Activity

@Lausten.     Any conversation needs a basis.

The most serious discussions I’ve had about human nature began with an agreement that there is no certainty, that some things aren’t known and aren’t provable. When the discussion turned in that direction, everyone had to recognize it and turn back to what can be demonstrated, and if not that, have some suggestion of possibility, and if not, qualified with a statement like “I feel” or “my personal experience”.

What, we have here, is, a failure, to communicate.

We have “this is true, and there is something wrong with you if don’t agree with me”.    Some, you just can’t reach. I don’t like it any more than you do.

Nature does not depend on what so called science thinks is predictable either! — dad1

@Lausten.     Now, the quote above. That’s right, nature doesn’t care. Nature doesn’t have feelings. Animals seem to, even plants make a decision in a manner of speaking, but the laws of nature are a description of nature, they help us predict and sometimes we are wrong, they aren’t the things in nature.

That I have to explain this, shows how diametrically opposed you are to the way of thinking that this forum is about. I don’t care who is right here, but you need to make some effort to understand where we’re coming from. The people here have spent years studying your book and your beliefs and they are engaging with you now in an attempt to understand.

You know, sometimes people write stuff that’s worth repeating.   Nicely said Lausten.  👍