TIME CONSTANCY = PROOF of GOD

My opponent wrote: "it is feasible that time does in fact fluctuate by tiny increments, as of yet undetectable." If you actually have no way of detecting any such "increments," then you have no way of proving their existence, and you lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =) "if we cannot measure it to precision." I can measure time's precision. You claimed that you cannot, though, and if you actually cannot, then your claim of inconstancy is clearly a lie. "You said: "We cannot possibly "know" that time "is not" constant -- because time IS constant, just as we cannot "know" that Texas "is not" a state -- because Texas IS a state."" That is true. "And I responded: "Your counterargument consisted of telling me that time cannot be inconstant because it is constant,"" I never made that statement, so it is indeed a straw man logical fallacy on your part. "...time has continued constantly because there have always been 60 seconds in a minute." That is true. "....more or less time than average can and does elapse during the intervals between the seconds." At what exact year in history did that supposedly happen, and exactly how did you supposedly measure that? You can't answer those questions because you are just LYING. "but the time actually elapsing can go faster or slower." Again, at what exact year in history did that supposedly happen, and exactly how did you supposedly measure that? You can't answer those questions because you are just LYING. "I would like to know on exactly what date in history you supposedly made such a measurement, as well as what method you used to make that measurement " You still haven't answered those questions because you are just lying about all of that. " We can compromise by saying that time moves forward relatively uniformly" Actually, I have proven conclusively the fact that time is absolutely uniform, and you have failed to provide as much as a single concrete example that demonstrates otherwise, so I won this debate: Thanks for your time! =) "to make me believe" This debate is not about your personal belief system -- it is about objective facts. " there is any sort of omnipotent being that can make time move forward at a relatively constant rate." I never claimed there was, so that is just another straw man logical fallacy on your part. " argument from ignorance." I did not commit argument from ignorance, actually. You did: You admitted that you personally have no way to measure time, and then based on that personal ignorance of yours, you argued that time is supposedly inconstant. THAT is argument from ignorance. (If you actually have no way to personally measure time, then any and all arguments or conclusions that you may posit about time's constancy Vs inconstancy must necessarily be based on your own personal ignorance of time's actual measurements). My stance, conversely, is that I can and do measure time as constant, and based on that objective knowledge, I conclude therefore that time is indeed constant -- THAT is an argument based on KNOWLEDGE, not on ignorance, ignorance on which your argument is clearly based. Also, without God, argument from ignorance could not be objectively wrong. " If you are going to give a faith based argument, ("We don't need proof, but faith") " Your argument is faith-based, but mine has proof, actually. For example, you have faith that time is inconstant, but you provided exactly zero evidence for that faith-based religious belief of yours. In fact, time is perfectly constant, and you and I both know that it is perfectly constant. You failed to provide the exact date that you claim time was ever supposedly inconstant, and you also failed to provide how you supposedly observed such supposed inconstancy BECAUSE YOU ARE JUST LYING ABOUT THAT. You are a bald-faced liar, you are a complete and utter moron, and you are incapable of engaging in actual debate. "why the principle of maximum entropy doesn't work" I never claimed it didn't, so that is another straw man logical fallacy on your part. I won this debate, and I won it thoroughly and handily: Thanks for your time! =)