Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 1:32 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:03 am
It is so obvious that all proofs and arguments must be supported by reliable evidences from various sources, e.g. research papers, links, references, etc.
Is that what is obvious to YOU.
If you are NOT able to see the truth, and falsehoods, in things yet, and thus NEED "reliable" evidence from various sources, then so be it. But not ALL are you like YOU.
True not many are like me as the minority.
It is a fact, the more advanced people [intelligent, smarter, wiser, EQ, critical thinkers ] are generally of the smaller percentile [1 -10%] within a distribution of humans.
In terms of knowledge, critical thinking, philosophy-proper, the majority are at the lower grades. Note the majority were once flat-earthers, geocentrists, the irrationals, and even not the majority are taking the illusory as real in the case of theists [90%].
So far, you have not presented evidence and arguments why your kind of 'stupid' ideas should prevail.
WHAT EXACTLY are MY "stupid" ideas?
You say they are "stupid" but I am yet to see what you THINK/BELIEVE My ideas are.
Dare I ask where do you BELIEVE you lay in the line from the most "stupid" people to the "more advanced" people?
When I first read what you wrote, I thought you were implying that you lay in the smaller percentile [1 - 10%] but I could be WRONG, so just clarifying with you.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amVeritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:03 am
The onus is on the one who disagree to argue why my real empirical evidence are not true nor reliable.
First, you would have to provide some REAL empirical evidence BEFORE one could disagree with it.
Second, if you had provided some REAL empirical evidence, then one would obviously be a fool to disagree with it.
By definition if "it" is REAL, then "it" generally could not be argued against. Unless of course this can be argued otherwise and shown not to be the case.
Since you started this thread let us show how this works.
First, YOU provide some REAL empirical evidence that supports your BELIEF.
Then, I will do, what I will do.
Note my hypothesis:
Islam is inherent evil.
Yep. Noted.
And OBVIOUSLY NOT TRUE.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amA. I have provided real empirical evidences to support my hypothesis, i.e. one example,
Note that this is NOT real empirical evidence to support your hypothesis.
What I do note is YOUR INTERPRETATION, and also note, I have already explained WHY 'your interpretation' is WRONG, in and of itself.
I have also asked you questions regarding this figure, which you totally ignored and will NOT answer.
Just because a group of human beings, who have been given a descriptive label, have done some things since a particular date IS NOT, and I repeat NOT real empirical evidence to support YOUR hypothesis that islam is inherently evil.
I have already explained that the word 'islam' is accepted by some, when translated, as meaning or being a derivative of the word 'PEACE', which if you are unaware can be seen as being related to the exact OPPOSITE of evil.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amB. I have provided verses from the Quran [core of Islam] to support my hypothesis.
Those verses only support YOUR INTERPRETATION of the quran, which I have already explained the reason of WHY it is WRONG.
You are basing your own so called "evidence", on your own INTERPRETATIONS.
You can not successfully base YOUR conclusion, of some one else's writings, on YOUR own INTERPRETATIONS of what the writings are saying. Especially when YOUR own INTERPRETATIONS are so OBVIOUSLY biased to begin with.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amC. I have also presented evolutionary principles, e.g.
1. DNA wise all humans has the potential to commit evil and violent acts.
WHERE is the EVIDENCE, for this BELIEF?
DNA affects what is physical. There is NO correlation between 'person', 'non-muslim', and/or 'non-believer' and the physical, which I have already alluded to many times already, and which you have totally ignored, many times also.
What you have not yet realized is that DNA can not affect that what is NOT physical. What you also have not yet realized is WHAT controls human's behaviors. Plus the multitude of other things that you have NOT YET REALIZED.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 am2. 20% [conservatively] of all humans are born with an active evil tendency.
WHERE is the EVIDENCE, for this BELIEF?
I have also questioned you about this previously in regards to WHAT EXACTLY is the so called "active evil tendency", where does it exist, how does it actually work, et cetera, et cetera, which you ALSO totally disregarded in answering.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amB and C combined to trigger real evil and violent acts as evidenced by A above.
QED!!
If you BELIEVE that this is proof, or evidence, then LOL.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 am
Would you really like me, and/or some one else, to go back through ALL the years and through ALL of the posts, within this forum, to find the answer for YOU?
By the way if others would like to see my views regarding human beings using, needing, and sharing "others" links, quotes, references, et cetera to back up their own opinions, views, assumptions, beliefs, et cetera, and from where the idea of this actual post has derived it's self from, then the link is ... I was about to give the link but because I do not usually give links, if ever, i do not know how to do it. But this is the post;
Re: Bank BANS woman in Helmet but Allows MAN in Burqa
Post by Age » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:50 am
If some one would like to share how to link to a particular post direct this would be appreciated, as it might come in handy one day for me.
Not sure what is your point.
Do not be to concerned. It is just another one of My completely MISSED, ignored, overlooked, or not understood points, by you.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amBtw, I did not mean NO [zero] links nor reference. I stated 'lots of links and references.'
WHERE in the quotes above does it say anything like this?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 am- How to link a post?
In the top of every post there is this;
" [] Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sun Nov 25, 2018 ...."
There is this [] on the left like 'a sheet of paper'.
Right Click on that and click 'Copy Link Address' then paste to wherever applicable.
Thank you.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:57 amJust give me evidences, at least some to give an idea who else generally include a lot of reference and links.
WHY?
What do you hope to get out of it?
Do you think/believe that the one who provides the most links and/or references is the most RIGHT or some thing?