The meaning of life

[Belinda]

God is presumed to be a he because God is believed to penetrate and activate something hollow and passive. The sexual metaphor is also used in engineering, electric plugs and so forth.

The biological-sexual metaphor would also suit physics idea of force that changes potential energy into kinetic energy; so aptly expressed by Michelangelo in the picture on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and inferred by unbelievers like me to be about physics.

[Harbal]

My impression is that you have a poor understanding of human nature.

This IMPLIES that you KNOW, for sure, what 'human nature' IS, EXACTLY.

No, it doesn't imply that.

So, would you like to INFORM, and EXPLAIN TO, the REST what IS 'human nature', EXACTLY?

No.

If no, then WHY NOT?

Because I don't have to if I don't feel like it.

Now, do you have ANY ACTUAL PROOF that BELIEVING (in) 'things' being true, when they are ACTUALLY NOT True, IS 'human nature', itself, then will you PROVIDE 'that proof'?

No, I don't have proof. Do you have proof that human beings are going to stop believing in things that aren't true? And if not proof, what reason do you have to even think it?

Also, I MENTIONED that IRREFUTABLE PROOF exists, YET you COMPLETELY and UTTERLY IGNORE this and just move onto your OWN IMPRESSION/ASSUMPTION, INSTEAD.

Well you should have just provided the irrefutable proof rather than expecting me to play the game of having to ask for it using a specific form of wording.

WHY do you have SO LITTLE 'Self-BELIEF'.

I think of it more as having a realistic view of my capabilities.

[Age]

My first choice would always be the truth.

But MY QUESTION, to you, WAS, If what you BELIEVE was true was NOT true, then would you like to HEAR that YOUR BELIEF IS NOT true?

Yes.

Okay, but this is OBVIOUSLY NOT an actual irrefutable truth, to you, correct?

Also, we NEED to KNOW what you BELIEVE is true, BEFORE we can INFORM of what BELIEFS are ACTUALLY true or NOT.

So, you sometimes SAY 'things' just because 'those things' are the most conventionally used words, terms, or phrases even though they could be absolutely FULLY or PARTLY Wrong, right?

Yes.

And this could apply to absolutely EVERY thing you SAY and WRITE also, correct?

It is this SIMPLE. While one is BELIEVING some 'thing' to be true, then they are NOT OPEN to ANY 'thing' CONTRARY.

Unless, OF COURSE, ANY one will provide ANY example otherwise.

I looked online a while back to check what time my local convenience store opened, and the website informed me that the store opened at 6:00 am. I believed the information on the website. I went to the store, arriving shortly after 6:00 am, to find it was not open. At that point I stopped believing the store was open.

Thank you for adding MORE PROOF, and providing MORE 'weight', to what I SAID and CLAIMED here.

I did give you an example. The example of God sending an angel.

WHAT IS AN 'angel'? LET ALONE WHAT IS 'God'?

I don't know, I never got to see either of them.

So, ONLY WHEN a some 'thing', which you BELIEVE does NOT even exist, but which you say is male gendered, sends to you some OTHER IMAGINED 'thing', then, and ONLY THEN, you will become OPEN to MAYBE God does exist, right?

And, so while you are BELIEVING that God does NOT exist is absolutely and irrefutably TRUE you, ALSO, BELIEVE that this NONE EXISTING 'thing' can send some OTHER IMAGINED 'thing', to you, right?

No, your assessment here is incorrect, wrong, mistaken.

Which part, EXACTLY, if not ALL, of what you call 'my assessment', but which I just call 'seeking out CLARITY from you', are you proposing IS incorrect, wrong, AND mistaken?

I do not believe it irrefutably true that God does not exist, I think it highly unlikely that he/she/it does exist.

WHY?

And, what EXACTLY do you BELIEVE is true in regards to God and It existing?

I don't believe that a none existing thing can send anything anywhere.

Okay.

You did NOT make WHAT claim?

There is no claim, I didn't make one.

What does the 'that' word refer to, EXACTLY?

Which "that" are you referring to?

The ONLY 'what' word in your response that I asked DIRECTLY AFTER.

So, WHY IMAGINE that 'it' IS IRREFUTABLE when 'it' could possibly BE REFUTED?

To me, this seems like a Truly bizarre AND absurd thing to do.

No comment.

Could this be BECAUSE you have come to REALIZE just how WEIRD and/or BIZARRE it ACTUALLY IS to IMAGINE absolutely ANY IS 'irrefutable' when it is ACTUALLY REFUTABLE?

So, do you REALLY BELIEVE that you are somehow SO SUPERIOR to "another" that you able to TELL 'them' what the thoughts and thinking ARE EXACTLY going on WITHIN that head?

No.

I' will TELL 'you' what ACTUAL 'thoughts' occur WITHIN this head and there are absolutely NONE that consist of, 'I BELIEVE in irrefutable truths'.

That's not the way it seems.

This is BECAUSE you are NOT READING, LISTENING, AND HEARING what I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING.

And this is BECAUSE you are JUMPING TO and MAKING ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS, BEFORE you SEEK OUT, OBTAIN, and GAIN ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, FIRST.

Is this now UNDERSTOOD and COMPREHENDED by 'you', "harbal"?

No.

And, LOL proposing AN ASSUMPTION of YOURS as being an 'obvious fact' is Truly BIZARRE, to say the least.

Should one be concerned about one's behaviour being perceived as bizarre, do you think?

There is NO 'should' here.

But I suggest WHEN one's behavior has been EXPLAINED as AN ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, and that behavior IS ACTUALLY BIZARRE, then it would HELP 'them' to REFLECT on 'things' here.

But, AGAIN, there is NO 'should' in regards to IF one WANTS to CHANGE, for the BETTER or NOT.

I am saying that I tend to think in terms of varying probability, rather than absolute truth.

This is BECAUSE you BELIEVE, WHOLEHEARTEDLY and ABSOLUTELY, that 'absolute truth' does NOT exist.

No, I do not " BELIEVE, WHOLEHEARTEDLY and ABSOLUTELY, that 'absolute truth' does NOT exist."

So, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truth exists? Or, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truths do NOT exist?

you CONCLUDE and BELIEVE 'things' BEFORE you GAIN and OBTAIN ABSOLUTE CLARIFICATION, and SO conclude AND believe some 'things' to BE TRUE when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT.

So do you.

If you WANT TO come here and MAKE THIS CLAIM ABOUT ME, then I suggest you BETTER back up and support this CLAIM of YOURS HERE.

So, PROVIDE ACTUAL EXAMPLES of when you think or BELIEVE that I have CONCLUDED and/or BELIEVED absolutely ANY 'thing' here BEFORE I GAINED and OBTAINED ABSOLUTE CLARIFICATION, FIRST, and SO I have CONCLUDED and BELIEVED 'things' to BE TRUE when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT.

If you do NOT, then this will be just be ANOTHER CLAIM, of the countless OTHER CLAIMS, made here based on absolutely NOTHING of ANY ACTUAL SUBSTANCE AT ALL.

You have come to a few false conclusions about me, for example. I have pointed out at least one instance in this reply.

LOL But there was NEVER A CONCLUSION MADE on my part.

What can be and will be CLEARLY SEEN is that I ASKED A QUESTION, for CLARIFICATION and CLARITY, FIRST, BEFORE ANY CONCLUSION WAS MADE.

BUT, JUST MAYBE, the 'at least one instance in this reply' MIGHT be some 'thing' that I have OVERLOOKED.

And, we will NEVER KNOW UNTIL to CLARIFY which 'instance' you are referring to, EXACTLY.

This WAS just ANOTHER EXAMPLE of HOW OFTEN the adult human beings, back in the days when this was being written, would SAY and USE words but REALLY have ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what those words could ACTUALLY MEAN or REFER TO, EXACTLY, which would FIT IN WITH other words and terminology.

And yet most human beings are still able to communicate with other human beings more effectively that you are.

This is BECAUSE 'you' are NOT LOOKING FOR ANY ACTUAL 'thing', and instead just MUCH PREFER to EXPRESS to each "other" what you ALREADY ASSUME and/or BELIEVE is true and right, here.

Don't you find that bizarre, to say the least?

NOT AT ALL.

'I' WAS the FIRST One to ADMIT that 'I' am here to LEARN how to communicate BETTER with 'you', human beings.

So, WHY would I find BIZARRE that most of 'you', human beings, are still able to communicate with human beings MORE EFFECTIVELY than 'I' am?

Just about ALL human beings who are introducing NEW words, phrases, terms, ideas, and/or views are SEEN as NOT being VERY EFFECTIVE communicators.

This has been a VERY COMMON theme among 'you', human beings, over the last few centuries, from the days when this is being written.

However much something appears to be the truth, how can you possibly know that nothing could ever happen, or come to light, that would refute it?

VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY WITH HIND-SIGHT, FORE-SIGHT, and WITH the ability to LOOK AT and SEE 'things' from A Truly OPEN perspective.

I think you are making a mistake to think that.

OF COURSE 'you' DO. And, just as OBVIOUS is IF I EVER asked you TO CLARIFY YOUR VIEW here, you will end up coming to SAYING some 'thing' like, 'I do NOT think I am able to do that'.

Also, I KNOW, FOR SURE by the way, that I am NOT making a MISTAKE here. And, that YOUR MISTAKEN thought here is a result of YOUR PRESUMPTIONS and ASSUMPTIONS.

But unlike 'you' where you BELIEVE absolutely AND wholeheartedly that there is absolutely NO thing that you can KNOW, for sure, I KNOW, for sure, that there are some things that can be KNOWN, FOR SURE, and this is just because they are IRREFUTABLE True Facts.

Give me a couple of examples of irrefutable facts so I know what sort of things I need to eliminate from my list of things that can never be known for sure.

'Things', called human beings, lived on a 'planet', which they called and labelled 'earth', and on that 'earth' these human being 'things' SPOKE and WROTE what are called 'words'.

The IRREFUTABLE PROOF of 'this' should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

That the one here known as and labelled "harbal" here is reading or hearing these words here, RIGHT NOW, is ALSO ANOTHER IRREFUTABLE Fact, which could NEVER be REFUTED, FOREVER MORE.

[Dontaskme]

God is presumed to be a he because God is believed to penetrate and activate something hollow and passive. The sexual metaphor is also used in engineering, electric plugs and so forth.

The biological-sexual metaphor would also suit physics idea of force that changes potential energy into kinetic energy; so aptly expressed by Michelangelo in the picture on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and inferred by unbelievers like me to be about physics.

When Awareness (Latent Father) Knows Sensation (Mother Kinetic)...Son is born (Consciousness/Mind/Thought)

When the mind moves, you stay put. Don’t be pulled into its current of conceptual rhetoric, for you are not the mind—you are the empty field of awareness in which its movements appear.

You are the knowing of the mind, but not that which is known.
No thought is true, but your presence that notices each thought is.

[Age]

You might say so, but I don't know that it is.

What do you NEED BEFORE you can KNOW something?

You need to know you have all the relevant information.

PLEASE do NOT TELL 'me' what 'I' NEED. I asked 'you' what 'you' NEED, okay?

I ALREADY KNOW what 'I' NEED, and now 'I' am trying to ASCERTAIN what 'you' NEED "harbal".

OF COURSE absolutely ALL of the 'relevant information' is NEEDED, but this is VERY EASY and VERY SIMPLE to OBTAIN, and ASCERTAIN. But what is ACTUALLY 'relevant' is ALL VERY DEPENDENT, OF COURSE, on 'that', which is to BECOME KNOWN.

Also, WHEN, and IF, you ALSO EVER find out HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORKS, then you WILL KNOW, FOR SURE, that 'it' WAS, and STILL IS, an IRREFUTABLE Fact.

I would not regard her drinking, and its consequences, as something that could be accepted.

Although 'that' was what was ACTUALLY HAPPENING, correct?

Also, do you mean in regards to 'accepting', full stop, or, in regards to your OWN 'standards' of living and 'acceptance'?

I mean it could not be accepted as a way of life.

To WHO, and WHY?

OBVIOUSLY, 'that way of life' WAS 'accepted' by your partner, correct?

The problem that my wife claimed her drinking was a response to.

Which was 'what', EXACTLY?

Our relationship, I suppose.

But you CAN 'honestly say', you have just CHOSEN to PREFER to NOT 'honestly say', correct?

No, you are not correct.
[/quote]

WHY?

[Age]

And what is so-called 'responsible' for the sun?

DAM answered the Age question with the following....

To save time, you can google the answer to the question what is so-called responsible for the sun, or you can make up your own version Age.

Age answered...

I found that when one MAKES A CLAIM, but are NOT ABLE TO back up and support THAT CLAIM, then there REALLY WAS NOT MUCH USE for 'them' to MAKE THE CLAIM in the beginning. you have SHOWN and PROVED 'this', ONCE AGAIN.

I'm very interested to know how would you like me to back up the claim that I made by claiming the sun is what is responsible for the earth?

By EXPLAINING what you mean by 'responsible', FIRST.

I could have said...the planet mars is responsible for the earth...but I didn't think that answer would sound right, so I put the sun is responsible for the earth instead, why, because I thought that was the right thing to say in response to your question. If you want me to back up that claim, you'll have to tell me how or what that even means to you, so that I fully understand what you are requesting me to do with my claim by asking for back up and support for the claim.

Again, by EXPLAINING what you MEAN when you use the word 'responsible' here, then we can MOVE ON from 'there'.

[Age]

God is presumed to be a he because God is believed to penetrate and activate something hollow and passive.

WHO BELIEVED or BELIEVES 'this'?

The sexual metaphor is also used in engineering, electric plugs and so forth.

The biological-sexual metaphor would also suit physics idea of force that changes potential energy into kinetic energy; so aptly expressed by Michelangelo in the picture on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and inferred by unbelievers like me to be about physics.

Okay.

[Age]

My impression is that you have a poor understanding of human nature.

This IMPLIES that you KNOW, for sure, what 'human nature' IS, EXACTLY.

No, it doesn't imply that.

So, 'what' IS YOUR IMPRESSION here based ON, EXACTLY?

So, would you like to INFORM, and EXPLAIN TO, the REST what IS 'human nature', EXACTLY?

No.

If no, then WHY NOT?

Because I don't have to if I don't feel like it.

Now, do you have ANY ACTUAL PROOF that BELIEVING (in) 'things' being true, when they are ACTUALLY NOT True, IS 'human nature', itself, then will you PROVIDE 'that proof'?

No, I don't have proof. Do you have proof that human beings are going to stop believing in things that aren't true?

YES.

And if not proof, what reason do you have to even think it?

This is MOOT, considering what my ACTUAL ANSWER WAS, and IS.

Also, I MENTIONED that IRREFUTABLE PROOF exists, YET you COMPLETELY and UTTERLY IGNORE this and just move onto your OWN IMPRESSION/ASSUMPTION, INSTEAD.

Well you should have just provided the irrefutable proof rather than expecting me to play the game of having to ask for it using a specific form of wording.

BUT if you are NOT INTERESTED, which you OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT, then I do NOT want to 'play the game' of writing down specific words to those who are NOT INTERESTED, like 'you' OBVIOUSLY and IRREFUTABLY ARE.

WHY do you have SO LITTLE 'Self-BELIEF'.

I think of it more as having a realistic view of my capabilities.

LOL
LOL
LOL

[Harbal]

But MY QUESTION, to you, WAS, If what you BELIEVE was true was NOT true, then would you like to HEAR that YOUR BELIEF IS NOT true?

Yes.

Okay, but this is OBVIOUSLY NOT an actual irrefutable truth, to you, correct?

You asked a question, and I answered it truthfully.

So, you sometimes SAY 'things' just because 'those things' are the most conventionally used words, terms, or phrases even though they could be absolutely FULLY or PARTLY Wrong, right?

And this could apply to absolutely EVERY thing you SAY and WRITE also, correct?

It depends on how important precision is in any given situation.

So, ONLY WHEN a some 'thing', which you BELIEVE does NOT even exist, but which you say is male gendered, sends to you some OTHER IMAGINED 'thing', then, and ONLY THEN, you will become OPEN to MAYBE God does exist, right?

No, I am already open to the possibility of God's existence.

And, what EXACTLY do you BELIEVE is true in regards to God and It existing?

The question of God's existence is not something I am interested in enough to have any firm beliefs about it.

No comment.

Could this be BECAUSE you have come to REALIZE just how WEIRD and/or BIZARRE it ACTUALLY IS to IMAGINE absolutely ANY IS 'irrefutable' when it is ACTUALLY REFUTABLE?

No, I was going to mention the irony in what you said, but then decided it would be more tactful not to.

I suggest WHEN one's behavior has been EXPLAINED as AN ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, and that behavior IS ACTUALLY BIZARRE, then it would HELP 'them' to REFLECT on 'things' here.

Your claim that my behaviour is bizarre is your opinion, not a fact.

So, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truth exists? Or, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truths do NOT exist?

I neither believe nor disbelieve it.

If you WANT TO come here and MAKE THIS CLAIM ABOUT ME, then I suggest you BETTER back up and support this CLAIM of YOURS HERE.

I have noted your suggestion, and dismissed it as something of no interest to me.

So, PROVIDE ACTUAL EXAMPLES of when you think or BELIEVE that I have CONCLUDED and/or BELIEVED absolutely ANY 'thing' here BEFORE I GAINED and OBTAINED ABSOLUTE CLARIFICATION, FIRST, and SO I have CONCLUDED and BELIEVED 'things' to BE TRUE when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT.

If you do NOT, then this will be just be ANOTHER CLAIM, of the countless OTHER CLAIMS, made here based on absolutely NOTHING of ANY ACTUAL SUBSTANCE AT ALL.

In my opinion, you sometimes get things wrong. If you don't accept that, and regard yourself as infallible, so be it. It is simply one more thing that we disagree about.

Give me a couple of examples of irrefutable facts so I know what sort of things I need to eliminate from my list of things that can never be known for sure.

'Things', called human beings, lived on a 'planet', which they called and labelled 'earth', and on that 'earth' these human being 'things' SPOKE and WROTE what are called 'words'.

The IRREFUTABLE PROOF of 'this' should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

Okay, prove it to me, then.

That the one here known as and labelled "harbal" here is reading or hearing these words here, RIGHT NOW, is ALSO ANOTHER IRREFUTABLE Fact, which could NEVER be REFUTED, FOREVER MORE.

Prove it.

[Harbal]

No, I don't have proof. Do you have proof that human beings are going to stop believing in things that aren't true?

YES.

I don't believe that you have.

[Age]

Yes.

Okay, but this is OBVIOUSLY NOT an actual irrefutable truth, to you, correct?

You asked a question, and I answered it truthfully.

Maybe, but you did NOT now answer the ACTUAL question I asked you here.

So, you sometimes SAY 'things' just because 'those things' are the most conventionally used words, terms, or phrases even though they could be absolutely FULLY or PARTLY Wrong, right?

And this could apply to absolutely EVERY thing you SAY and WRITE also, correct?

It depends on how important precision is in any given situation.

Within actual philosophical discussions could there really be ANY thing less than absolute precision necessary?

So, ONLY WHEN a some 'thing', which you BELIEVE does NOT even exist, but which you say is male gendered, sends to you some OTHER IMAGINED 'thing', then, and ONLY THEN, you will become OPEN to MAYBE God does exist, right?

No, I am already open to the possibility of God's existence.

And, what EXACTLY do you BELIEVE is true in regards to God and It existing?

The question of God's existence is not something I am interested in enough to have any firm beliefs about it.

Okay, pity you are not really that interested because if you were, and considering that you are ALREADY absolutely FULLY OPEN to the possibility of God's existence, then you could have VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY found out what the ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY here.

Which, by the way, would STILL NOT hold ANY necessary NEED for BELIEF either way.

No comment.

Could this be BECAUSE you have come to REALIZE just how WEIRD and/or BIZARRE it ACTUALLY IS to IMAGINE absolutely ANY IS 'irrefutable' when it is ACTUALLY REFUTABLE?

No, I was going to mention the irony in what you said, but then decided it would be more tactful not to.

I REALLY WISH and would have MUCH PREFERRED you DID EXPRESS what and where you thought or BELIEVED the irony was here.

This began when you stated; Sometimes, what seems irrefutable today, ends up being refuted tomorrow.

I replied; Well then 'it' was OBVIOUSLY NEVER EVER 'irrefutable'. And, to think, assume, or BELIEVE that 'it' WAS, is AGAIN, just VERY DISTORTED and TWISTED thinking. ONLY 'that', which can be and IS IRREFUTABLE is what IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE.

You responded; Exactly.

To which I asked you the question; So, WHY IMAGINE that 'it' IS IRREFUTABLE when 'it' could possibly BE REFUTED? and then stated; To me, this seems like a Truly bizarre AND absurd thing to do.

To which you did NOT answer the question and just instead stated; No comment, with some emoji thing.

I am STILL CURIOS as to WHY you would IMAGINE that some 'thing' that was REFUTABLE is IRREFUTABLE?

But if you STILL do NOT want to answer, or even comment, then so be it.

I suggest WHEN one's behavior has been EXPLAINED as AN ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, and that behavior IS ACTUALLY BIZARRE, then it would HELP 'them' to REFLECT on 'things' here.

Your claim that my behaviour is bizarre is your opinion, not a fact.

You talked about the behavior when one thinks or imagines that some 'thing' is IRREFUTABLE but which is later REFUTED. We BOTH AGREE that this behavior exists, which I talked about being this behavior you have done is an ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, so we BOTH AGREE on this behavior. Unless of course you want to now CLAIM that you have NEVER done this. But either way what would you call this behavior of BELIEVING or iMAGINING some 'thing' is IRREFUTABLE, but which was ACTUALLY REFUTABLE from the outset, if NOT a BIZARRE behavior, which is what I call and label this behavior?

So, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truth exists? Or, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truths do NOT exist?

I neither believe nor disbelieve it.

If you WANT TO come here and MAKE THIS CLAIM ABOUT ME, then I suggest you BETTER back up and support this CLAIM of YOURS HERE.

I have noted your suggestion, and dismissed it as something of no interest to me.

So, PROVIDE ACTUAL EXAMPLES of when you think or BELIEVE that I have CONCLUDED and/or BELIEVED absolutely ANY 'thing' here BEFORE I GAINED and OBTAINED ABSOLUTE CLARIFICATION, FIRST, and SO I have CONCLUDED and BELIEVED 'things' to BE TRUE when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT.

If you do NOT, then this will be just be ANOTHER CLAIM, of the countless OTHER CLAIMS, made here based on absolutely NOTHING of ANY ACTUAL SUBSTANCE AT ALL.

In my opinion, you sometimes get things wrong. If you don't accept that, and regard yourself as infallible, so be it. It is simply one more thing that we disagree about.

WHY JUMP to ANOTHER False, Wrong, AND Incorrect ASSUMPTION here about me NOT accepting some 'thing', and then carrying on as though there was some sort of truth in it? Talk about just ANOTHER ATTEMPT at DISTRACTION and DEFLECTION.

LOOK, IF in YOUR OPINION I sometimes get things WRONG, THEN I would be VERY HAPPY and VERY PLEASED if you JUST MENTIONED those 'things', AND THEN EXPLAINED WHY, in YOUR OPINION, those 'things' ARE WRONG. THEN we, AT LEAST, would have SOME 'thing' to LOOK AT and DISCUSS here. BUT, if you think or BELIEVE that YOUR OPINIONS are just RIGHT, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT AT ALL, and so regard "yourself" as infallible and YOUR OPINIONS could NEVER be REFUTED, and so INSTEAD of continuing on with YOUR CLAIM that I sometimes get things wrong you INSTEAD JUMP to some OTHER TOPIC and OPINION of yours, then so be it. It is simply just ANOTHER 'thing' we could LOOK AT, and DISCUSS here.

Give me a couple of examples of irrefutable facts so I know what sort of things I need to eliminate from my list of things that can never be known for sure.

'Things', called human beings, lived on a 'planet', which they called and labelled 'earth', and on that 'earth' these human being 'things' SPOKE and WROTE what are called 'words'.

The IRREFUTABLE PROOF of 'this' should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

Okay, prove it to me, then.

Prove 'what', EXACTLY?

What does the 'it' word here refer to, EXACTLY?

And, IF you or ANY "OTHER" of 'you', human beings, COULD REFUTE what I SAID and CLAIMED here, then PLEASE GO ON AHEAD.

ALSO, 'what' PROOF do you want or NEED, which would PROVE 'it' (whatever 'it' IS, EXACTLY)?

Furthermore, do you DISAGREE or DISPUTE what I SAID and CLAIMED here?

That the one here known as and labelled "harbal" here is reading or hearing these words here, RIGHT NOW, is ALSO ANOTHER IRREFUTABLE Fact, which could NEVER be REFUTED, FOREVER MORE.

Prove it.

Could ANY one REFUTE 'it'?

If yes, then GO ON and DO IT.

Also, do 'you' DISAGREE or DISPUTE that 'you' READ or HEARING THOSE WORDS that 'I' PUT IN FRONT of 'you', "harbal"

[Dontaskme]

And what is so-called 'responsible' for the sun?

I'm very interested to know how would you like me to back up the claim that I made by claiming the sun is what is responsible for the earth?

By EXPLAINING what you mean by 'responsible', FIRST.

I'm thinking maybe the word ''responsible'' is not a suitable word to use now - probably needs to be scrapped in favor of a more suitable word...namely, the word I think would be more suitable would be ''essential''

The sun would be essential for stone to exist...would you agree Age?

Then all we have to figure out is what would be essential for the sun to exist? ...maybe dust and gas?

[Harbal]

Okay, but this is OBVIOUSLY NOT an actual irrefutable truth, to you, correct?

You asked a question, and I answered it truthfully.

Maybe, but you did NOT now answer the ACTUAL question I asked you here.

So, you sometimes SAY 'things' just because 'those things' are the most conventionally used words, terms, or phrases even though they could be absolutely FULLY or PARTLY Wrong, right?

And this could apply to absolutely EVERY thing you SAY and WRITE also, correct?

It depends on how important precision is in any given situation.

Within actual philosophical discussions could there really be ANY thing less than absolute precision necessary?

So, ONLY WHEN a some 'thing', which you BELIEVE does NOT even exist, but which you say is male gendered, sends to you some OTHER IMAGINED 'thing', then, and ONLY THEN, you will become OPEN to MAYBE God does exist, right?

No, I am already open to the possibility of God's existence.

And, what EXACTLY do you BELIEVE is true in regards to God and It existing?

The question of God's existence is not something I am interested in enough to have any firm beliefs about it.

Okay, pity you are not really that interested because if you were, and considering that you are ALREADY absolutely FULLY OPEN to the possibility of God's existence, then you could have VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY found out what the ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY here.

Which, by the way, would STILL NOT hold ANY necessary NEED for BELIEF either way.

Could this be BECAUSE you have come to REALIZE just how WEIRD and/or BIZARRE it ACTUALLY IS to IMAGINE absolutely ANY IS 'irrefutable' when it is ACTUALLY REFUTABLE?

No, I was going to mention the irony in what you said, but then decided it would be more tactful not to.

I REALLY WISH and would have MUCH PREFERRED you DID EXPRESS what and where you thought or BELIEVED the irony was here.

This began when you stated; Sometimes, what seems irrefutable today, ends up being refuted tomorrow.

I replied; Well then 'it' was OBVIOUSLY NEVER EVER 'irrefutable'. And, to think, assume, or BELIEVE that 'it' WAS, is AGAIN, just VERY DISTORTED and TWISTED thinking. ONLY 'that', which can be and IS IRREFUTABLE is what IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE.

You responded; Exactly.

To which I asked you the question; So, WHY IMAGINE that 'it' IS IRREFUTABLE when 'it' could possibly BE REFUTED? and then stated; To me, this seems like a Truly bizarre AND absurd thing to do.

To which you did NOT answer the question and just instead stated; No comment, with some emoji thing.

I am STILL CURIOS as to WHY you would IMAGINE that some 'thing' that was REFUTABLE is IRREFUTABLE?

But if you STILL do NOT want to answer, or even comment, then so be it.

I suggest WHEN one's behavior has been EXPLAINED as AN ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, and that behavior IS ACTUALLY BIZARRE, then it would HELP 'them' to REFLECT on 'things' here.

Your claim that my behaviour is bizarre is your opinion, not a fact.

You talked about the behavior when one thinks or imagines that some 'thing' is IRREFUTABLE but which is later REFUTED. We BOTH AGREE that this behavior exists, which I talked about being this behavior you have done is an ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Fact, so we BOTH AGREE on this behavior. Unless of course you want to now CLAIM that you have NEVER done this. But either way what would you call this behavior of BELIEVING or iMAGINING some 'thing' is IRREFUTABLE, but which was ACTUALLY REFUTABLE from the outset, if NOT a BIZARRE behavior, which is what I call and label this behavior?

So, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truth exists? Or, do you BELIEVE irrefutable truths do NOT exist?

I neither believe nor disbelieve it.

If you WANT TO come here and MAKE THIS CLAIM ABOUT ME, then I suggest you BETTER back up and support this CLAIM of YOURS HERE.

I have noted your suggestion, and dismissed it as something of no interest to me.

So, PROVIDE ACTUAL EXAMPLES of when you think or BELIEVE that I have CONCLUDED and/or BELIEVED absolutely ANY 'thing' here BEFORE I GAINED and OBTAINED ABSOLUTE CLARIFICATION, FIRST, and SO I have CONCLUDED and BELIEVED 'things' to BE TRUE when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT.

If you do NOT, then this will be just be ANOTHER CLAIM, of the countless OTHER CLAIMS, made here based on absolutely NOTHING of ANY ACTUAL SUBSTANCE AT ALL.

In my opinion, you sometimes get things wrong. If you don't accept that, and regard yourself as infallible, so be it. It is simply one more thing that we disagree about.

WHY JUMP to ANOTHER False, Wrong, AND Incorrect ASSUMPTION here about me NOT accepting some 'thing', and then carrying on as though there was some sort of truth in it? Talk about just ANOTHER ATTEMPT at DISTRACTION and DEFLECTION.

LOOK, IF in YOUR OPINION I sometimes get things WRONG, THEN I would be VERY HAPPY and VERY PLEASED if you JUST MENTIONED those 'things', AND THEN EXPLAINED WHY, in YOUR OPINION, those 'things' ARE WRONG. THEN we, AT LEAST, would have SOME 'thing' to LOOK AT and DISCUSS here. BUT, if you think or BELIEVE that YOUR OPINIONS are just RIGHT, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT AT ALL, and so regard "yourself" as infallible and YOUR OPINIONS could NEVER be REFUTED, and so INSTEAD of continuing on with YOUR CLAIM that I sometimes get things wrong you INSTEAD JUMP to some OTHER TOPIC and OPINION of yours, then so be it. It is simply just ANOTHER 'thing' we could LOOK AT, and DISCUSS here.

'Things', called human beings, lived on a 'planet', which they called and labelled 'earth', and on that 'earth' these human being 'things' SPOKE and WROTE what are called 'words'.

The IRREFUTABLE PROOF of 'this' should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

Okay, prove it to me, then.

Prove 'what', EXACTLY?

What does the 'it' word here refer to, EXACTLY?

And, IF you or ANY "OTHER" of 'you', human beings, COULD REFUTE what I SAID and CLAIMED here, then PLEASE GO ON AHEAD.

ALSO, 'what' PROOF do you want or NEED, which would PROVE 'it' (whatever 'it' IS, EXACTLY)?

Furthermore, do you DISAGREE or DISPUTE what I SAID and CLAIMED here?

That the one here known as and labelled "harbal" here is reading or hearing these words here, RIGHT NOW, is ALSO ANOTHER IRREFUTABLE Fact, which could NEVER be REFUTED, FOREVER MORE.

Prove it.

Could ANY one REFUTE 'it'?

If yes, then GO ON and DO IT.

Also, do 'you' DISAGREE or DISPUTE that 'you' READ or HEARING THOSE WORDS that 'I' PUT IN FRONT of 'you', "harbal"

I can't continue with this. All the misunderstandings an misinterpretations make it too frustrating. Also, if I have to see the word, "irrefutable", one more time I think it will drive me mad. No hard feelings, let's just call it a day.

[Age]

No, I don't have proof. Do you have proof that human beings are going to stop believing in things that aren't true?

YES.

I don't believe that you have.

Okay. If this is what you BELIEVE is true, then this MUST BE true, to you, correct?

Or, do you normally BELIEVE in things being true that you have NO proof for and which may NOT be true AT ALL?

[Age]

And what is so-called 'responsible' for the sun?

I'm very interested to know how would you like me to back up the claim that I made by claiming the sun is what is responsible for the earth?

By EXPLAINING what you mean by 'responsible', FIRST.

I'm thinking maybe the word ''responsible'' is not a suitable word to use now - probably needs to be scrapped in favor of a more suitable word...namely, the word I think would be more suitable would be ''essential''

The sun would be essential for stone to exist...would you agree Age?

NOT necessarily so.

Then all we have to figure out is what would be essential for the sun to exist? ...maybe dust and gas?

To me, 'matter' AND 'space' is ESSENTIAL for suns, stones, planets, and ALL other named and labelled 'things' to exist.

Which, by the way, 'matter' AND 'space' ALWAYS EXISTS, HERE and NOW.

Also, thank you for recognizing that there could be a more 'suitable' word than the 'responsible' word.