Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[R00tKiT]

Still haven't figured out why this thrashes your argument yet?


Nope.

I don't think you even understand the argument.

We, as mortal, transcient creatures, have absolutely no saying about what is inherently designed, and what appears designed, that's why I extended the definition of design, it's simply the right definition to use in a formal argument. In this world, we simply pick existent stuff and work with it, we never ever create something ex nihilo.

Still haven't figured out why this thrashes your argument yet?


Nope.

He never will he's completely hopeless

What about grabbing a fucking grammar book and disappearing for a few years? This is getting tiresome.

---

It's only dishonest if one knows there is no god but claims to be agnostic.  I was once an agnostic theist.  I didn't know if there was a god but I wanted there to be and I believed there was (for really bad reasons).  I was being honest.  I then stopped believing that there was a god even though I wasn't sure there wasn't one.  I was an agnostic atheist.  I was being honest.  Then after much study and thought I became convinced that there was no god and there never could be.

I am curious to know how you became convinced that there is no god. There are very few atheists who make such a claim, not even the most hardcore skeptic can claim to have an argument against any possible deity.

Rather than be dishonest and say I was an agnostic atheist because people wouldn't like it much if I said I was a hard atheist, I chose to be honest and stated that I was a strong atheist, after all I don't care what people think of me.  I'm going, to be honest, no matter who doesn't approve.  So you see, at no point in my life have I been dishonest with regard to this issue.

There is no way for me or anyone to check that you're truly honest. We should either just take your word for it, or ask you to clarify your reasons for asserting that there is no god.