Wow you guys are the kings misinterpreting and not reading
Rhythem Wrote:I failed to supply evidence for my assumptions, so I would like to argue about Epicuras instead.
On second thought I don't actually want to have a discussion where anyone disagrees with me, I'd rather continue to assume god as the creator without addressing any criticism of my assumption.
In support of my assumption, and in place of actual evidence, I offer this plate of word salad, with the provision; of course; that I do not wish to address any criticism.
As usual Rhythem, prove your assumptions and don't just "throw stuff out there" because your upset. I've supplied reasoning for beliefs too many times now and have made no objective assumptions about God. Also, how have I demonstrated I don't want to have a discussion where anyone disagrees with me and how have I not addressed the criticism I'm getting, when I've been addressing it all day. Please prove your statements and don't just type stuff out of anger.
Aerzia Saerules Arktuo Wrote:I have to wonder why we even have these threads anymore. [gripe]Seriously... there's at least 250 repeat threads of this. What the hell does someone think they are accomplishing by making *another* one? I can totally get the second one... even a third one. Hell, I could be convinced to understand 15-30 over the course of the forum's existence. But this is ridiculous. The OP has added nothing new. There is nothing new to add. We've been over this more than 250 times. Why do it again?
you've failed to realize that I'm practically the only here actually being civil and also the only one actually reading peoples answers and positions.
Ace Otana Wrote:Because this place has become just like a school. Ignorant theists come, assert shit, we come in, try to teach'em some sense. They throw tantrums, repeat themselves and in desperation jump to logical fallacies as if it will help some how.
Been doing more teaching than debating. Theists tell us what we believe, try to redefine atheism and just can't shut up about their delusional shit.
This is why we don't take these kind of threads seriously, it's the same old tired shit over and over again. Just repeating ourselves.
Lol, please show me my tantrums, logical fallacies and what I've asserted to be true. Oh, and someone please prove to me why a strong atheist in not an ignorant belief.
Epimethean Wrote:I think he's mixed up his quotes now, too.
not sure if I did, its kinda hard to keep in response with all these false claims and accusations.
Napoleon Wrote:LOL
Figure of speech fail...
Ummm...no..Napolean...just no....good try though.
5thHorseman Wrote:What do you know about physics etc to come to this conclusion OP?
Being an atheist is simple. Logic, reasoning and not filling any unknown gaps in with GOD, because we do not yet know the correct answer.'we know that science will get the answers one day.
Just because you think there must be a god because it's just too random is pretty lame. Random happens, look at our evolution.
As I've stated before I do not need to the know the details of creation to understand basic truths about it. Regardless of what science finds about the nature of the beginning of existence remains the same. There is also nothing logical about asserting God doesn't exist because science will find out why one day. Attack my reasons not my convictions. Also, I don't think there must be a God from probability, I just choose to believe in one based on that reasoning, though I could wrong about it. Thinking there is a God because its too random is perfectly logical; anyone who ignores chance in their logic of everything in life will in all likelyhood have a very difficult time making up his mind on anything. Evolution is also very far from random.
5thHorseman Wrote:It's ignorance to say he exists with no evidence. The evidence part is for you to show, we have nothing to disprove.
Lol, this proves you guys do not actually read what I'm saying at all.
Rhythm Wrote:Again, I do not agree with your conclusions, how many times must I say gods do not exist?
and how times must I say that asserting that God does not exist when you know nothing about his nature, and would not even know where to look to find out, is ignorance. Prove why this statement is false. So far, you haven't even actually addressed this statement, which is what this entire thread has been about.
Napoleon Wrote:This guy reaches conclusions like this:
We have no evidence for a cosmic space turtle flying through the solar system
\/
Therefore we must say it might exist otherwise it's being ignorant.
Actually there is no proof against space flying turtles but there is a huge load of reason against this as nothing like that as ever been detected or seen, from earth, in this solar system. Furthermore, there is much reason to believe that such an atmosphere is not suitable for a biological life form and very unlikely any lifeform could adapt to such an environment.
See how that works. See how the nature of the object is actually and fully understandable and how much reason I can put forth to deny it. On the contrary, there is no understanding of the nature of God and there are no, non-ignornant, reasons to assert he musn't exist
