|
A good case against God
|
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. While an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you can still only prove a positive..... is that right? I dunno, I'm kind of drunk... I'll re-read this later to see if I made sense.
Cunt
 Quote:1. by making a claim you have the burden of proofTrue. Quote:2. you have the option of rejecting a claim aswellTrue. Quote:3. to conclusivly reject a claim you must present reason (or proof)False. Quote:4. therefore the conclusive rejection of a claim requires the burden of proofFalse. Quote:5. therefore the conclusive rejection of a claim is also a claimFalse. Quote:do i make myself clear? Yeah, but you're wrong. You're deliberately trying to avoid the burden of proof.
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.  (July 10, 2012 at 9:43 am)NickB Wrote: ok lets do this slowly I personally make the claim that the Christian God doesn't exist. I also believe I have the evidence to show this. To start you off: http://atheistforums.org/thread-13747.html "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
'You're deliberately trying to avoid the burden of proof.'
its you who is avoiding the burden of proof. all i'm saying is that both sides should show arguments and try to debunk each other. also, to say that number 3 is wrong you have to give a reason. otherwise you are saying that purely on your own opinion without the the slightest shred of evidence to support it. if you do give evidence you are just reinforcing no. 3 so there is no logic 'false'  (July 10, 2012 at 9:43 am)NickB Wrote: ok lets do this slowly By all means. Quote:1. by making a claim you have the burden of proof DING! Very good!  Quote:2. you have the option of rejecting a claim aswell DING! You're on a roll! Quote:3. to conclusivly reject a claim you must present reason (or proof) BZZZZZTTT!!!  This is absolutely absurd. I claim that a six foot tall invisible rabbit lives in my house and likes to eat chocolate eggs. According to you, you must now present proof to conclusively reject my claim. Please present such proof. If you can't, you must then accept my claim as valid. Correct? Quote:4. therefore the conclusive rejection of a claim requires the burden of proof BZZZZZTTTT!! Now you're at 50%. Do you agree that the burden of proof is on you to reject my invisible rabbit claim? Quote:5. therefore the conclusive rejection of a claim is also a claim BZZZZZZTTTT!!! Oh, dear. Three misses in a row. Where did you learn this crap? Because my Logic 101 professor would have failed you. Quote:do i make myself clear? Yes, it's quite clear you have no idea how logic works.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems? (July 10, 2012 at 10:16 am)NickB Wrote: its you who is avoiding the burden of proof. all i'm saying is that both sides should show arguments and try to debunk each other. I have no burden of proof. I don't believe in god, that is my stance. It doesn't involve making claims of any kind whether you like it or not. Theist = Belief in god A-theist - Without belief in god. It really doesn't get any simpler.
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.  (July 3, 2012 at 2:34 am)Jeffonthenet Wrote: Can anyone give me a good case against the existence of God that can stand up to scrutiny? What, you mean other than the complete lack of anything that could constitute evidence of any such thing ever having of existed?
"That is not dead which can eternal lie and with strange aeons even death may die."
- Abdul Alhazred.  RE: A good case against God
July 10, 2012 at 1:15 pm
(This post was last modified: July 10, 2012 at 1:20 pm by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
(July 10, 2012 at 8:42 am)NickB Wrote: In the words of William Lane Craig : 'absence of evidence is not evidence of abscence' THIS: (July 10, 2012 at 12:29 pm)Kayenneh Wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY Please do not post in this thread until after you have watched this. It's only about 10 minutes. Not that long, even for a 15-year-old's attention span. FOLKS, TRY TO GO EASY ON THIS KID, HE IS ONLY 15 YEARS OLD.  (July 10, 2012 at 9:54 am)frankiej Wrote: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. While an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you can still only prove a positive..... is that right? I dunno, I'm kind of drunk... I'll re-read this later to see if I made sense. Frankie dearest, you know they are fucked when a drunk Scott makes more sense than they do..  "A good case against god"? Sorry for butting in but.. I'm a gnostic atheist when it comes to gods in literature. You don't feel the wrath of Väinämöinen, Odin, Amon-Ra, Zeus, Jupiter or any of the religions that have come before. Why the fuck should I care for a fantasy divinity that someone came up with more recently? It's still a ridiculous thought as those ancient characters are now. They day you can prove that a god indeed exists I will change my mind, before that I say that all book bound divinities are fabricated by man. See, drunk Scott and Finn make more sense than the believers 
When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura
 (July 10, 2012 at 9:54 am)frankiej Wrote: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. While an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you can still only prove a positive..... is that right? I dunno, I'm kind of drunk... I'll re-read this later to see if I made sense. A lot of your posts are ending with "I'm kinda drunk" so I was wondering, wheres the party at? 
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
