This is what I said:
“Is it rational to demand proofs for “their fantastic stories, supsertitions, fanatsies, hallucinations, and what not...” if, in fact, that “rational” person believes that no such “proof” can possibly exist?
And here is a comment you made about religious proofs:
“The problem with religious “proofs” is that one cannot differentiate them from hallucinations, fancy, dreams, fantasy, etc.” (made to D-fendr post #573)
So I stand by what I said and if you take personally..well, that's not my fault.
I see all sorts of assertions made without a speck of proof, Jonah living in the belly of a whale three days is a “fantastic tale”. Where is your proof that it is a “fantastic tale”?
“So, let's leave hallucinations and fairy tales out of the picture and conetrate on the real world around us.”
Why? You've been using those terms quite freely. No, let's not.
“Is he rational?
If he treats it as theory, yes he is. If he treats it as fact, he is not.”
What proof is there the person is not rational? Why by what and whether he believes something or just allows it is a theory.
“If this is going to reduce to groundless accusations with the party being accused held guilty until proven innocent than all bets are off.”
“No, nothing I believe is a fantastic tale.
If you believe the tale of a talking donkey you do. Or if you believe Jonah lived in a belly of a fish for three days you do, or if you claim the rain fall towards the heave, or anything man's fancy can produce, that's not in the rela world, you do”
Grounds? None.
But those cite religious proof are being groundlessly accused:
“The problem with religious “proofs” is that one cannot differentiate them from hallucinations, fancy, dreams, fantasy, etc.”
Grounds? None. So, In your own words,
“You made the allgeation, you provide evidence or retraction. Otherwise this exchange is over.”
“No talking donkeys, no voices from the sky, no three day camings out in a stomach of a fish, no sun standing still, etc. Otherwise pink unicorns, and a buch of gods are on the menu for serious consideration.”
Why? Because they can't be differentiated from “ hallucinations, fancy, dreams, fantasy, etc.”?
Ditto. A tale is a tale and one cannot differentiate between a talking mirror in the Snow White and the talking donkey, or pink unicorns on Jupiter for that matter.
I see all sorts of assertions made without a speck of proof, Jonah living in the belly of a whale three days is a “fantastic tale”. Where is your proof that it is a “fantastic tale”?
It doesn't happen in the real world. It doens'thappen because (1) digestive juices are highly acidic, lethal, and tend to dissolve a body, (2) there is not enough air in the stomach, resulting in suffocation, (3) smooth muscle movements would crush the body, etc.
Now if you insist on flying reindeer and talking mirrors, then we can talk about Jonah too in the same category.
However, you will have to show me either a talking mirror, a flying reindeer or someone who actually, verifiably spent three days inside a giant animal's stomach and lived to talk about it before I move that story out of the fairy tale section.