Are Atheists using Intellectually Dishonest Arguments?

[Fake Messiah]

Nothing was posited in that video other than that the object was a UFO in the strictest definition of the term, yet somehow you're able to just speculate what the object was purely based on nothing, and expect everyone to just accept your speculation simply because you say so.

If you have evidence of the object being a balloon, then submit it, until then find somewhere to sit down.

Huggy, you should watch a documentary "A Journey to Planet Sanity (2013)" because you'll see what a joke that guy actually is that you'll be embarrassed for even mentioning him, let alone believing him.

---

2) Atheists often presume  "belief in scientism, the logically incoherent claim that 'only scientific knowledge is valid/real/genuine knowledge'"

Yeah atheists rely too much on Evidencism that's why they can't understand god because they constantly need evidence and god is so beyond that

[Mister Agenda]

I think some objects seen in the sky are UFOs in the sense that they have never been identified and perhaps never will be, but I'll call bullshit on Huggy's UFO-summoning guy when a confederate with a balloon is the more likely explanation.

Again, wild speculation = refutation in the mind of an atheist.

Nothing was posited in that video other than that the object was a UFO in the strictest definition of the term, yet somehow you're able to just speculate what the object was purely based on nothing, and expect everyone to just accept your speculation simply because you say so.

If you have evidence of the object being a balloon, then submit it, until then find somewhere to sit down.

LOL, the balloon thing is just to point out that there are alternatives to assuming that the guy can get space aliens or sky ghosts to appear at his command. If they're just UFOs to you in the strictest sense (not positively identified yes), then what is their relevance? You don't know exactly what they are either, so why are you making hay of it, Huggy?

[GrandizerII]

Again, wild speculation = refutation in the mind of an atheist.

Nothing was posited in that video other than that the object was a UFO in the strictest definition of the term, yet somehow you're able to just speculate what the object was purely based on nothing, and expect everyone to just accept your speculation simply because you say so.

If you have evidence of the object being a balloon, then submit it, until then find somewhere to sit down.

LOL, the balloon thing is just to point out that there are alternatives to assuming that the guy can get space aliens or sky ghosts to appear at his command. If they're just UFOs to you in the strictest sense (not positively identified yes), then what is their relevance? You don't know exactly what they are either, so why are you making hay of it, Huggy?

It's an unindentified object. Therefore, only Huggy can identify it.

[KevinM1]

Let's play a game of What's More Likely!

1. A person can summon and/or commune with aliens/angels/whatever on a regular basis; they, essentially, appear on command.  And no one - scientists, the military, world religious leaders, or even the local populace - notices or cares.

2. A person is a bit deranged, and seeks attention.  They call themselves a prophet, and concoct a story about how they can summon aliens/angels/whatever on command.  So, with the help of a buddy or two, he performs these stunts.  The buddy releases something mundane (likely a balloon) a mile or so away at the right time, and this 'prophet' points at it as proof of his mystical connection to these creatures.  He doesn't do it on windy days, actually postponing certain demonstrations because, well, balloons don't behave in the wind.  A local news outlet hears of the guy, and plays along.  It's a nice filler story for a slow news day, sure to be a hit with those in the Southwest who buy into woo.

If you choose 1, congratulations!  You're a gullible rube.