darthska
Staff member
- 44,625
- 28,301
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
@ courtprosecuting atty:
"Your honor, we are fairly certain the defendant did kill the victim, because he can't prove that he didn't. BOOM."
*entire courtroom*:
View media item 701904
Arian Foster Let It Be Known That He Is A Non-Believer
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by DCAllAfrican,
- Start date
@ courtprosecuting atty:
"Your honor, we are fairly certain the defendant did kill the victim, because he can't prove that he didn't. BOOM."
*entire courtroom*:
View media item 701904
- 20,184
- 4,159
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
I understand what you were implying with the burden of proof. Now you want to quibble over semantics.
No ever says "God exists....facts!" or "God doesn't exist...facts!"
I get it, you don't want to make the claim God doesn't exist because then the burden of proof would be on you.
So we hide behind terms like "lack of belief" which is basically the "I don't know" answer...which is the agnostic answer view point
But if you have no answer why protest so hard when I say the answer is God? If you truly have no answer then you must accept the POSSIBILITY that God could be the answer.
Its fine you compare God to unicorns or Big Foot.
Guess what? The majority of the world doesn't believe in unicorns or Big Foot.
They believe in God. Trying to sell strong atheism to people will not work.
Its an argument from ignorance with no hope.
No ever says "God exists....facts!" or "God doesn't exist...facts!"
I get it, you don't want to make the claim God doesn't exist because then the burden of proof would be on you.
So we hide behind terms like "lack of belief" which is basically the "I don't know" answer...which is the agnostic answer view point
But if you have no answer why protest so hard when I say the answer is God? If you truly have no answer then you must accept the POSSIBILITY that God could be the answer.
Its fine you compare God to unicorns or Big Foot.
Guess what? The majority of the world doesn't believe in unicorns or Big Foot.
They believe in God. Trying to sell strong atheism to people will not work.
Its an argument from ignorance with no hope.
Last edited:
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
"hey what are you up to?"
"nothing much, just sitting at home not shooting a jump shot"
"nothing much, just sitting at home not shooting a jump shot"
So what? The majority of people also believe in ghosts.
What's it going to mean when Islam overtakes Christianity as the most popular religion in the world?
Last edited:
- 43,402
- 42,953
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
Da biblical fall back
"we in da last days"
"we in da last days"
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Funny thing is it's mostly atheists working to innovate and save the world
- 49,179
- 50,280
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2009
Do some of ya'll believe in Santa Claus as well?
- 22,027
- 31,180
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Reported. Last thing we need is dudes in here trolling talking about Santas not real. I seen him with my own 2 eyes once. Your trolling isn't gonna derail my walk with him.
Last edited:
- 44,211
- 73,309
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2004
That was Tyrone b
Oh the ignorance
Prove to me that he's NOT real and then get back to me.
The majority of children believe in him so good luck with that.
Last edited:
darthska
Staff member
- 44,625
- 28,301
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
First it was "Prove the god concept exists" parroted by "Prove it doesn't", and now...
And yes, what you just described is filling in the blank.
No, "There is no god" is not filling in the blank.
You can't fill a cup up with not milk, or not soda. Saying "There's no milk" in there is not filling in the blank. Saying 'There's no evidence of milk, so there's no milk' is not a conclusion; it's an observation, two MORE terms you seem to be confusing.
No, we don't have to accep the possibility of something for which there is ZERO EVIDENCE being the answer, not when the ENTIRE POINT is searching out evidence-based answers.
If you want to talk about faith-based answers, absolutely, the god concept belongs.
But when the ENTIRE DISCUSSION is about that which has been evidenced, then no, the god concept doesn't have to accepted.
No matter how many people believe that 2 + 2 is purple, if I have 2 of something and then add 2 more, there will 4. I can either seek out the answer on my own by realizing that the majority's opinion of purple might not be right and counting on my own or at least trying to count, or I can stick with the "Majority says..." reasoning.
"The majority believes, so that's even MORE evidence."
(And just so you don't play me for stupid, I already saw your argument to Zik about implying something without saying it, so I know that you understand the concept. I point that out so I can say this: I know you didn't SAY "The majority believes, so that's more evidence." I know that. Implied, though.)
And I'm not saying that because I'm offended; I'm genuinely shocked. Ignorance is lack of knowledge. Refusing to believe something for which there is no proof or evidence is NOT the same as not knowing facts.
I swear...
Originally Posted by Master Zik
I get it though. You don't want to make the claim GOD does exist because then the burden of proof would rest on you.
Parrots gon' parrot. Almost word for word, man.
Because that's filling in the blanks, which is counterproductive to scientific discussion.
And yes, what you just described is filling in the blank.
No, "There is no god" is not filling in the blank.
You can't fill a cup up with not milk, or not soda. Saying "There's no milk" in there is not filling in the blank. Saying 'There's no evidence of milk, so there's no milk' is not a conclusion; it's an observation, two MORE terms you seem to be confusing.
No, we don't have to accep the possibility of something for which there is ZERO EVIDENCE being the answer, not when the ENTIRE POINT is searching out evidence-based answers.
If you want to talk about faith-based answers, absolutely, the god concept belongs.
But when the ENTIRE DISCUSSION is about that which has been evidenced, then no, the god concept doesn't have to accepted.
I know it's difficult to accept that there is just as much evidence for the 3 things you just mentioned, but science doesn't care about how difficult something is to accept or what it does to your feelings. Love it or hate, feel sad about it or indifferent: there is just as much evidence of the 3 things you mentioned.
Aaaaaand the majority of people used to think the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth and the Northern Lights were angels dancing.
No matter how many people believe that 2 + 2 is purple, if I have 2 of something and then add 2 more, there will 4. I can either seek out the answer on my own by realizing that the majority's opinion of purple might not be right and counting on my own or at least trying to count, or I can stick with the "Majority says..." reasoning.
"The majority believes, so that's even MORE evidence."
(And just so you don't play me for stupid, I already saw your argument to Zik about implying something without saying it, so I know that you understand the concept. I point that out so I can say this: I know you didn't SAY "The majority believes, so that's more evidence." I know that. Implied, though.)
How dare you.
I swear...
Last edited:
- 22,027
- 31,180
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
- 43,402
- 42,953
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
Also disproving a God exists, and disproving the biblical God exists are two completely different things. There's undeniable proof the biblical God does not exist
darthska
Staff member
- 44,625
- 28,301
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
You have to at least entertain the possibility.
- 20,184
- 4,159
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
Some of yall can compare God to Santa Claus. the Tooth Fairy, unicorns whatever
The majority of the world don't worship and believe in those concepts.
The concept of God is here or least in your moral lifetime...You can take it as evidence that God exists...you can take it as you want.
A person can believe theres no God and thats fine, you are doing it from the argument of ignorance, that same argument I'm accused of having
Theres 0 proof God doesn't exist and there's been EXACTLY 0 accounts from a dead person saying "Yeah theres nothing there...No God"
The atheist argument is the argument from personal incredulity with no hope
If you truly want to be neutral, the best you can say is I don't know, which means you have accept the possibility on BOTH sides
The majority of the world don't worship and believe in those concepts.
The concept of God is here or least in your moral lifetime...You can take it as evidence that God exists...you can take it as you want.
A person can believe theres no God and thats fine, you are doing it from the argument of ignorance, that same argument I'm accused of having
Theres 0 proof God doesn't exist and there's been EXACTLY 0 accounts from a dead person saying "Yeah theres nothing there...No God"
The atheist argument is the argument from personal incredulity with no hope
If you truly want to be neutral, the best you can say is I don't know, which means you have accept the possibility on BOTH sides
Last edited:
- 43,402
- 42,953
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
You haven't submitted an argument. That's what you're not getting. A claim isn't an argument, it's just a claim. An argument is the presentation of evidence to justify your claim.
And again, what idea of God are you referring to? The biblical God or the idea of a higher being? The biblical God has been disproven within its own texts
And again, what idea of God are you referring to? The biblical God or the idea of a higher being? The biblical God has been disproven within its own texts
Last edited:
100% WRONG
darthska
Staff member
- 44,625
- 28,301
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
So the concept of god is here. I can dig it.
So we'll throw that on the table as fact: the concept of god exists.
That's not proof that GOD exists, and it's not proof of ANYTHING else. It is proof... that the concept... exists. A majority of people believe in the concept, so it exists.
Moving forward, one step at a time...
WHOA, WHOA, WHOA!!! One step at a time.
Evidence of god existing is anything that proves his existence, NOT the thought of him existing. What kind of definition of evidence do you run with? "The thought of something is evidence that it is real." What?!
Second, that 'Take it how you want" line: No, how you want belongs nowhere in a scientific discussion. What is, is, regardless of whether you want it be that or not.
Parrots gon' parrot.
"You're being ignorant."
"YOU'RE being ignorant!"
Like a car. When a car is in neutral, it going both forward and in reverse, simultaneously.
Oh wait, that's not true at all, and you're back to just making up rules to fit what you want.
You're in over your head, dude. You're trying, I see that. But logic ad reason and evidence-based scientific discussion (which is wildly redundant, as 'faith-based' science isn't science at all) is not your forte, man.
Back to sports, maybe?
"No, I can win this!"
- 22,027
- 31,180
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
I can say I don't know but I'm never going to deny the existence of an infinite creative force that's true nature is more than likely beyond my realm of understanding within this human experience were currently in. given our brain capacity to usage ratio in our current state I doubt we can come to grasp such divine understanding. That would be my personal belief just like it's another's personal belief to believe that same force is this anthropomorphic Jesus. So to an atheist I'd be considered a "believer" as well. It's just that the word believer is now synonymous with blind faith Christianity. Like you said the concept is here. And for people who subscribe to it no matter what their religion they're all wanting the same thing. Religion is a tool used to pervert the god concept and use it as a device of control and separation. There's a lot going on here to say the least.
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Threads like these emphasize the sorry state of our education system
- 20,184
- 4,159
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
Yeah I must have missed that Yahoo! article
Stop it.
There are TONS of near death experiences that are described as a void of infinite nothingness.
That is the truth. No amount of your double talk will change that.
You're 100% WRONG
Last edited:
- 20,184
- 4,159
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
Wait wait!....When a person has said they saw an afterlife their accounts were I dont know
Backed up by when you're dead...you are really dead there's no coming back.
I know you didnt say that but where were you to dispute him?
Now someone coming back from the dead and saying they saw nothingness is accepted now
Which is it?
Last edited:
darthska
Staff member
- 44,625
- 28,301
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
