When Atheists Can't Think Episode 1: No Evidence for God?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Scientific curiosity, yes. But what difference should it make to my life?

And no, I've read through many of your posts and you seem not at all curious about atheists. If you are, maybe you could tell me five things you have learned from your time on the forum about "atheists", and the reasons behind their belief, that you didn't already know.

No offense, but that seems somewhat sociopathic.

A sociopath would not care how dishonest or insulting his arguments are in his efforts to make himself feel better about the beliefs which he is afraid to question himself. To that end, he will not stop short of defaming anyone, depriving them of their civil rights, and will even resort to physical violence. Yes, causing the premature death of a woman with a name, who has loved and touched so many people in her brief time on this planet is murder. The outlawing of abortion causes premature deaths of very real people, therefore it's murder. If you support that, then yes, you are a murdererous fucking sociopath!

One can get excited to watch the Star Wars flick, get a promotion, grab some drinks at the bar. Watch the game. Get a haircut. Buy a new pair of shoes. Eat at a new restaurant. All this makes a difference in your life, surely.

But the ground of good and evil, the source of all of reality and the mind of such a perfect and powerful being, one who is supposed to love you more than anything, arouses no personal, non-scientific interest or curiosity whatsoever?

There's something unhuman about that, right? Who would reject a chance to get to know the being who created them, were such a being to exist, without being either consumed by irrational and self-gratifying priorities, or one who bore a deep and irrational hatred of God?

Where's your evidence that that your god exists? You have been asked for this 1000x, and you ignore this completely. If you don't have any, then it's time for you to deal with that fact, and be honest about it for the first time in your life. Of course you never will, being sociopathic as you are.

As for my curiosity, you read me wrong. Go through my posting history for the record of insults (by me and against me).

Honey, you reap what you sow!

People have been nothing but fair to you in explaining why your arguments don't apply here, and very specific on what we see wrong with your claims. Specifically, we have spelled it out in crystal clear terms why we find it so insulting, understanding that those who have never conversed with those outside of their own groups would be unaware. You respond to all that by throwing one huge hissy-fit after another like a two-year old, while repeating exactly what you have been corrected on ad nauseum (also like a two-year-old). Fucking grow up already!

As for what I've learned:

1) The atheists on this forum are, largely, deeply anti-intellectual and uninterested in developing their critical thinking. My attempts to engage rationally was initially completely or predominantly unprofitable.
2) Most anti-theism here is deeply emotional. The responses here towards theism overflows with rage, hatred, contempt, and other negative feelings. Very little in the way of rational argument goes on.
3) For most of my interlocutors, truth is unimportant of a view. They won't pursue uncomfortable truths, but they will pursue what sits nicely with a priori atheistic commitments.
4) This might be a general problem, not just one that afflicts atheists. When people study things that go against their beliefs, their desire to understand and comprehension ability plummet. 

I'll think of a fifth later.

LOL, are you by any chance related to Walt Disney, the Master Imagineer?

1)  Your attempts to engage rationally were unprofitable because you don't know the first thing about rational discourse. People here sincerely strove to explain that to you, but how could you have really listened, coming in here with the precognition that your ideas are infallible? Discussion, My Dear, doesn't work that way - if there's going to be one at all, then it has to be a two way street. We understand you perfectly, but you don't understand anything about us.

2) Funny, how you call atheism emotional. Anybody can be provoked to an emotional response, depending on just how maliciously his views come under attack by those who attempt to invalidate his views through mischaracterization when they cannot disprove their validity in truth. However, aside from newborn babies there are no atheists, none whatsoever, who's positions weren't decided based on what they learned from far better sources for learning and social progress than your bible.

3) Your opinion on supernatural ideas is just an opinion. We have shown you the basics on how we go about searching for truth, but you ignore this. I for one am very, very comfortable with discussing your ideas, they do not intimidate me at all - in fact, I know them intimately as a former evangelical Christian. I know them, I fear them not, and they are still wrong.

4) Well-stated on those who think their own ideas trump rational discourse, and the resulting conclusions which begin with empirical evidence (or the neutral position which must result when said evidence is missing). That's right, atheism is a neutral position, neither positive nor negative. What cannot be proven true is not necessarily false, but given the record of Christians to prove their god without any evidence, thinking that argument counts for that when it counts only for insult, my neutral position on your god is very probably not.