Dawkins, Scientific Atheism is a Fallacy & Intellectually Dishonest?

I cannot help it if you cannot or will not follow my simple reasoning. Perhaps if you read the posts, now & then?

Why does every 'debate' with the New Internet Atheist HAVE to include barrages of ad hominem? They cannot or will not address the subject, but deflect with innuendo, false accusations, & demeaning comments about the POSTER, rather than the subject being discussed?

I mean, i get it that if you have no argument, fallacies will have to do. But most of the NIA posters ONLY have fallacies, & avoid any reasoning like the plague...

It spells the death of reason & empiricism, imo...

 

It would be so much easier if you just showed some evidence for the existence of these gods.
What convinced you gods exist?

 

That is not my job. That is WAY above my pay scale.

I can only ponder these mysteries with other blind men, groping in the dark with me.

 

What you yourself believe or don't believe has no impact on what is and what is not.

 

It does when we are discussing what Atheist's believe!

 

Indeed since atheists live in a fantasy world where they live in their fantasy dream castles.

However reality is completely independent of atheist fantasies.

 

thats precisely why atheists are failing

 

No, you are championing a conclusion.

And, you are doing do without benefit of evidence.

 

There are no dream castles (such as heaven) in atheism.

 

Excellent, then show me a reality where your gods exist!

 

YAWWWWN
Basically, all you're doing is shifting the Burden of Proof to Atheists for making the negative claim.
The old and vacuous:
"You can't prove there's no god"
No kidding!
YOU can't prove I'M not god either. Ho Hum.

I am an atheist. (AND an agnostic)
I believe there is No god
Which is Not to say 1000% "there is no god'".

But logically, there is No Proof or even evidence of Any god, and All gods on which we have a verdict have been proven Bogus.
Tens of Thousands of False Gods (Fire, Lightning, Fertility, etc) which have the Same bogus basis as the current necessarily Whittled Down gods (life, universe). IOW, we don't have an explanation so let's assign a god for it.

Then there's the issue of WHICH "god".
If, by some miracle, one happens to be correct, all the others are wrong.
So at least ¾ of believers are Necessarily Wrong (99.8% if you're Jewish or Native American) even if the One stepped in it. Macro-viewing Hundreds of cultures, all with their own deities, it's Obvious these are convenient local legends, Not any universal truth.

IOW, which 'god' the vast majorities believe in depends on a Geographic/cultural Accident of birth, Not a discernible truth.

So in light of:
ALL the "I dunno it must be god"S on which we have a verdict being Bogus...
The incredible Lack of evidenceS of any gods...
The Many "only" "gods" which negate each other, and make the vast majority of other contradictory ones false...
I can say, for all Practical purposes (in addition to mere lack of belief), "there is no god", fully realizing Proving that Negative is Impossible.

But if the stars all line up overhead one night and form the word "JESUS", or ANY other Evidence comes to light, I would be glad - even 'thrilled' - to change my mind.
Until and unless, Atheism/Agnosticism is the most logical position.
+

 

*core tenets.

This jibber-jabber about the scientific method and the burden of proof tells me that you understand pretty much nothing of Dr. Dawkins' beliefs, claims or philosophy. Dr. Dawkins has said nothing that goes against the scientific method and made no assertions requiring proof that he has failed to provide. He rejects religious claims that are, in fact, lacking in justification, and encourages other people to be similarly skeptical of what they are told.

Personally, I don't somehow idolize him, but I do find myself agreeing with him a lot of the time. He argues in a rational, erudite, and humble manner. He speaks from knowledge when he speaks about scientific matters, especially biology and evolution, his field of expertise. He respectfully listens and responds to the theists he debates, and asks them questions for clarification. Importantly, he also does not accept BS responses from them, but challenges such responses and assertions. As, again, we all should do.

 

There is no evidence of gods, an afterlife or anything beyond our physical existence. IIRC, you've stated there is more to existence than the physical. What convinced you of this belief? If I'm wrong, please correct me.

 

Think.

 

Awesome. Thank you for the conversation. Have a great life, sir.

 

I must applaud you for an honest statement of belief. This is a minority opinion, among the atheists here, though. You must be an older atheist, who has no problem saying, 'I don't believe in God!' For some reason, the New Internet Atheists won't do this. They hem & haw, & dodge any expression of 'belief!', which they claim to not even have.

I have no problem with anyone's belief system. I am an American, & a firm supporter of the 1st amendment, & believe in freedom of conscience, as a principle of collective organization.

It is the phony narrative, 'You have beliefs.. We have science!' that sticks in my craw.. the irrationality & bigotry of that attitude i find very anti-freedom & anti-diversity, and anti-human. It is just another instance of religious bigotry, that has been with man as long as we can remember.

 

Yawwwwn? Wow. That reminds me of a high school response from a sophomore over 45 years ago. I'm a Baby Boomer. What generation are you?

Sorry, kid, but you can't be both a heterosexual and a homosexual. It's one or the other. Sure, you can be something in between, but not both. Same goes for being a theist, an atheist or an agnostic.

1000% is emotion. Rhetoric. Not logic.

 

Agreed with many of your statements except assumption of age. My guess is younger. Much younger.

In my experience, many attitudes are age based. Some people stop learning, which is why we have "50 year old boys", but most people do not. Sure, some people can be "mature beyond their years", but that is limited by only a few years, not decades except in very rare circumstances of genius....which doesn't apply here.

 

I'm a boomer, ex-Wall-Street-er, logic guy. Successful beyond your dreams.
Compare my posts/OPs in ie, the Science or Latest News sections to yours.
Genetics, Evolution, WSJ, etc.
I would always do a quick search before I spouted. Experience and common sense.

One can be an atheist and agnostic for precisely the reasons I elaborated, and you could NOT debate.

In fact, the perhaps the country's best known theologian is Both A/A.

Startlingly lecture at the atheist org - Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
An expert on Christianity/NT, and religion in general.

99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including Three college textbooks.
He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.
Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.
[.....]



+​

 

I don't know why you can never address the issues raised. Perhaps because you really have no answers?

 

How are athiests failing. Religion is dying in America. Athiesm is rising. Knowledge is triumphing over superstition.

 

Well if younare much younger you don't have much experience. Next fallacious arguement.

 

govmnt educated people are getting dumber, they are programmed bots for the work force nothing more.