.
}}{{Objection
|page=Dating methods are far more reliable than a mythological story written by men and distorted by successive translations and rewritings.
|displayed-title=Dating methods are far more reliable than a mythological story written by men and distorted by successive translations and rewritings.
}}{{Objection
|page=There is no geological or archaeological evidence of the Flood to date, which is enough to consider it a mythological tale.
|displayed-title=There is no geological or archaeological evidence of the Flood to date, which is enough to consider it a mythological tale.
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, flood, 6000 years
}}

The Bible claims that the universe has existed for 6,000 years, which is false.

2024-06-03T09:09:37Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|objections={{Objection
|page=Assertion without argument
|displayed-title=Assertion without argument
}}
}}

The criteria for defining a biased argument are defined by zetetics, which is the science of critical thinking.

2024-06-03T09:09:06Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The criteria for defining a biased argument are defined by zetetics, which is the science of critical thinking.
|initialisation=Objection@25650
}}

A biased argument

2024-06-03T09:08:35Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=A biased argument
|initialisation=Objection@5146
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=How to demonstrate that an argument is biased, twisted ...? What are the criteria!? That's where to start ... To assert is only to assert ...!
|objections={{Objection
|page=The criteria for defining a biased argument are defined by zetetics, which is the science of critical thinking.
|displayed-title=The criteria for defining a biased argument are defined by zetetics, which is the science of critical thinking.
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, Arguments, Fraud
}}

False dilemma

2024-06-03T09:08:15Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=False dilemma
|initialisation=Justification@5146
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=[The] strategy [of the false dilemma] is a formidable one, because it slyly steers the debate by simplifying it into a single antagonism. But this antagonism is only apparent: the fact that two proposals are competitive does not necessarily mean that they are contradictory. The false dilemma creates the illusion of "contradictory competitiveness". In the statement "either you're with us, or you're against us", we can find acceptable arguments for not being "with them" without being "against them": there is no contradiction.

Finally, the two competing hypotheses can both turn out to be false!
|article=False dilemma
|work=Cortecs
|date=November 17, 2010
|link=https://cortecs.org/la-zetetique/sophisme-le-faux-dilemme/
}}
}}

Argumentative mille-feuille

2024-06-03T09:07:55Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Argumentative mille-feuille
|initialisation=Justification@5146
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=The organization of this caricatural antagonism between "good science" (spiritualist) and "bad science" (materialist) in the scientific practices of the last four centuries is the result of the use of several rhetorical strategies that are fairly classic in concordist currents. However, it's worth recalling them here. The first is to use and abuse the sophistry of the argumentative mille-feuille. The stacking, accumulation and decontextualization of the 100 quotations from great scientists presented in chapter 12 are designed to impress the reader.
|authors=Jean-François Bert, Adrien Miqueu
|article="God is dead!" But concordism never stops resurrecting him
|work=Zilsel
|date=january 2022
|link=https://www.cairn.info/revue-zilsel-2022-1-page-11.htm
}}
}}

Intentionality bias

2024-06-03T09:07:35Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Intentionality bias
|initialisation=Sub-argument@5146
|summary=Perception of a will or decision behind what is fortuitous or accidental.
}}

Belief in the justice of the world

2024-06-03T09:07:15Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=The idea that everyone will be punished if they act badly and rewarded if they act well.
}}

A call to nature

2024-06-03T09:06:55Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=The supposed naturalness of an idea used as a criterion to validate it.
}}

Circular reasoning

2024-06-03T09:06:35Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=Mutually validating arguments and evidence.
}}

Argument from ignorance

2024-06-03T09:06:15Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=Use a dogmatic argument to avoid admitting ignorance.
|webliography={{Site reference|link=https://cortecs.org/la-zetetique/sophisme-appel-a-lignorance/
|page=Sophism - Appeal to ignorance
|site=Cortecs
|date=July 26, 2013
}}
}}

The "missing link" myth stems from a misunderstanding of evolutionism

2024-06-03T09:05:44Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The myth of the "missing link" stems from an erroneous understanding of evolutionism.
|initialisation=Objection@25632
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=Missing link, hypothetical extinct creature halfway down the evolutionary line between modern humans and their anthropoid progenitors. In the second half of the 19th century, an erroneous interpretation of Charles Darwin's work was that humans descended in a direct line from existing ape species. To accept this theory and reconcile it with the Great Hierarchical Chain of Being, an ape-man or fossil ape-man seemed necessary to complete the chain. Today, it is recognized that the relationship between modern humans and present-day anthropoid apes (e.g. chimpanzees) is based on common ancestors rather than direct descent. These ancestors have yet to be identified, but the ape-hominid divergence may have occurred between 6 and 10 million years ago.
|article=Missing link
|work=Britannica
|link=https://www.britannica.com/science/missing-link
}}
}}

The theory of evolution is impossible

2024-06-03T09:05:10Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The theory of evolution is impossible
|initialisation=Objection@7160
|summary=No trace of numerous intermediaries between species has ever been found ...! What is there but a Creator ...?
|objections={{Objection
|page=The "missing link" myth stems from a misunderstanding of evolutionism
|displayed-title=The "missing link" myth stems from a misunderstanding of evolutionism
}}{{Objection
|page=God is a filler concept
|displayed-title=Even if the theory of evolution were insatiable, it would in no way prove the existence of God.
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, evolution, Creator, Necessity
}}

Justification by faith proves the fallacy of religious reasoning

2024-06-03T09:04:50Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Justification by faith proves the fallacy of religious reasoning
|initialisation=Objection@25631
}}

Justification by Faith

2024-06-03T09:04:20Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Justification by Faith
|initialisation=Objection@7160
|title-warnings=Incomplete title
|summary=The Bible speaks of justification by Faith, and those who don't want to believe are also those rejecting the morality that this God requires ...! What's more ...!
|objections={{Objection
|page=Justification by faith proves the fallacy of religious reasoning
|displayed-title=Justification by faith proves the fallacy of religious reasoning
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, Faith, Reason
}}

Panglossian reasoning

2024-06-03T09:03:50Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=Reasoning backwards towards one possible cause among others, towards a preconceived scenario or towards the position you wish to prove.
|webliography={{Site reference|link=https://cortecs.org/la-zetetique/effet-pangloss-ou-les-dangers-des-raisonnements-a-rebours/
|page=The Pangloss effect, or the dangers of backward reasoning
|site=Cortecs
|date=April 12, 2011
}}
|objections={{Objection
|page=Justification by Faith
|displayed-title=Justification by Faith
}}{{Objection
|page=The theory of evolution is impossible
|displayed-title=The theory of evolution is impossible
}}
}}

How to prove something that doesn't exist

2024-06-03T09:03:30Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=How to prove something that doesn't exist
|initialisation=Justification@7159
|summary=How can you prove something that doesn't exist?

It's not possible, unless you can't find something you've been looking for.

With our advanced technology, do you think we'd have found nothing?
|sections=Religion and spirituality
}}

Reversing the burden of proof

2024-06-03T09:02:59Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=It's up to the person who asserts an existence to provide proof.
|quotes={{Quote
|quote=<span lang="fr-FR">You've got it: it's up to the one who claims something to prove it, not up to others to prove that what he claims isn't true. It's not up to the critics of Claude Vorilhon, ''alias'' Raël, to prove that he couldn't have been abducted by extraterrestrials, it's up to him to prove that he was. In the same way, it's not up to the critics of a manual technique to show that it's ineffective, it's up to the pretenders to show that it possesses the efficacy they lend it.</span>
|authors=Richard Monvoisin
|article=Onus probandi, or burden of proof (on the claimant)
|work=Cortecs
|date=July 16, 2015
|link=https://cortecs.org/superieur/onus-probandi-ou-charge-de-la-preuve-qui-revient-a-celui-qui-pretend/
}}
|justifications={{Justification
|page=How to prove something that doesn't exist
|displayed-title=How to prove something that doesn't exist
}}
}}

Unfulfilled prophecies are forgotten

2024-06-03T09:01:18Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Unfulfilled prophecies are forgotten
|initialisation=Justification@25596
}}

Fulfilled" prophecies are merely reinterpretations of prophecies in the light of current events.

2024-06-03T09:00:58Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Prophecies "fulfilled" are merely reinterpretations of prophecies in the light of current events.
|initialisation=Justification@25596
}}

Fulfilled" prophecies only reflect our cognitive biases

2024-06-03T09:00:28Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=Prophecies "fulfilled" are merely a reflection of our cognitive biases
|initialisation=Objection@25594
|justifications={{Justification
|page=Fulfilled" prophecies are merely reinterpretations of prophecies in the light of current events.
|displayed-title=Fulfilled" prophecies are merely reinterpretations of prophecies in the light of current events.
}}{{Justification
|page=Unfulfilled prophecies are forgotten
|displayed-title=Unfulfilled prophecies are forgotten
}}
}}

The prophecies!

2024-06-03T08:59:58Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|displayed-title=The prophecies!
|initialisation=Objection@3016
|summary=And the prophecies of Daniel 8 and 7, as well as Revelation 13 ... Connected and fulfilled ... Are they human inventions...?
|objections={{Objection
|page=Fulfilled" prophecies only reflect our cognitive biases
|displayed-title=Fulfilled" prophecies only reflect our cognitive biases
}}
|sections=Religion and spirituality
|keywords=God, Prophecies, religion, invention
}}

God is a tool to muzzle our cognitive dissonance

2024-06-03T08:59:38Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

The moral values we attribute to God are actually our own.

2024-06-03T08:59:18Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

The concept of God is a creation of evolution

2024-06-03T08:58:58Z

Translate-Robot: Translation of :fr: generated by DeepL

{{Argument
|summary=Belief in God has been selected during the evolution of living beings. Faith has evolutionary benefits such as group cohesion and anxiety reduction.
|sections=Philosophy, Religion and Spirituality
|keywords=God
}}