Abiogenesis is impossible

[Sword of Christ]

Too bad, there's a missing link with reality...

Feel free to demonstrate the logic and evidence for the unfounded belief I have demonstrated you to have. The fact is you have far less evidence and logic than Christians or any other faith on the planet. There's a reason only 2% of humanity are followers of your belief.

[pocaracas]

Too bad, there's a missing link with reality...

Feel free to demonstrate the logic and evidence for the unfounded belief I have demonstrated you to have. The fact is you have far less evidence and logic than Christians or any other faith on the planet. There's a reason only 2% of humanity are followers of your belief.

Too bad reality doesn't rely on human beliefs...

[The Valkyrie]

Too bad, there's a missing link with reality...

Feel free to demonstrate the logic and evidence for the unfounded belief I have demonstrated you to have. The fact is you have far less evidence and logic than Christians or any other faith on the planet. There's a reason only 2% of humanity are followers of your belief.

Perhaps only 2%, though I dispute that number, but the rest don't follow ONE religion, they follow hundreds.

Even Christian following isn't consistant as there are hundreds of different CHristian denominations.

[Sword of Christ]

Too bad reality doesn't rely on human beliefs...

Damn right it doesn't it wouldn't matter if 99% of humanity were atheists, it would still be balls. Most people have more sense though that's why it's only 2%.

[Alex K]

Typical, I'm gone for just a few hours, and people bring out the big fonts

[Jackalope]

Your reading comprehension really needs work.

What does the Tao have to do with atheism?

Go back and read her post, you fuckwit.

Here, I'll connect the dots for you since you seem to be completely incapable or unwilling to do so yourself:

There are a subset of Taoists and Buddhists who are atheists. Those people are not materialists.

You are attempting to refute atheism by refuting naturalism. Naturalism is not a necessary component of atheism. Atheism does not equal naturalism, and naturalism does not equal atheism. There are atheists who are naturalists, and those that are not.

Your refutation fails, your reading comprehension fails, and you fucking suck at logic.

[pocaracas]

Too bad reality doesn't rely on human beliefs...

Damn right it doesn't it wouldn't matter if 99% of humanity were atheists, it would still be balls. Most people have more sense though that's why it's only 2%.

Most people... that's why political polls are a popularity contest and whoever pours more money into the campaign, wins...
People have a lot of sense...

Good thing reality doesn't give a crap about people's beliefs.

[Crossless2.0]

Sword of Christ, you've been registered here for about half a year and have 900 posts to your credit. Are you seriously going to pretend that you don't know what an agnostic atheist is? Do you really not know the difference between methodological naturalism and "philosophical reductionist naturalism"?

Speaking only for myself, I don't know there is no god and have never made that claim (agnostic), but I also don't believe in a god (atheist) because you believers have presented nothing in the way of compelling evidence. Zilch. What is so hard to understand about that?

Your strawman arguments are nothing but a desperate gambit to change the subject, but it won't work. You, the believer and claimant, bear the burden of evidence, and you can't deliver. And you know it.

[Sword of Christ]

Go back and read her post, you fuckwit.

I can read it just fine and nice ad hominem attack there. When all else fails and you have nothing better to say just call someone a name that always works. Makes you look big and impressive when you're arsehole like that as well so that's like two advantages of it, get to prove you're right and you a feel big strong man. You know the intimidation I'm feeling here, indescribable.

There are a subset of Taoists and Buddhists who are atheists. Those people are not materialists.

I didn't say they were I'm saying you are. If you want to become a Buddhist or whatever then we would have a different debate here and I would see a lot validity to your faith even if I would disagree about certain points. I think Christianity has more evidence and reason to support than Buddhism but you are not a fricken Buddhist, you're not a Mormon, you're not a Scientologist. I would have some good arguments against all of those but I would agree with all of them to a certain point because they are not materialists, you are a materialist so this is an argument directed at you. You don't get to hide behind Buddhism.

You are attempting to refute atheism by refuting naturalism.

That's all atheism is so that's all you have to do.

Naturalism is not a necessary component of atheism.

Yes it is unless you want to believe something else like Buddhism, Taoism, fucking Wicca or whatever.

Atheism does not equal naturalism, and naturalism does not equal atheism.

What do you think it equals? Do you believe in God, the Tao? Brahma? What? If you lack a belief in any of these then you believe in materialism and that's what atheism is arguing for. It doesn't matter if you're an agnostic atheist or whatever because everyone in the world lacking certain knowledge is an agnostic, I'm an agnostic as well though I believe in God. You're hiding you believe behind terminology that means nothing.

There are atheists who are naturalists, and those that are not.

All atheists are naturalists unless they are something else at which point they are called something else. Yes not all religions are based on Monotheism there are alternatives but none of them are naturalists.

Your refutation fails, your reading comprehension fails, and you fucking suck at logic.

If you reject everything equally, all religions, all beliefs, all metaphysical propositions beyond the physical natural world, if you argue against everything else, then you are a materialist. All anyone has to then have to do is refute materialism which is what I have done. You can no longer apply the traditional arguments in support of atheism if it is centred on a certain kind of belief because now you're on the same level playing field but with nothing to bring to the table.

[Jackalope]

Go back and read her post, you fuckwit.

I can read it just fine and nice ad hominem attack there (hint - it is not a synonym for "insult".

Apparently not with understanding.

Let's add "ad hominem" to the list of things you know not the meaning of.

There are a subset of Taoists and Buddhists who are atheists. Those people are not materialists.

I didn't say they were I'm saying you are.

Wrong. I am agnostic on the issue of monist materialism vs. dualism.

You are attempting to refute atheism by refuting naturalism.

That's all atheism is so that's all you have to do.

Please. Go tell a group of atheist Taoists and atheist Buddhists that they are monist naturalists. We'll wait.

Naturalism is not a necessary component of atheism.

Yes it is unless you want to believe something else like Buddhism, Taoism, fucking Wicca or whatever.

Listen up very carefully. I am an atheist. I am not a monist naturalist.

Atheism does not equal naturalism, and naturalism does not equal atheism.

What do you think it equals?

Unsuprisingly, aheism equals atheism, the position of not believing in any deities - which also, apparently unknown to you, does not preclude beliefs in other non-material things.

Do you believe in God, the Tao? Brahma? What? If you lack a belief in any of these then you believe in materialism and that's what atheism is arguing for.

Except that I don't, and it's not.

It doesn't matter if you're an agnostic atheist or whatever because everyone in the world lacking certain knowledge is an agnostic, I'm an agnostic as well though I believe in God. You're hiding you believe behind terminology that means nothing.

There are atheists who are naturalists, and those that are not.

All atheists are naturalists unless they are something else at which point they are called something else. Yes not all religions are based on Monotheism there are alternatives but none of them are naturalists.

More reading comprehension fail.

...and despite dozens of atheists telling you that your concept of atheism is wrong, you persist in telling us what it is. I wouldn't dream of telling you what Christianity is, so please - fucking stop.

You're apparently under the mistaken impression that atheism is a worldview. It is not. It is a negative answer to the question "Do you believe in deities?" and nothing more, no matter how badly you want it to be something else.