notmyself

Obvious solution is mandatory gun ownership (3 of) for every, man, woman and child.

Traipsing down to the library in the p****** rain to do research for homework. Most the entire collective knowledge of mankind at your fingertips. Granted you have to search for it but same with the library. Back 'in the day', lack of knowledge could be put down to lack of opportunity such as no schools, libraries etc. but now, for the most part, if an individual doesn't know something it's because they don't care to and that is called wilful ignorance.

Yep. The Fermi paradox.

'Call it what you will, I never saw teenagers ( when I was one ) walking along a public pavement looking at a screen instead of where they were going' Indeed mate.

Indeed... evidence of flour, eggs, sugar and such is not evidence of a cake.

Yep. Often get that or something similar when studying a subject. Learn this and then that and on and on then suddenly the entire subject becomes as clear as day.

'How do you get from not understanding how the universe was created to proof that God exists?' I've heard this referred to as the 'look at the trees' postulation and also the 'god of the gaps'. I believe I wrote about this earlier as an example of an oft heard claim that has never ever been shown to be valid.

lol All cheeses are similar in that they are all cheeses.

I suspect the reason you have to keep asking is because you don't understand or refuse to. None have shown themselves to be valid so the question of which one/s are true and which one/s are not is effectively meaningless. Another way of looking at would be if you support a football team and they lose. The score / number of goals they lose by isn't going to effect the result. Please don't feel compelled to respond if that basic logic is beyond you. I could possibly explain with the aid of sketches/ pictures but life is too short. Sorry.

Sorry, hadn't read all the comments. None have been shown to valid though some would argue that the real or true aspect can be related to it being true that a number of people believe it. Weird imo but have seen it argued. Some would also argue that the Universe / existence has to require a creator but that too has never been demonstrated. 'There has to be a god' OK... ? You base that on? Foolishness, if you ask me lol.

Theism as opposed to deism (belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe)

That would be a non capitalised god.

Can't know for sure.... yep. Downside is that that is agnostic while atheist is a rejection of the claim of knowledge that an intervening god exists. It's so simple, shockingly so, that it's incredible the number of people who don't understand. We use this same logic in law and have done for centuries. It's guilty or not guilty rather than guilty or innocent.

BA.4-5 is essentially a free booster.

Blaming a dog for acting like a dog?