Quote:If you know that a theist's god does not it exist then a disbelief would have the foundation of knowledge. Otherwise, you reject it based on what? A lack of evidence.I never claimed to 'know' that god or gods don't exist. Feel free to quote me. I said I rejected the claim. I don't need to justify it. This 'god' was claimed by theists, ask them what evidence they have for it and what is to be expected. Not me buddy. I simply don't believe the bullshit they spout. I'm unconvinced of such a being.
Do you think if a god exists he/she should appear? What would constitute evidence? Is it turtles all the way down?
Quote:To me it is as, you consider that evidence is lacking implies you know what the evidence is and is able to be retrieved.Alright I'll be specific, I don't know of any evidence that supports god's existence. So far theists have failed to present anything that could support their assertions. Don't point the finger at me mate just because I don't believe.
Quote:If you believe that evidence is lacking, it would be a belief. The resulting conclusion of a lack of belief has the foundation of resulting from what you consider to be true, which is a belief.It's not a matter of belief mate, if you know of any evidence, please...share with us.
Quote:Fair enough. I still don't get it.You won't.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
