I know God exists by reasoning, what do you Catholics say?

@DocSavage

You say:
According to you, Catholics believe in a different god than the one you’ve been posting about. Don’t you think you should make that clear before you engage them ?

I tell you:
Catholics make a distinction between the God of nature and the God of supernature.

According to Catholic doctrine, to know the existence of the God of nature, reason and intelligence are sufficient, but to know the existence of the God of supernature, man needs revelation which is composed of two parts: (1) The Bible and (2) Tradition.


You see, Doc, as an ex-fundamentalist biblical Christian you know as with all Protestants, only the God of supernature. That is why I call you all who were Christians before, biblical atheists, because you now deny the God of supernature Who reveals Himself in the Bible.


Now, I am always trying to inform you that it is time you use reason and intelligence to know the God of nature.

With Catholics, they are very articulate that the God of nature and the God of supernature are identical, it is just that with the God of nature man's reason and intelligence are enough to come to His existence, but with God as the God of supernature, man needs revelation, which is as I said already composed of two parts: (1) The Bible and (2) Tradition.


As you have the faculties of reason and intelligence, what do you say, doesn't the regular order of nature implicate the existence of God as the creator and operator of nature?







DocSavage · M
What about God as mankind's reason and intelligence can and does know to exist: since you two though biblical atheists, still you continue to have the faculties of reason and intelligence, so what do you say about the regular order of nature, doesn't it implicate the existence of God as the creator and operator of nature? -Yrger

According to you, Catholics believe in a different god than the one you’ve been posting about. Don’t you think you should make that clear before you engage them ? You have a habit of changing the subject when you’re confronted. Maybe you should try being honest and straightforward with people.

Ran away again, did you ?
But you admit now, that you have nothing tangible to show as evidence for your god’s existence, not even a pair of eyeglasses.

[quote] You see, Doc, as an ex-fundamentalist biblical Christian you know as with all Protestants, only the God of supernature. That is why I call you all who were Christians before, biblical atheists, because you now deny the God of supernature Who reveals Himself in the Bible [/quote]
Ex-fundamentalist Christian ? That was a month ago, two weeks ago you said I was an Atheist, then I was a Buddhist.
You keep changing it. Not that I mind it much, I was raised on different mythologies, so I’m familiar with several gods, including a few nature gods. don’t play any favorites though.
That’s because they all have two things in common. 1) none have ever been proven to exist. 2) all gods are man made.
[quote] As you have the faculties of reason and intelligence, what do you say, doesn't the regular order of nature implicate the existence of God as the creator and operator of nature?[/quote]
As I have repeatedly stated , I find nothing in nature to suggest or support the existence of such a being. I have also repeatedly asked you what evidence lead you to such a conclusion. You refuse to answer.

@DocSavage

I tell you:
Okay, I will try another approach. Here is my concept of what is evidence: "Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)" Please tell me what is wrong with my concept of evidence in re God exists or not - in concise words.

[b][i]But you are not taking my challenge for you to tell me what is wrong with my concept of evidence, so you have depleted your coffer of genuine knowledge. You have lost the debate.
[/i][/b]









yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage


I keep on and on asking you to present in concise words your definition of evidence, but you are not presenting any.


You just instead ask me to produce evidence to the existence of God.


Can't you understand at all, that unless we have agreed on what is evidence, you and I cannot present each one's to be factual evidence, for you and I will insist that what you present is not evidence.



Okay, I will try another approach.

Here is my concept of what is evidence:
"Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)"

Please tell me what is wrong with my concept of evidence in re God exists or not - in concise words.

@DocSavage


Do be pertinent, so get busy and present your concept of evidence.

Here is again my concept of evidence:
Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)



So, cease and desist from your attempt at escape by engaging in insulting language.







yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage


It's your turn to present your concept of evidence, and make it in concise words.

Then we will work to arrive at a mutually ageed on concept of evidence, by which you will prove that there is no God, and I that God exists.

The process is rational and intelligent and it takes deep thinking and honesty, I hope you are up to it.


There's still plenty of concepts for us to agree on, else we will be in the absurd situation of talking past each other's head.


Again, I repeat:
Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)








Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words) -Yrger


Ok, I call. Present your evidence we’ll review it.
I will challenge that which I don’t agree with.
Fair enough ?

@DocSavage @newjaninev2 @BibleData @Emosaur @LeopoldBloom
@HollyW @BibleData @Thodsis @SW-User @deadgerbil @Dshhh
@HeidiA @ImperialAerosolKidFromEP @lacrossegirl25 @Rhode57 @ElwoodBlues
@Convivial @DocSavage @newjaninev2 @BibleData [@Emosaur] [@LeopoldBloom]
[@HollyW] [@TheoreticSkeptic] [@Thodsis] [@Mithraia] [@deadgerbil] [@Dshhh]
[@HeidiA] [@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP] [@lacrossegirl25] [@Rhode57] [@ElwoodBlues]
[@Convivial] [@DocSavage] [@newjaninev2] [@TheoreticSkeptic] [@Emosaur] [@LeopoldBloom]
[@HollyW] [@TheoreticSkeptic] [@Thodsis] [@Mithraia] [@deadgerbil] [@Dshhh]
[@HeidiA] [@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP] [@lacrossegirl25] [@Rhode57] [@ElwoodBlues]
[@Convivial] [@BiasForAction] [@Abstraction] [@mcane] [@allygator18] [@ DrPhibes] [@ Adstar] [@jehova] [@TelegramSam]


Hi everyone, the list above is my invitation to you all to join in the discussion. If you are not happy with it, then you can opt to not receive any notification, by cancelling the notification feature.
---------------------

[@everyone]

Hi everyone, please react to my writings here.

[quote]From Yrger:
I know God exists by reasoning, what do you Catholics say?
There are three ways man knows God exists:
1. By reasoning
2. By reading the Bible (or the Koran for Muslims)
3. By meditation

For my own part, I know God exists by reasoning, what about you Catholics?[/quote]





yrger · 80-89, M
@sexyjigsaw

Hi sexyjigsaw, what about yourself, do you care to discuss with me how to know God exists by reasoning, or you are an atheist?

Don't be shy, say something.



Hi sexyjigsaw, what about yourself, do you care to discuss with me how to know God exists by reasoning, or you are an atheist?


(This is the way I exchange views with everyone, not by using the 'reply' feature of Similarworlds.com - I hope you get to learn this 'method' pretty soon.)


And no, I am not into converting you to know God exists.

What then am I after?

I love to learn whether I can master ways of thinking which are better than how and why I am doing with my reason and intelligence.


sexyjigsaw
I'm not a Catholic, but it seems obvious that if they're Catholic, they believe in their scripture and worldview

@DocSavage


You as an atheist deny God exists, I am theist thus I have the knowledge that God exists, logically you deny the God that I know to exist: Wherefore we are linked together.


Now, before anything else God is the creator of everything that is not God Himself.

You therefore deny that God is the creator of everything that is not God Himself.


Very well then, let you propose another being that is the creator of everything that is not itself.






DocSavage · M
[quote]And above all, you must also define what/who is God and how and why He is connected to and with:[/quote]

I repeat WHAT PART OF ATHEIST DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND ?
What possible reason would I have for bringing god into any of it ?
You’re the one that claims there are at least two, and you completely failed to show any evidence for either one.
You don’t honestly expect me to do your arguing for you, do you ?
Use your so call reason and intelligence to figure it out. You might also try adding other books than the Bible to your reading list.

@DocSavage

What happened to you? Cat got your tongue, or you have depleted your knowledge - that is the deficiency of atheists, they are limited woefully in their reason and intelligence, one cannot hope to engage in a productive dialogue with them at all, in re God exists or not.

They are conversant with just bullocks and tihs and hollering all the time, in place of rational and intelligent and pertinent exchange of ideas.


Take notice, everyone, DocSavage has gone into hiding.








yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage


No need for unkind and indecent language.

I will start the process of us coming to an agreed on concept of evidence in re God exists or not.

Here is my gambit:
Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)







DocSavage · M
BOLLOCKS
You can define the evidence once you present it. You’re stalling because you know how weak it is.
Put up or shut up

@sexyjigsaw

Hi sexyjigsaw, what about yourself, do you care to discuss with me how to know God exists by reasoning, or you are an atheist?

Don't be shy, say something.







Hi sexyjigsaw, what about yourself, do you care to discuss with me how to know God exists by reasoning, or you are an atheist?


(This is the way I exchange views with everyone, not by using the 'reply' feature of Similarworlds.com - I hope you get to learn this 'method' pretty soon.)


And no, I am not into converting you to know God exists.

What then am I after?

I love to learn whether I can master ways of thinking which are better than how and why I am doing with my reason and intelligence.





sexyjigsaw
I'm not a Catholic, but it seems obvious that if they're Catholic, they believe in their scripture and worldview

@DocSavage


You claim:
[quote][There] is energy , which is matter in a different state, it’s that energy that becomes partials. Nothing is no longer exactly nothing anymore. Add gravity and they become something, perhaps a “singularity “[/quote]


You are into self-obfuscation with words like:
1. Energy
2. matter
3 . State
4. Partials
5. Nothing
6. Singularity
Unless you produce the defintion of each word and show how and why they are related, and therfore no God exists.

And above all, you must also define what/who is God and how and why He is connected to and with:
1. Energy
2. matter
3 . State
4. Partials
5. Nothing
6. Singularity

Otherwise, you are into self-obfuscation with empty words. You are into a lot of blah blah blah blah . . . without reason and intelligence.







DocSavage · M
[quote]Quantum physics is not nothing, for if it were nothing then no human could talk about it.[/quote]
Never said it was. What you have is energy , which is matter in a different state, it’s that energy that becomes partials. Nothing is no longer exactly nothing anymore.
Add gravity and they become something, perhaps a “singularity “
Get the idea ?

[quote] Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words) -Yrger[/quote]

Ok, I call. Present your evidence we’ll review it.
I will challenge that which I don’t agree with.
Fair enough ?

Yrger/microbrain made the claim, I agreed to the rules of evidence. He refuses to present it.
He is the one being dishonest. He’s stalling, he’s lying. And he can’t hide

@DocSavage


It's your turn to present your concept of evidence, and make it in concise words.

Then we will work to arrive at a mutually ageed on concept of evidence, by which you will prove that there is no God, and I that God exists.

The process is rational and intelligent and it takes deep thinking and honesty, I hope you are up to it.


There's still plenty of concepts for us to agree on, else we will be in the absurd situation of talking past each other's head.


Again, I repeat:
Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)








Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words) -Yrger


Ok, I call. Present your evidence we’ll review it.
I will challenge that which I don’t agree with.
Fair enough ?

@sexyjigsaw


Hi sexyjigsaw, what about yourself, do you care to discuss with me how to know God exists by reasoning, or you are an atheist?


(This is the way I exchange views with everyone, not by using the 'reply' feature of Similarworlds.com - I hope you get to learn this 'method' pretty soon.)


And no, I am not into converting you to know God exists.

What then am I after?

I love to learn whether I can master ways of thinking which are better than how and why I am doing with my reason and intelligence.





sexyjigsaw
I'm not a Catholic, but it seems obvious that if they're Catholic, they believe in their scripture and worldview

@DocSavage

Hi everyone, how can we ever have any decent dialogue with Doc when all he has in mind are tihs matters.

Doc, go away and do your tihs in some measure of privacy.



Doc is one atheist who goes for tihs incantation, instead of rational intelligent exposition in concise language for his atheistic persuasion.





yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage

Hi everyone, how can we ever have any decent dialogue with Doc when all he has in mind are tihs matters.

Doc, go away and do your tihs in some measure of privacy.




DocSavage · M
You can’t just go back and read ?
Your problem is you’re self defecating. Too much shit. You just can’t stop spewing it. You answer your own questions. I’ve done my part. You lose.

[@yrger/microbrain
[quote] You are a master of self-obfuscation.[/quote]
Learned a new word, did you. Finally something over two syllables. There may be hope for you yet. ( not much )
Fortunately, I remembered to include a part of the article. Explaining where your mysterious particles come from. It seems ( ultimately) they start as energy, and switch to matter and antimatter which can be measured. Meaning it’s no longer “nothing “
I can’t do the math myself, but I understand the principle. They even made it work in a laboratory.
Your problem is a short attention span. You don’t like to read. You like short, simple answers. Quick and convenient. Truth doesn’t matter so much if it takes you too much effort. Very typical of theist.

@DocSavage


I keep on and on asking you to present in concise words your definition of evidence, but you are not presenting any.


You just instead ask me to produce evidence to the existence of God.


Can't you understand at all, that unless we have agreed on what is evidence, you and I cannot present each one's to be factual evidence, for you and I will insist that what you present is not evidence.



Okay, I will try another approach.

Here is my concept of what is evidence:
"Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)"

Please tell me what is wrong with my concept of evidence in re God exists or not - in concise words.

@DocSavage

You say:
I have also repeatedly asked you what evidence lead you to such a conclusion.

I tell you:
We must first work together to agree on a mutually defined concept of evidence, otherwise we put ourselves in an absurd situation of talking past each other.







As you have the faculties of reason and intelligence, what do you say, doesn't the regular order of nature implicate the existence of God as the creator and operator of nature? -Yrger

As I have repeatedly stated , I find nothing in nature to suggest or support the existence of such a being. I have also repeatedly asked you what evidence lead you to such a conclusion. You refuse to answer.

@DocSavage

What has happened to you, cat got your tongue?




yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage


You claim:
[quote]There is energy, which is matter in a different state, it’s that energy that becomes partials. Nothing is no longer exactly nothing anymore. Add gravity and they become something, perhaps a “singularity“[/quote]


You are into self-obfuscation with words like:
1. Energy
2. matter
3 . State
4. Partials
5. Nothing
6. Singularity
Unless you produce the defintion of each word and show how and why they are related, and therfore no God exists.

And above all, you must also define what/who is God and how and why He is connected to and with:
1. Energy
2. matter
3 . State
4. Partials
5. Nothing
6. Singularity

Otherwise, you are into self-obfuscation with empty words. You are into a lot of blah blah blah blah . . . without reason and intelligence.

@DocSavage

Hi everyone, I am asking Doc to tell me what is the God he denies to exist, he must have one he denies to exist, otherwise it is absurd on his part for him to deny what he does not know at all.


That is what I find any dialogue with Doc to be impossible, because he is what I would call all the time to be a most self-obfuscating human.


Anyway, I will try another tack with him.

Hi Doc, suppose you just tell me that you deny the God I know to exist, that will clear you from my certainty that you are into self-obfuscation.


Now, let us all sit back, and await with bated breath take notice what is his next gimmick of self-obfuscation.

[quote] Hi everyone, a productive diaglogue requires both parties to keep to the issue at hand, that is impossible in the present case, because Doc just goes on and on and on with bullocks etc. [/quote]

Present the evidence you to claim to have or admit you’re lying. No more stalling no more straw men. Straight answer to straight question.

[quote] takes deep thinking and honesty, I hope you are up to it.[/quote]

You have neither. If you did, you would have answered the question.
Why don’t you start running away again ?
You’re already fried

@DocSavage

You seem to be stubborn in insisting that I present a factual piece of evidence, when we have not yet concurred on what is the concept of evidence.

It is useless with your kind of un-reasonable mind.

Tell you what, let us suppose that you are theist, and you have evidence to the existence of God, so let you present your evidence for God existing.



Hi everyone, he will now resort to his routine accusation that I am stalling or to his foul language and lewd videos.

@DocSavage

Don't again go into self-obfuscation, just define every word in the list, in concise language, otherwise your English vocabulary is woefully deficient.

And also don't engage in quoting my text as to leave out the whole context, unless you are a cheater in addition to being a self-obfuscator..




You are into self-obfuscation with words like:
1. Energy
2. matter
3 . State
4. Partials
5. Nothing
6. Singularity
Unless you produce the defintion of each word and show how and why they are related, and therefore no God exists.

[quote] And above all, you must also define what/who is God and how and why He is connected to and with: [/quote]

I repeat [b]WHAT PART OF ATHEIST DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND ?[/b]
What possible reason would I have for bringing god into any of it ?
You’re the one that claims there are at least two, and you completely failed to show any evidence for either one.
You don’t honestly expect me to do your arguing for you, do you ?
Use your so call reason and intelligence to figure it out. You might also try adding other books than the Bible to your reading list.

@DocSavage

What is the question you Doc are referring to?


Hi everyone, a productive diaglogue requires both parties to keep to the issue at hand, that is impossible in the present case, because Doc just goes on and on and on with bullocks etc.


Okay, hi everyone, let us witness how he will reply to this question from me, it is a test on whether he can think productively instead of dealing with bullocks.

"Is there the default status of existence that is the reality or not."

@DocSavage

@Everyone


Hi everyone, a productive diaglogue requires both parties to keep to the issue at hand, that is impossible in the present case, because Doc just goes on and on and on with bullocks etc.


Okay, hi everyone, let us witness how he will reply to this question from me, it is a test on whether he can think productively instead of dealing with bullocks.

"Is there the default status of existence that is the reality or not."

@DocSavage


I remind you:
You have not answered with what faculties of the mind you deny God exists?

Or you have no faculties of reason and intelligence, you just go about self-obfuscating all the time.


I need to witness what reason and intelligence you use in denying God exists, as you again and again fear to comply, it is obviois you are bereft of any kind of reason and intelligence.

Go away, you are not into anything but self-obfuscation.

@DocSavage


No need for unkind and indecent language.

I will start the process of us coming to an agreed on concept of evidence in re God exists or not.

Here is my gambit:
Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists. (19 words)







DocSavage · M
BOLLOCKS
You can define the evidence once you present it. You’re stalling because you know how weak it is.
Put up or shut up

@DocSavage

You are still into self-obfuscation, because you have not so far presented any rational and intelligent exposition on how and why no God exists.

So, go away and stay away, don't waste the time of everyone with reason and intelligence.









DocSavage · M
[quote]Go away, you are not into anything but self-obfuscation.[/quote]

Why ? You may be confused and bewildered. But anyone else reading it will have no problems. You’re just embarrassing yourself.
You lose again.

[quote] Let us start anew.[/quote]
Let’s not.
You made the claim that something cannot come from nothing. Turns out, science actually found out that there isn’t “nothing” and something can exist. Without a god to guide the process.
What more do we need to discuss on the subject ? You haven’t come up with one compelling argument. You just keep repeating the same over and over. Pointless.

[quote] Now, let us all sit back, and await with bated breath take notice what is his next gimmick of self-obfuscation.[/quote]
I honestly don’t believe anyone is here watching. Nor do I really care. You invited a bunch of us to the challenge, remember ?
You have ducked, dodged, and avoided honest, straightforward questions. And refused to answer clearly. Many trolls like to play that game. I like to make them work for it.
I take pride in my stubborn nature, if you can’t deal with it, too bad.

You’re losing it, aren’t you ?
Asking an Atheist to show you evidence of god ?
Claiming to have evidence of god, but refusing to present it, because it may not be considered evidence of god ?
Expecting everyone to believe it, when you don’t have enough faith in it yourself ?
You invited the challenge, now you’re not up to it ? Pathetic.

[quote] God is the permanent self-existent spirit creator and operator of man and the universe and everything transient.[/quote]

Just so everyone knows what they’re getting into.

@DocSavage

Hi everyone, how can we ever have any decent dialogue with Doc when all he has in mind are tihs matters.

Doc, go away and do your tihs in some measure of privacy.




DocSavage · M
You can’t just go back and read ?
Your problem is you’re self defecating. Too much shit. You just can’t stop spewing it.
You answer your own questions. I’ve done my part. You lose.

Stop stalling.
Present your evidence, or admit you haven’t got it.

@DocSavage

You have not answered with what faculties of the mind you deny God exists?

Or you have no faculties of reason and intelligence, you just go about self-obfuscating all the time.







yrger · 80-89, M
@DocSavage

I say:
I know God exists from my reason and intelligence faculties.

What about you, with what faculties of your mind do you deny God exists?

[b]WHAT PART OF ATHEIST DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND ?[/b]
To quote a certain professor :
We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
- Richard Dawkins
Where did you get the idea I only disbelieve in one particular god ?
You make absolutely no sense.

@DocSavage

You say:
An interesting article I read today. It seems science has in fact figured out how something can come from nothing.
No god needed, just quantum physics. Meditate on that.

I tell you:
Quantum physics is not nothing, for if it were nothing then no human could talk about it.

You are a master of self-obfuscation.

[quote] evidence:
"Evidence is anything at all which we both agree to exist and it leads us to know God exists[/quote]

You have to present your evidence before I can agree on it.
Like your eyeglasses. All they prove is someone got there first. Not who, when , or why.
My eye glasses lead to Nathan Leopold, and his friend Richard Lobe. And they were both convicted of killing Bobby Franks. Because of them.
So quality of evidence is important.

[quote] What about God as mankind's reason and intelligence can and does know to exist: since you two though biblical atheists, still you continue to have the faculties of reason and intelligence, so what do you say about the regular order of nature, doesn't it implicate the existence of God as the creator and operator of nature?
[/quote]
According to you, Catholics believe in a different god than the one you’ve been posting about. Don’t you think you should make that clear before you engage them ? You have a habit of changing the subject when you’re confronted. Maybe you should try being honest and straightforward with people.

[quote] Quantum physics is not nothing, for if it were nothing then no human could talk about it. [/quote]
Never said it was. What you have is energy , which is matter in a different state, it’s that energy that becomes partials. Nothing is no longer exactly nothing anymore.
Add gravity and they become something, perhaps a “singularity “
Get the idea ?

[quote] So, cease and desist from your attempt at escape by engaging in insulting language. [/quote]


That better ?

You should also remember, you’re the one that keeps insisting your god came into existence from “nothing “ with all his abilities and plans included in the package.
Science just cut out the muddle man . And we’re still here.

I don’t answer, because I already answered it all on the last several post.
You just keep repeating your claim of reason and intelligence, but failed to demonstrate either.
Why start again, just cut and paste the last post.

[quote] Tell you what, let us suppose that you are theist, and you have evidence to the existence of God, so let you present your evidence for God existing. [/quote]

So, now you are asking me to answer the question I asked you ?
Tried that one before . And I got it right.

What’s with you theist anyway ? You’re so sure of your god and your faith. Until someone questions you about it.

I’ve been chasing you through ever post you put up. I stated repeatedly what my view of evidence is. I’ve answered all questions asked, I even answered the questions I asked you that you couldn’t answer.
Remember

[quote] Again, I ask you:
Okay, you are an atheist, so tell me what is the God you deny to exist?[/quote]
Why not ask a Christian the same thing ? Must be a few hundred they can name off the top of their head. Or a Muslim ?
Your questions are really getting irrational, and irrelevant.

[quote] These quantum principles have mind-bending consequences for anyone trying to understand the nature of nothing. For example, if you try to measure the amount of energy at a location — even if that energy is supposed to be nothing — you still cannot measure zero precisely. Sometimes, when you make the measurement, the expected zero turns out to be non-zero. And this isn’t just a measurement problem; it’s a feature of reality. For short periods of time, zero is not always zero.

When you combine this bizarre fact (that zero expected energy can be non-zero, if you examine a short enough time period) with Einstein’s famous equation E = mc2, there is an even more bizarre consequence. Einstein’s equation says that energy is matter and vice versa. Combined with quantum theory, this means that in a location that is supposedly entirely empty and devoid of energy, space can briefly fluctuate to non-zero energy — and that temporary energy can make matter (and antimatter) particles.[/quote]
An interesting article I read today. It seems science has in fact figured out how something can come from nothing.
No god needed, just quantum physics. Meditate on that.

You can’t just go back and read ?
Your problem is you’re self defecating. Too much shit. You just can’t stop spewing it.
You answer your own questions. I’ve done my part. You lose.

I knew it. Stalling again. I agreed to your terms of evidence, all you have to do is present it. I can’t evaluate it until I see it.
Chickened out again.( The chicken that laid the egg )