Speechless

[robvalue]

As I also predicted, he doesn't know what the words mean either.

Despite being on an atheist form since 2013!?

[Czechlervitz30]

I wanted to see what was atheism all about. Now I know that there is an invincible position of "show me the evidence".

I dont remember making the only possibly painful statement like "obey my God or burn".

If an atheist likes science it is more like this: "I see data points that give me this conclusion and I can undertand it with these sets of ideas." 

If I apply it to the bible it goes like this: "I see a book... that is all it is." There are many other books that are made by cutting down forests. Books are bad.

[robvalue]

Atheism is a description of a person, it's not a position one chooses. Either you are one, or you aren't. If you're not, you're a theist.

Of course, you can state that you're a Christian, but actually be an atheist. Or you can state you're an atheist but actually be a theist. You can profess to be whatever you like. But it doesn't change whether or not you're actually an atheist.

[account_inactive]

Still waiting for you to respond to Thump, FatAndFaithless and Kevin in regards to prison demographics. But it wouldn't surprise me if you continue to ignore them.

[Czechlervitz30]

Still waiting for you to respond to Thump, FatAndFaithless and Kevin in regards to prison demographics. But it wouldn't surprise me if you continue to ignore them.

Was that directed at me?

[account_inactive]

Still waiting for you to respond to Thump, FatAndFaithless and Kevin in regards to prison demographics. But it wouldn't surprise me if you continue to ignore them.

Was that directed at me?

No, sorry for the confusion. It was directed towards purplepurpose.

[Czechlervitz30]

Was that directed at me?

No, sorry for the confusion. It was directed towards purplepurpose.

Good, this thread is getting confusing.

[KevinM1]

I wanted to see what was atheism all about. Now I know that there is an invincible position of "show me the evidence".

I dont remember making the only possibly painful statement like "obey my God or burn".

You do realize that "show me the evidence" means that we're willing to change our minds in the face of verifiable evidence?

The problem is, the evidence we're always subjected to falls into the following categories:

1. Attempts to logic a god into existing, as though a well-reasoned argument suffices in place of actual evidence.  What's funnier is that these arguments merely create a deistic entity that may as well not exist anyway.

2. Attempts to treat various religious accounts as being unbiased and inherently accurate, and thus evidence for its own claims.  Various fallacious sub-arguments tend to follow ("They wouldn't believe in a lie," "They wouldn't die for a lie," "Persecution implies truthfulness," "These are indeed unbiased eyewitness accounts," "The stories are more likely to be true because they describe things impossible according to our knowledge of the universe," etc.).

3. Personal testimony, as though anecdotes (often filled with gross misconceptions about, well, everything) are somehow more convincing than hard evidence.  Shit like NDEs, not understanding the possibility of false positives, and the reliance on post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacies.

So, no, "show me the evidence" isn't invincible.  It's just that apologetics does everything except provide evidence.  There's a whole lot of emotional appeals, word salad, and various forms of conflation (causation and correlation is my favorite flavor, for the record), but no real evidence.

And, frankly, I'm disappointed.  I think reality would be a lot more interesting if gods and devils and angels existed.  At the very least, it'd give me an excuse to blast some Iron Maiden out my windows.

[RoadRunner79]

Oh my good god Roadrunner. Did you just try and dismiss and tu quoque away my whole list?

You are living in a fantasy land for real. You can't just keep saying "evolution" and expecting real harmful things to go away.

You don't even understand the difference between evolution and the theory of evolution. Until you do, you should really stop bringing it up. And look up the tu quoque fallacy, because it's the only play you seem to have. Except plain denial of reality.

I am almost speechless at the tactics you are stooping to. "I could say the same about evolution?"

You could, but it would be a meaningless thing to say as you don't even understand what it is.

This is when the opponent deflects criticism of their argument towards you instead, saying, "You too!" The problem with this is that they have not addressed the criticism of their argument at all. They are trying to get around it by implying that your position has similar problems, and so is not superior.

It may be the case that your position has problems, but that is irrelevant when discussing their position. That is a separate discussion. Of course, your position may not have such problems, in which case it is just a cheap deflecting tactic to cover the weakness of their position.

http://robvalue.wix.com/atheism#!tu-quoque/c17iz

I think this is funny, since I actually agree with you on quite a bit, even if I pointed out some hypocrisy on your part.  I wasn't using tu quoque to dismiss arguments, but there are some that I don't think you would find as valid if used in other circumstances or perhaps need to be addressed in your own house as well.   My intentions are to get down to principles and details, and I'm sorry if my method offended you. 

You may be correct, I am not entirely certain what you mean between evolution and the theory of evolution.   I am thinking that you are distinguishing between the evidence and facts for evolution and some of the theories about the mechanism.  It's not really about evolution anyway, and even if harm has been done in the name of evolution theory, I don't think that reflects on the theories themselves, but is something that needs to be addressed in the handling of it (such as poisoning the well against anyone who questions the dogma   and just-so stories).  But it would be fallacious to think that the actions of those who claim to believe in evolution follow that the claims are false.

I also find it interesting, that you assume, I am not familiar with what evolution is.  Why would you say that?

[purplepurpose]

But you never addressed FAF, Kevin and Thumps point.

That isn't borne out by American prison demographics.

If religion usually indoctrinates people trough fear in hell, to make them more compassionate and caring. Then how the fuck such person managed to commit serious crimes if he believes in God and his judgment? He cannot justify It to himself.

If person became religious after ending up in prison, thats different story.