There was no deception and no deflection. Explain how I was being deceptive and/or deflective. Demonstrate your rationalization to justify your accusation.
Because you brought up an irrelavent math problem. Even that was wrong.
1. There are thousands of questions in the world that reason, logic, and science do not have an answer for or explanation for. We all know that. But what I claim that reason, logic and science have the answer and explanation for far more number of things than any other system you can bring up. In addition it is best to avoid to believe any kind of superstition.
2. I do agree that cave men did not have all the sophisticated math and science that we have at our disposal today.
But cave man (10,000 year ago or so) surely had a very clear understanding of 1 + 1 = 2. They knew it is 2, not more not less. They also had the understanding that even if a goat is very big still it is one goat.
Proof: A cave man asks his neighbor to hold his very skinny goat until the next day. An hour or so later cave man brings in one more goat to his neighbor to hold. This goat is big. Twice as big as the first one.
Next day he wanted his goats back.
What do you think the cave man will do when the neighbor returns only one goat?
He would jump all over his neighbor. This clearly shows cave man did have understanding of 1 + 1 = 2. They just couldn’t express that in a formal mathematical language. They also knew a goat is a goat regardless of its size.
Again, they did not know a lot of things that we know today. Example: man believed Sun revolves around the Earth and not vice versa.
You picked very poor examples of 1+ 1 = 2 and large and small lion.
Next time just ask me to help you to defend your stance. I will do it. I am serious.
Now, Your argument about what knowledge to use to determine truth from lies.
Let’s find out.
I am debating in the 21st century, with Fathom, The Cat, MBL, YeeZeVee and others. None of them lives in the cave time. We all have access to all the modern math and sciences. Only thing we can talk about is what we know using all the current knowledge we have today.
If you want to use the knowledge that have not been discovered or invented yet then anything goes.
However, if is true now, but not true to the caveman's time in history, does it mean that truth is subject to time? If so, then all it means is that truth changes with time, and tomorrow's truth may not be the same as today’s.
Claiming to use future’s knowledge I can claim I am your Papa. I am your mama. I am god. I am the one who created the universe. I will send you to hell to burn forever, Fathom.
You don’t understand this because you do not have the knowledge of the future.
500 years from now you will discover new knowledge that will clearly show you and convince you that I am your papa.
Fathom: That’s ridicules. I won’t even live for 500 years.
Abdul: Yes. You will.
Fathom: All scientific and medical science clearly shows I won’t live for 500 years.
Abdul: You are saying that using only today’s Medical science. But in the future you will acquire new knowledge on that basis you will live 500 years.
Moral: the only thing we can bet on are the things that are reasonable, logical , scientific using today’s knowledge.
However, if you just want to specculate, do brain storming just for fun then it is OK.
Yah, we can talk about the possibility of the existance of ghost, soul, Allah etc. just for fun and explore.