Demonic Rituals - US Marines Drink Snake Blood in Thai Jungle

If you think about it , in short without all those scientific terminology the big bang theory merely states that something just sprung up from nothing, which even in science does not make any sense
For instance ,that singularity your talking about , where did it come from ?

The Big bang theory is exactly that,-a theory, otherwise it should be known as the big bang fact if at all the hard evidence was available to substantiate the same
That also goes for the so called Theory of evolution and any other crap that scientist want us to believe .

When it comes to experience - they say experience is the best teacher
i once was just like you very sceptical until i got a reality check
i was reminded of the state of things in the real world
i can confidently say i have encountered spirits both good and evil
and again ill tell you
not every thing thats true can be backed up with "hard Evidence"

Not everything you are told by "white" scientists is for real
they are mortal human beings just like you and me
These are all red herrings. You have not addressed the issue and are deflecting. And I dont know what all this is about "white scientists". The big bang explains the expansion from a singularity not where or how it emerged. As for evolution lets not even touch that yet.

So lets talk about your experience with good and bad spirits. What was your experience and how did you determine it was a "spirit"?
 
Last edited:
i once was just like you very sceptical until i got a reality check
i was reminded of the state of things in the real world
i can confidently say i have encountered spirits both good and evil
why don't you share what happened and we can evaluate whether it is worth belief
 
These are all red herrings. You have not addressed the issue and are deflecting. And I dont know what all this is about "white scientists". The big bang explains the expansion from a singularity not where or how it emerged. As for evolution lets not even touch that yet.

So lets talk about your experience with good and bad spirits. What was your experience and how did you determine it was a "spirit"?
science ignores the most important part "where or how it emerged" - this is where ID (Intelligent design) comes in

ID has an answer to that question (arguably with no tangible evidence) , science on the other hand dose not even attempt to answer the question

As for my spiritual encounter- all i can say is that
some things are best left alone
no matter how much i would try to explain it would be totally unintelligible to you
you've got to experience it to understand it
 
science ignores the most important part "where or how it emerged" - this is where ID (Intelligent design) comes in

ID has an answer to that question (arguably with no tangible evidence) , science on the other hand dose not even attempt to answer the question

As for my spiritual encounter- all i can say is that
some things are best left alone
no matter how much i would try to explain it would be totally unintelligible to you
you've got to experience it to understand it
Its not that science does not tryto answer where everything came from, its that it currently cannot. And does not make any proclamations that it does. The reason you have never heard an answer for where things emerged is because there isnt one. A lack of an answer is not an indication that attempts are not being made.

Intelligent design is not an answer simply because it fallacious. It is an argument comprising of special pleading and and circular argument if you use the bible or any holy book as evidence.

Furthermore, how did you determine;
1. That what you see is designed?
2. If it is designed, the design is intelligent?

Finally, The fact that you cannot explain your experience in an intelligent way of even in the simplest terms should be very worrying to even you.
Im not asking you to convince me that it happened. I just want to know what happened and how you ruled out EVERYTHING else before the conclusion that it was spirits.
 
Its not that science does not tryto answer where everything came from, its that it currently cannot. And does not make any proclamations that it does. The reason you .
And that there is exactly is my point
Not everything that is believed or trusted can be attributed to hard evidence
be it religion or the big bang theory
this phenomenon is called faith
i have faith evil spirits are for real
just like Christians have faith in the existence of God
or the Atheists have faith in the big bang theory
 
And that there is exactly is my point
Not everything that is believed or trusted can be attributed to hard evidence
be it religion or the big bang theory
this phenomenon is called faith
i have faith evil spirits are for real
just like Christians have faith in the existence of God
or the Atheists have faith in the big bang theory
You are using faith in the same context when the meaning are entirely different.
When Christians use faith, they mean belief in the absence of evidence as per Hebrews 11.1

When a secular person uses the word faith it means belief based on the evidence provided. As in the case of the big bang, all physics models and gathered evidence that point to this being the case.

In short, you do require hard evidence and in the absence of hard evidence, logic and reason to determine if something is true or can be trusted.

Now if you believe things without evidence then that is shitty way to live. Because you will believe anything.

You can believe things based on bad evidence. However, you need to critically think to determine if the evidence you have is bad or good based on any counterproposals.

We've asked you repeatedly to give us your evidence for spirits, something you seem to be trying very hard to avoid addressing. You set up strawman arguments and bring up issues not on the table.
Here is a thought experiment. Ask yourself this: between your "experience" of spirits and those who claim to have been abducted by aliens, which of you has a more credible claim bases on whatever evidence you have? And what makes one claim more credible than the other?
 
When a secular person uses the word faith it means belief based on the evidence provided. As in the case of the big bang, all physics models and gathered evidence that point to this being the case.
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary

Now if you believe things without evidence then that is shitty way to live. Because you will believe anything.
so you mean religious people live shitty ?
may also means big bang theorist live shitty too because they believe nothing gave rise to something (crazy haaa !!!!! ,no real evidence to support the theory)


You can believe things based on bad evidence. However, you need to critically think to determine if the evidence you have is bad or good based on any counterproposals.
what if all the "counterproposals" are all based on bad evidence too ?, doesn't that mean yo have "faith" based on bad evidence ?.
just like in the big bang theory.


Here is a thought experiment. Ask yourself this: between your "experience" of spirits and those who claim to have been abducted by aliens, which of you has a more credible claim bases on whatever evidence you have? And what makes one claim more credible than the other?

You should also have included the big bang theorist

who is more credible
the spirit world believer
the alien abductees
or the big bang theorists

all i can say is - The craziest of the lot must be "big bang theorists" in believing falsified evidence that does no even make scene

As for abductees can't make any judgement on them because i do not know if aliens truly exist
scientist think it would be quite absurd if indeed we are the only intelligent living beings in this universe (some even toy with the idea of a multiverse)

The only evidence you will ever get when it comes to spirits is if you come into contact with them



 
When a secular person uses the word faith it means belief based on the evidence provided. As in the case of the big bang, all physics models and gathered evidence that point to this being the case.
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary

Now if you believe things without evidence then that is shitty way to live. Because you will believe anything.
so you mean religious people live shitty ?
may also means big bang theorist live shitty too because they believe nothing gave rise to something (crazy haaa !!!!! ,no real evidence to support the theory)


You can believe things based on bad evidence. However, you need to critically think to determine if the evidence you have is bad or good based on any counterproposals.
what if all the "counterproposals" are all based on bad evidence too ?, doesn't that mean yo have "faith" based on bad evidence ?.
just like in the big bang theory.


Here is a thought experiment. Ask yourself this: between your "experience" of spirits and those who claim to have been abducted by aliens, which of you has a more credible claim bases on whatever evidence you have? And what makes one claim more credible than the other?

You should also have included the big bang theorist

who is more credible
the spirit world believer
the alien abductees
or the big bang theorists

all i can say is - The craziest of the lot must be "big bang theorists" in believing falsified evidence that does no even make scene

As for abductees can't make any judgement on them because i do not know if aliens truly exist
scientist think it would be quite absurd if indeed we are the only intelligent living beings in this universe (some even toy with the idea of a multiverse)

The only evidence you will ever get when it comes to spirits is if you come into contact with them
When a secular person uses the word faith it means belief based on the evidence provided. As in the case of the big bang, all physics models and gathered evidence that point to this being the case.
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary
You keep going on about the big bang theory but im now absolutely certain you do know what it entails. So let me address that so you stop talking out of ignorance or what you think it is and what is isnt.
The big bang theory points to everything in the universe in the universe as we know it originating from a singularity. It does not postulate that the singularity came from nothing. I have mentioned before that the "big bang" describes the inflation of space time from this singularity.

"The Big Bang theory is a cosmological model of the observable universe from the earliest known periods through its subsequent large-scale evolution.[1][2][3] The model describes how the universe expanded from a very high-density and high-temperature state"
"One of the common misconceptions about the Big Bang model is that it fully explains the origin of the universe. However, the Big Bang model does not describe how energy, time, and space was caused, but rather it describes the emergence of the present universe from an ultra-dense and high-temperature initial state."
THESE TWO QUOTATIONS ARE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE WIKIPEDIA PAGE ON THE BBT. THE FIRST BEING THE OPENING SENTENCE AND THE LATTER ON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE BBT. NEITHER OF WHICH TALK ABOUT THE ORIGINS.
Now, you speak of lack of evidence for the big bang? Here you go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Observational_evidence
This is a hell of a lot more than you can provide for spirits short of anecdotal evidence.

When a secular person uses the word faith it means belief based on the evidence provided. As in the case of the big bang, all physics models and gathered evidence that point to this being the case.
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary
What vocabulary?
Tell me what your definition of faith is and we can then have a conversation from there since you are cherry-picking what definition to use based on whatever statement you want to make.
You can believe things based on bad evidence. However, you need to critically think to determine if the evidence you have is bad or good based on any counterproposals.
what if all the "counterproposals" are all based on bad evidence too ?, doesn't that mean yo have "faith" based on bad evidence ?.
If counterproposals are based on bad evidence then you will reach a wrong conclusion. And this why I made a clear definition of the word faith. My belief in that "wrong conclusion" would be backed by that faulty evidence. And I can justify that belief and you can show me that my belief is wrong by showing the what is invalid in the evidence propping up that belief.

Now if you believe things without evidence then that is shitty way to live. Because you will believe anything.
so you mean religious people live shitty ?
may also means big bang theorist live shitty too because they believe nothing gave rise to something (crazy haaa !!!!! ,no real evidence to support the theory)

Do you see how you keep trying to strawman things? I said believing things without evidence is a shitty way to live. You inferred this to religious people. I made no mention of this. As for the evidence to BBT, there is evidence there. You can choose to refute it, but you have to understand what you are refuting first which you don't. And if you do understand it, show why the supporting evidence is wrong.

The only evidence you will ever get when it comes to spirits is if you come into contact with them
This is idiotic. And let me explain why. You cannot start with a conclusion and say that conclusion is the very evidence for the thing you are proposing it to be. You must either:
1. Show to a comfortable degree of certainty, that this proposed thing to be different from all other things you know it could be; and/or
2. Show to a comfortable degree of certainty, that the proposed thing is like this thing you are proposing it is. by comparing with something demonstrable.

Therefore to say something is a spirit you must:
1. Show it is not a hallucination, illusion, trick, deception etc
2. Define and show/demonstrate that there are things such as spirits and why your experience matches what can de said to be a spirit.
 
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary
You keep going on about the big bang theory but im now absolutely certain you do know what it entails. So let me address that so you stop talking out of ignorance or what you think it is and what is isnt.
The big bang theory points to everything in the universe in the universe as we know it originating from a singularity. It does not postulate that the singularity came from nothing. I have mentioned before that the "big bang" describes the inflation of space time from this singularity.

and i ask again where did this thing called "singularity" come from?,and can even science answer that ?

Just as you have asked me

1. Show this thing called "singularity" is not a hallucination, illusion, trick, deception etc
2. Define and show/demonstrate that this thing called "singularity" that is said to be the genesis of the big bang theory truly exist/exited
and most important explain its origins accompanied with hard evidence

If you can not answer this

why so you expect the same about spirits ?
 
you are terribly wrong my fren - you're now inventing new vocabulary
You keep going on about the big bang theory but im now absolutely certain you do know what it entails. So let me address that so you stop talking out of ignorance or what you think it is and what is isnt.
The big bang theory points to everything in the universe in the universe as we know it originating from a singularity. It does not postulate that the singularity came from nothing. I have mentioned before that the "big bang" describes the inflation of space time from this singularity.

and i ask again where did this thing called "singularity" come from?,and can even science answer that ?

Just as you have asked me

1. Show this thing called "singularity" is not a hallucination, illusion, trick, deception etc
2. Define and show/demonstrate that this thing called "singularity" that is said to be the genesis of the big bang theory truly exist/exited
and most important explain its origins accompanied with hard evidence

If you can not answer this

why so you expect the same about spirits ?
Have you heard of a black hole? Do you know it is a singularity? Do you know there are many discovered and more discovered every other day?
there's your evidence for a singularity. Showing it is not a hallucination, trick etc.

Evidence for the big bang was posted in my last response which you clearly didn't read but just come here with your "gotcha" questions.

Do scientist know where the singularity came from? No. No one even pretends to know.

The fact is everything you ask for I have replied with some level of evidence. Even if you decide to dismiss it, you are dismissing SOMETHING.
The cogs in your head are working terribly hard to come with a rationale for your belief that you clearly cant.
And by the way, even all the evidence for the big bang theory was completely wrong, you still dont have a case for your belief.
All you have given us is "i experienced something, so i believe."
It boils down to you having the same burden of evidence as those guys who think they saw ghosts, bigfoot, fairies, loch ness monsters etc
 
Have you heard of a black hole? Do you know it is a singularity? Do you know there are many discovered and more discovered every other day?
there's your evidence for a singularity. Showing it is not a hallucination, trick etc.

Evidence for the big bang was posted in my last response which you clearly didn't read but just come here with your "gotcha" questions.

Do scientist know where the singularity came from? No. No one even pretends to know.

The fact is everything you ask for I have replied with some level of evidence. Even if you decide to dismiss it, you are dismissing SOMETHING.
The cogs in your head are working terribly hard to come with a rationale for your belief that you clearly cant.
And by the way, even all the evidence for the big bang theory was completely wrong, you still dont have a case for your belief.
All you have given us is "i experienced something, so i believe."
It boils down to you having the same burden of evidence as those guys who think they saw ghosts, bigfoot, fairies, loch ness monsters etc
just asked you a simple, question , where did these singularity came from?
never asked for proof it exists
those are two different things
just answer the bloody question if you can
 
The come about when a massive star dies and collapses under its own weight.
Dont bother with this guy. His questions are answered but he ignores the answer. Mind you, he asked for proof of their existence here:
Just as you have asked me

1. Show this thing called "singularity" is not a hallucination, illusion, trick, deception etc
2. Define and show/demonstrate that this thing called "singularity" that is said to be the genesis of the big bang theory truly exist/exited
and most important explain its origins accompanied with hard evidence

And even if he did ask for an explanation of the origin of the singularity, there is a whole link to a wiki on BBT up in the thread explaining its evidence.
 
The come about when a massive star dies and collapses under its own weight.
we are talking here before the stars were ever formed , there was a big bang that came about from a singularity , that's what @Burner believes
my ques is
this singularity that gave birth to the big bang , what were its origins ?
where did it come from ?
that is an easy enough question to answer , isn't it
 
Dont bother with this guy. His questions are answered but he ignores the answer. Mind you, he asked for proof of their existence here:


And even if he did ask for an explanation of the origin of the singularity, there is a whole link to a wiki on BBT up in the thread explaining its evidence.
Evidence is one thing
Origins is another
 
we are talking here before the stars were ever formed , there was a big bang that came about from a singularity , that's what @Burner believes
my ques is
this singularity that gave birth to the big bang , what were its origins ?
where did it come from ?
that is an easy enough question to answer , isn't it
Nobody knows that answer
 
Exactly. And just because we don't know, does not mean that your claim whatever it may be, wins by default.
we are applying double standards here , are't we ?
the bottom line is that not everything is known and not everything that does not have physical evidence is false
 
Back
Top