Reviewing Atheist 'Lack Belief' in Deities theory. <<MOD WARNING ISSUED>>

Quote mining is a part of the modus operandi of conspiracy theorists and dishonest politicised theists. It practically defines their dishonesty.

 

I lack belief, I am an atheist.

 

It is astonishing, he simply highlights what he wants a sentence to mean and repeats it over and over ignoring what it is clear is the actual meaning! There is something very odd going on with Koko.

 

you claim to be an atheist yet you claim a god exists and that no other atheist would deny that your alleged god exists.

quote mining is not necessary when someone does not comprehend the meaning of what they are saying, are you going to join him?

He gave me an example of a god that exists, a god no atheist would deny exists, what more does anyone need.

 

It is astonishing, you cannot read past a comma!

Now stop dodging the fact you clearly think the idea of PP being a god because of a lying brit is absurd but the idea of a lying jew requires knowledge.

 

If I read past the comma then I would have to point out the fact that you totally contradicted whats before the comma, therefore what you said before the comma is a complete fabrication, a falsehood, pick your poison. Doesnt matter how you want to play that hand it ends up the same. Since you want to put me in a position where I am forced to analyze the statement, psychologists call that double-think which is a form of delusion known as cognitive dissonance.

Once again it was stated as a question. Please type a note to yourself next time you want to want to practice mind reading and accuse me of something that is not true

 

So, to continue my thought. You can say that there is no hard evidence that an airplane full of money won't explode over your house dropping millions of dollars in your back yard and solving all of your financial issues for the rest of your life. But you can't really say you are agnostic about it. You 'know' it won't happen. And, to live your life in a way that leaves even a little possibility for that to happen is not rational. You can't 100% say that it won't happen, so, in effect, you 'believe' that won't happen, but it's effectively the same thing as having no belief that it will happen. Again, all semantics. There is no god, for all intents and purposes. You can say that there is no god with at least as much assurance as you can say that you exist, even though you can't say either with 100% certainty.

 

It is perfectly clear what was meant, you just chose to ignore it like you have everybody else's arguments, you constantly show wilful ignorance, so we are still arguing about what I said rather than the clarified explanation that I have given you, both before and after that statement. You do this repeatedly rather than argue the actual points.
So let me clarify one more time, Prince Philip exists, no atheist can argue that, some theists believe him to be a god, no atheist can argue that there are some people who believe him to be a god. Therefor I cannot argue that their god exists only that he is not a god. You stated that a brit lied to them, thus you are suggesting that he is not a god, that cannot be a agnostic position. You hung yourself with you little attempt at sarcasm!

 

yes it is! You said it 3 times. Above are the other 2. Perfectly clear indeed! What makes you think PP isnt a god? Got any proof?

 

And as predicted despite clarifying it, despite explaining patiently, you ignore that and continue with your silly little deflections. You are simply not here to debate, you are simply here to push your sad wife beating, atheism is a religion agenda!

 

Can anyone translate the above into English? Denial of what? Evidence of what? Definition of what? Proof of what? What false claims? It's almost like he's responding to someone else. And the claim that I'm a closet theist is silly beyond belief. When I was a Christian, I was proud of it. Now that I'm an atheist, I'm embarrassed.

 

One of them is so butt hurt they are lashing out calling me a wife beater LOL

 

Ok lol, I have to ask: there are atheist bars?? Where? How do I find them?

This isn't really true, and I have not experienced what your talking about, however, atheists do have the enviable position of being on the side of overwhelming evidence and rational thought. And yes, atheism is a more logical and scientific position.

Because you can't prove god doesn't exist (id like to see your proof), and nobody has proved that it does exist doesn't mean they are claims on equal footing. It is not logical to claim that you don't 'know'. For all intents and purposes, we know.

 

atheists deny the existence of any/all G/god(s)

atheists 'believe' no G/god(s) exist.

129 pages and atheists are still believers.

 

Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Atheists are in the identical position as theists
Atheists cannot prove God does not exist any more than theists can prove God does exist.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The only person who is 100% scientific and rational is agnostic, which just so happens to be me because I do not make the assumption either way.
That said once you claim God does not exist you have the burden to proof it, good luck with that since it cant be done.
The enviable position belongs to agnostics who are in the catbird seat with the highest accuracy of reason and logic.
Its not rational to believe something you cannot prove.

 

I explained this to you twice.

 

your explanation is insufficient, and you certainly cannot claim either reason or logic since you cannot prove your position, and if you do you are only fooling yourself.
That makes 4 times I am explaining to you why your explanation is insufficient.

Feel free however to 'prove' your claims. (oh and remember science requires empirical repeatable evidence that can be peer reviewed)

 

lol, what more do you want? Are you saying that there is no position whatsoever that you consider unequal to any other?

 

Under those conditions its still an unprovable probability, (hypothesis) hardly scientific as you claim.

 

Lol, I know you are the founding member of the "semantics matter" movement, but lets move beyond semantics into reality.

Yes, unproven to 100% like absolutely everything else. But the probability of a particular postulate being true is close enough to 0 as to be logically ignored.

The null hypothesis is not that a god exists. The null hypothesis is that nothing exists, and from there we make determinations to the best of our ability based on evidence. Nothing is 100% proven. But that doesn't mean all postulates are equal.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ter-man-beats-ex-wife.517490/#post-1068186725

Always happy to supply the evidence!

 

Not only is your butt hurt showing so is your level of comprehension, AGAIN.
From your link:

That is not promoting wife beating, except of course to someone whos butt is glowing in the dark slinging **** in every direction hoping to get something negative to stick to ease their pain.
Always happy to LMAO

 

You mean the unsemantics? the lackers and those who defend them are the ones who throw everything into one big basket and call it all the same.


The null hypothesis is agnostic, until 'demonstrated' otherwise.

 

Basically the same thing. All propositions are equal. From there, we separate out the ones that have evidence to support them. Then, there is no reason to pay any attention to the ones that have no evidence to support them until that level of evidence changes. Logically we assume things are not true when there is no reason to believe they are true, unless at some later date, evidence comes to light to support that thing.

Nothing is 100%, ever.

 

and theists reject atheist theology as untrue
and atheists reject theist theology as untrue
Agnostics do not take a position and assume things as 'unproven', not untrue.
it goes or should go without saying that unproven is not the same as untrue.
Acceptance as untrue without evidence is as irrational as acceptance of something as true without proof. atheists fool themselves when they think they are using a higher standard of logic and reason when in fact they are in the same boat as theists.