Why atheism always has a burden of proof

[pocaracas]

Beats me...
Maybe something along the lines of:
If such an powerful entity exists, which can contact people directly, and can embody people, then I see no difficulty in contacting everyone directly.
That way, everyone will have a similar experience which cannot be dismissed as an abnormal psychological event on an individual, because everyone will have experienced roughly the same!
If it's soooo important for said entity that we humans accept that it exists, then I see no reason why it should cower from such a simple feat.... as it seems to be doing now (if it exists)

So if a powerful entity exists, they should contact people directly, that's what you're saying? And this is what a reasonable atheist believes?

I hope you have some really good reasoning to explain why entities have to contact people in order for it to be true that they exist.

I guess you'll only believe Barack Obama is the American president once he rings you up? That's kinda stupid.

The people who claim that entity exists, also claim it wants me to acknowledge that it exists. They want me to believe that it exists.
That Obama exists is trivial, since he's a human being.
God, on the other hand, if it really exists and wants me to acknowledge that it does in fact exists, then it should stop hiding...
just sayin'...

If, on the other hand there is a god and it couldn't care less, then... why should I care?

Oh, how I wish magic was real!!...
Sadly, it does not seem to be.
All my beliefs are based on some level of probabilities, based on previous experience (sometimes, compounded with other people's experiences).
And gods... warrant... a very low probability of existence outside people's imaginations.

How precise are your assigned probabilities values? What equation are you using?

Or, are you just pulling it out of your ass? You can be honest, Mr. Skeptic.

Not at all calculated numerically... just intuitively... so yes, similar to pulling it out of my ass, but with some experience behind it! I use lubricant! Finest brand available.

How likely is it that gravity exists? Pull a number out of your ass! I'd pull something very close to 1.
How likely is it that dragons exist? pull a number out of your ass! I'd pull something very close to 0.
How likely is it that pixies exist? pull a number out of your ass! I'd pull something very close to 0.
How likely is it that life exists on this planet? pulling a number.... errr 1!
How likely is it that you've drunk caffeine today? pulling number.... 0.9!

Whatever the odds, there is always room for all options.
In the meantime, I live my life with according to what my intuitive odds hint at to be above 50%. (I get a sense that this sentence isn't very well written... )

LOL, troll.
Assume I'm a 6 year old kid. Explain it like if my a very stupid blonde.

I once had a test that was something like "explain conservation of momentum as if you were talking to a 6 year old". (most difficult test evar!)


I'll give you a chance to think about your lack of ability to refute anything I write, while you try to make me feel like you know something I don't, but never quite elaborate it...

Sounds like rage.

But since you want an explanation of why your reasoning is a failure, I'll take two of your own statements and ask you to demonstrate how one leads to the other.

"Now, I look around me...
gravity works in a predictable manner"

and

"Muslim - Like judaism, but with a human representative who claimed to have direct contact with the father god."

First of all, it's "Islam" not "Muslim". But why don't you explain how our knowledge of how gravity works disproves a claim, that for example, Islam doesn't "fit the bill".

Does it show that?

You're right, it is Islam... I keep getting those mixed up... Stupid farts can't even get a consistent nomenclature for themselves!

Anyway, my argument involves the whole. Not just one statement, but everything I see around me; everything I sense around me; Every bit of information that I acquire.
From the religions, all I see, all I sense, all the information I get only has people claiming stuff about some entity. I never see the entity itself, there is never a piece of information about that extraordinary entity which matches the rest of reality that I sense... and all those claims seem to carry the aroma of wishful thinking, or fertile imagination, or deception, or... some abnormal psychological state.


Now, You.... you seem to get attached to single statements and miss the whole thing. And then waste pages on stupid little details. Why?
Why is it that your single interest in this forum seems to be to take small parts of other people's statements and confront them with that? Strip everything from context and just make people explain it all... you seem keen on having explained to you all the little inner workings of every mental process...