THE INVALIDATION THREAD!

edited July 18 in General
Haha. The other thread is not so lonely now because I have it on good authority (my own) that this thread is the best friend of your so called 'loneliest thread'.

Comments

  • edited January 2006
    Although he's a very bad best friend, he invalidates everything you say, just because he can.
  • edited January 2006
    Beggars can't be choosers.
  • edited January 2006
    oh no, my forum is being polluted with threads! how am i supposed to sift through all of this? it's madness i tells ya!
  • edited January 2006
    mario wrote:
    oh no, my forum is being polluted with threads! how am i supposed to sift through all of this? it's madness i tells ya!

    with lasers. lasers can do everything, including their own taxes.
  • edited February 2006
    Can they make a rock so big that not even they can lift it?
  • edited February 2006
    probably. except they'd be able to lift it too.
  • edited February 2006
    That arguement is invallid as asking if God could create something greater that he/she/it-self would be a direct contradiction to God being omnipotent. It the same as asking if you can make a square circle. They are two opposing definitions. they cannot occur at the same time and it is thus, and invalid argument.
  • edited February 2006
    What if God just pretended he couldn't lift it for a little while so everyone would shut up about it?
  • edited February 2006
    They'd just bitch about how it was proof of him not being omnipotent or some such thing. You can't win in a situation like that.
  • edited February 2006
    the argument is invalid because believing in god is a matter of faith, so god would never be put into a situation where he had to prove his existence. and now for an excerpt from the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy on the subject of proving god's non-existence:
    "now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful [the babel fish] could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of god.

    "the argument goes something like this: `i refuse to prove that i exist,' says god, `for proof denies faith, and without faith i am nothing.'

    "`but,' says man, `the babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? it could not have evolved by chance. it proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. qed.'

    "`oh dear,' says god, `i hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

    "`oh, that was easy,' says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing."
  • edited February 2006
    mario wrote:
    the argument is invalid because believing in god is a matter of faith, so god would never be put into a situation where he had to prove his existence. and now for an excerpt from the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy on the subject of proving god's non-existence:

    Yeah, basically. ^^
  • edited February 2006
    "`oh, that was easy,' says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
    I'm confused. What's a Zebra Crossing, and why would not knowing their color get yourself killed? I'm sure a horse could trample you just as good. Also, what ever happened to the DevoRevo?
  • edited February 2006
    i think 'zebra crossing' is a british expression for white-striped crosswalks. his proof probably nullified the stripes, so the car didn't stop for him while he was crossing the street.

    devo revo isn't ready yet.
  • edited February 2006
    I always wondered what QED stood for.
  • edited February 2006
    To Mario: It all makes sense now. On both questions. Thanks.
  • edited February 2006
    deku12345 wrote:
    I always wondered what QED stood for.
    I still don't know what QED stands for. I just know when it's used, so I've coasted by on that for years.
  • edited February 2006
    you lazies! you're on the internet for crying out loud! geez!
  • edited February 2006
    Mario, you need to develop a Beatin' Stick just for people who ask what things are on internet forums. Because everyone needs more beatin' sticks.
  • edited February 2006
    i concur wholeheartedly.
  • edited February 2006
    I can make a square circle...
  • edited March 2006
    Well... Well I can make a star fish!
  • edited March 2006
    I'm not entirely sure why, but for a second there I thought it was using a red high-heeled shoe as bait.
  • edited March 2006
    Maybe it is! I dunno. It is a mysterious MS Paint squiggle.
  • edited March 2006
    Maybe it's Gene Simmons' tongue.
  • edited March 2006
    Jeez, Mario, I'm the resident Latin student. But you can take my glory if you want to... *sniff*