Evidence for atheist claims

[The Valkyrie]

Oh, I have no doubt it's a riot.

"Riot" is one way of putting it.

[maestroanth]

I will play the person you believe I am, a "dumb redneck christian"......

Is there any other kind? ;P

[robvalue]

When it's a theist versus an atheist, the theist just keeps talking bollocks until the atheist gets sick of them and leaves, and then the theist "wins". How would two theists work?

I expect that god will step in and pick one to defend and arm.

Oh yeah, I forgot the old fashioned method! Whoever is still alive was right.

[Little Rik]

Ol'Stimbonator is right guys. I have tried to give clues, but here is the deal, little rik and others like him, are well within the rules. They only thrive on people replying to them, to give a random reply, and so on ad nauseum.

Then people start breaking the forum rules, the staff gets angry and believe me, you should let sleeping dogs doing just that. If you notice LR doesnt span trough multiple threads, and his replies, incoherent they may be, only are directed at thise that bother with him. By giving LR attention, we are giving him a very undeserved legitimacy on this forum.

Sooo...your rules are such that your mods have to sit quietly and watch Rik basically ignore the rules about preaching and trolling so long as people are "engaging him," and then when people get sick of it and lash out in an attempt to drive him off (or have some fun at his expense in more or less the way he has fun at ours), those same mods are required to turn around and warn those members about insulting a toxic person who trolls constantly and hijacks threads. Do I have that about right?

And yes, he does post in multiple threads. He may mostly stick to one at a time, but once people start ignoring it he moves to a new one.

Besides, why does that even matter? People keep bringing up that "he only posts in one place" thing. Is there a loophole in the rules that allows trolls to troll as long as they stay in one thread? If so, why is it still there?

Let us clear some of yours many dogmas Pinky.
1) Stim already said that is not against the rules to proselytizing.
By the way when i ever did that?
The only time that I did mention my guru was when somebody asked me who I follow so no i never
did proselytizing.
By saying that i follow yoga that is not proselytizing.
2) I never start the fight.
When rude people swear to me like someone called Pinky I do not swear back.
By ridiculing the swearer is a way to back the swearer off so it is not me that start the fight.
3) Nobody is forced to read my posts so there shouldn't be any reason for whining about.
4) You talk all the time about the rules so why don't you follow them by not swearing at me
and in this way start all the trouble?
5) As I already said there is not such a thing as to hijacking the thread.
A forum is not a club in which people inside should follow the same principles.
In a forum arguing is the norm so if you don't like arguing with people you better apply for a club
that fit most your style of life.

Right?  

[Homeless Nutter]

Ol'Stimbonator is right guys. I have tried to give clues, but here is the deal, little rik and others like him, are well within the rules. They only thrive on people replying to them, to give a random reply, and so on ad nauseum.
[...]

You see - the trick is to get Rik to ignore you...

[Little Rik]

Hell is a state of mind but this state can and will one day have to change because nobody like
to live in such a state.
The only permanent thing is the cosmic mind behind this illusion but let us come to your hell.
Once you leave your dead body (when you die so to speak) you can not possibly end up in an hell in which you suffer physically.
You only have YOU your consciousness.
The old body has been left behind to rot so how can you possibly feel physical pain?

If we don't have bodies in the afterlife, then what are these near-death EXPERIENCES supposed to be experiences of?  If you don't have a body, then you don't have eyes to see any white light, no ears to hear spirits telling you things, no mouth with which to respond, and no skin to feel warm or cold.  It would seem that by your account, all these NDEs are nothing but imaginings.  How is an NDE proof of anything if the accounts are wholly imaginary, complete hallucinations?

How would you hallucinate considering that your brain is 100% off and totally inactive as established by
doctors and neurosurgeons?
To hallucinate you need a brain that function or at least not completely dead so it is clear that the consciousness take over free from the constrain of body-mind.
Not only that but as described by most people who had an NDE the consciousness is even more sharp
than when the body was alive.
Easy to imagine that.
When the body is alive the consciousness is stuck inside a body so there exist limitations in what the
consciousness can do but when is free from the body then it can function a lot better.
It is a dogma to think that we can not feel and perceive things like vision, sound, smell and all other feelings
without a body.
The consciousness is much more subtle and powerful than the physical senses.
Sooner or later the dogma that the consciousness is a product of the brain will be shredded in pieces
and atheism will be bankrupted but that will be a really good news for you guys because only then you will be able to progress.  

[Cyberman]

Just a few quick points.

1) Nobody mentioned proselytising.

4) Swearing is not against the Rules.

5) There is absolutely such a thing as hijacking threads.

[robvalue]

7) Members don't get to tell the staff what the rules are. The rules are the rules, and are constantly available for all to see. (They're at the top right when viewing on a computer or in "full version".) The staff have the final say about how the rules apply.

[SofaKingHigh]

I'm quite put out by constantly being referred to as a "member."

Cock is fine, dick acceptable, but member is positively outrageous.

[robvalue]

My apologies. Standard sized cocks do not get to measure the big dicks.