Is Neo[Atheism] a Rational Religion?

I dont know is not a valid response a freebee for you, I should be charging for tutorial services




you said it now you dodge because you contradicted your claim again.

 

I've contradicted nothing. I've never claimed to know. Where is your proof that you know?

 

???? You answer questions? Seriously? Hahahaha

... no you don't.

 

No, he didn't. He said it is a perfectly fine response, and it is. He did NOT say it is a possible truth value or answer to the question. That is the strawman you refuse to release.

 

false, its a contradiction to claim its strictly true or false in one post and I dont know in the next!

 

When a proposition is presented, (and it was) a response is either an answer to a proposition, or a proof its invalid.
So tell us what it means in your 'personal' bird dictionary lol

The proposition did not ask what he knows, it stated God Exists.

Responding with I dont know is a bunk answer, especially after demanding I answer true of false LOL

Why dont you help him with a citation from an academic resource like I always provide? Cant be that hard if its true.

 

There are thousands of claims that you understand are true/false, and yet you don't know the which. Millions. Tens of millions. IT is NOT a contradiction to say that a proposition is either true or false and yet not know which. Children understand this concept. You used to understand it and say it yourself. Why do you not pretend not to understand it? Why can you not cite a SINGLE source that backs you up? Why can't you find a SINGLE other person who agrees with you on this? You failed so hard, and you didn't have to go to a galaxy far, far away to do it.

 

Koko, once again, claims to know whether or not God exists, after years of saying otherwise . . . and yet fails to tell us which. Which is it, Koko? Does God exist or not? You claim to know now.

 

Nobody said you were. Instead you fail to understand that there are multiple meanings for "atheist", and agnostic IS a subcategory of atheist using one meaning you don't prefer.

If theism is a belief, then a lack or that belief is not-theism. Pretty simple.

Nobody else is either. The statements you refer to have a difference that you yourself depend on for your preferred meaning of agnostic.

Nor is anybody else. That's another of your strawmen.

Citations you have shown us you don't read, that don't say what you claim they do, and even if they did, that don't prove anything definitively. Just quoting some claimed authority that you think (wrongly most of the time) agrees with you is not a proof. Appeal to authority fallacy.

Silent? I have been posting, just not all the time or when you would like. I am in Vietnam right now, which has opposite time zone to my normal one.

And no, yardmeat isn't trolling nearly as much as you, and I think you know that. If you suddenly decided to actually engage in good faith and have an actual conversation I think yardmeat would be happy to do so with you, as would I. But you have repeatedly and consistently shown no interest in that. It is the only consistency we have seen from you.

 

it was YOUR proposition to answer not mine LOL
the proposition does not ask you what you know it asks you for a true or false.
this is elementary school stuff and you dont get it!
you claim to teach and cant even tell us the book you use to teach this nonsense, how about that bird?
still waiting for your citation that I dont know is valid

 

you were

wrong again, theism is a proposition

thisd is false, thats your flakey definition NOT mine, please refrain from strawmanning my positions, I get enough of that from Dr strawman dodge

false you just tried to when you said its a belief, sheesus

NOT apeal to authority, I proved the point first then supported it with an authorative citations.

You like dr dodge simply post narratives

YOu and dr dodge never because you cannot quote what you disagree with in my citations, again narrative because you have not basis to stand on.

Feel free to quote your claims to prove it instead of beer farts

 

Wrong.

A response is any reaction to stimuli. When a proposition is presented one may react without answering the proposition or claiming it to be invalid. One may react in many different ways.

Just as when presented with a chess board one need not play chess. One may pick up a piece and admire the workmanship, one may say they don't know how to play chess, one may decline playing chess. One may even topple the board. These are not chess moves, but they are responses to being presented with a chess board.

I suppose that could be entertaining. We could send you a link to an article we didn't read that doesn't say what we claim it says, just the same way you often do. But why would anyone do that when you are pushing a strawman and not asking about what anybody actually did say?

 

Thanks for admitting he IS trolling!

 

the response I dont know communicates the persons answer to the proposition, which is what he did, please keep the **** in context, sorry
why do you apologize for his nonsense?

 

If you can't answer it, why would you demand others answer it? Why shouldn't others ask you your own position on a proposition you state?

 

He already tried that and got busted LOL

 

Then which is it: true or false? You aren't allowed to not know of not answer, per Koko.

As I said, I'll give you that book when you give me your promise. Still waiting.

Already provided. Still waiting for your citation that it is illegal, which you haven't provided.

 

Its not mine to answer, I have no reason to till we get this taken care of, he has splaining to do and so do you because you agree its legitimate.

 

still dodging, you already answered, we are at you validating it which you wont because you cant because its outside the scope of the rules LOL.
Neither will the bird.
at least he admitted your trolling according to his definition of trolling.

its your claim dodge, prove it

 

You've quoted no such "rules." You keep dodging and making it up and refuse to prove it.

 

Repeatedly claiming something does not prove it.

Citations can help, but only in so far as they actually address and prove your point. Yours rarely do, which isn't surprising because you appear to rarely read or understand them.

Most of the time we disagree with nothing in your citations, but your own claims disagree with them. Sometimes we don't even disagree with you, but you demand we do by pushing strawmen, as you just did above. Nobody has claimed "I don't know" is a possible truth value to a proposition. You keep demanding they have, but they have not.

As fun as it may be, no. I am not inclined to take up your straw men.

 

Thank you for admitting you do nothing but troll.

 

look at the desperation, he is so desperately trying to turn his burden of proof obligation around on me, hes tried this what 500 times now and it didnt work, busted every time, maybe it will work next time LMAO

 

No it doesn't. It communicates the person has no answer to communicate.

 

There would only be a burden of proof on him if he claimed he knew the correct answer.... Which he hasn't.. but which you repeatedly implied you have, and failed to clarify.