Why are atheist...atheist?

[Alastor]

I might actually be one of the most militantly atheist posters you've dealt with. I do in fact contend that gods do not exist. You should read through the posts here if you want to know why you got the reaction that you did. Your arguments are no different than any of the theists who drop by time and time again to tell us how we're "ignorant" morally/intellectually/spiritually inferior..etc etc etc. I challenged your beliefs and you withered? Either things are too complex, too improbable, or they are not, has nothing to do with belief.

You know you keep saying that nothing can be known about god, believe there are some folks here who would disagree with you (myself included for hilariously different reasons).

The thing that really eats at me, personally, is that you had enough in you to start a thread proposing that my conclusions are ignorant, but now I'm just too mean to be dealt with?

Would you like me to play my violin for you?

Ok first let me deal with these guys ipnaf

Your arguments are no different than any of the theists who drop by time and time again to tell us how we're "ignorant" morally/intellectually/spiritually inferior..etc etc etc. I challenged your beliefs and you withered? Either things are too complex, too improbable, or they are not, has nothing to do with belief.

Again, what the heck? How have my beliefs withered. They've stayed exactly the same this entire thread, which was never about my beliefs to begin with I might add. I would love for you to use proof by contradiction to show how my beliefs have suddenly changed. It is more likely that you were just so thirsty for an argument that you didn't even realize what I was originally saying.

Also if there is anything you guys can honestly say you know about God, I would love to know; why keep from such precious knowledge away from others.

The thing that really eats at me, personally, is that you had enough in you to start a thread proposing that my conclusions are ignorant, but now I'm just too mean to be dealt with?

Would you like me to play my violin for you?

FOR THE UMTEENTH TIME, if my premise does not apply to you then you have nothing to defend. In fact, as I've said before you've already demonstrated multiple times that you agree with my premise so why the heck do you have a problem with it. I didn't say you were mean but your offense to my question makes you difficult. You are so spited already that you continually don't read my post and actually understand what I'm saying and yet keep going on accusing me of this and that.

You must be a fan of the Three Stooges. You poke atheism in the eye, get slapped in the face, and then come back with a "why I oughtta!"

.

This is getting redicously. Please grow up. My original premise only applies to strong atheist as "Faith no More" defined it. Anyone else is just not reading period. Tell me how a strong atheist not ignorant or stop responding with unnecessary statements.

An atheist is simply one who does not believe in the existence of a god or gods. That's it.
I am an agnostic atheist, I'm not claiming anything, I have simply rejected the claim that a god or gods exist. That's it.

Even if atheism was a belief system (which it's not) I'd still lack belief in god. Nothing would change.

.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sourc...gle+Search

atheist is someone who denies the existence of God.

And once again to say you reject the claim the a God or god's exist, requires clarification. If you mean you have no beliefs about God then that is different from saying you believe he or they don't exist. The latter makes no sense.

According the link you provided,

Special pleading is a form of spurious argumentation where a position in a dispute introduces favorable details or excludes unfavorable details by alleging a need to apply additional considerations without proper criticism of these considerations themselves. Essentially, this involves someone attempting to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exemption

Please explain to me how this applies to my argument. I presented neither favorable nor excluded unfavorable details at all, forget whether they were properly criticised. Furthermore, I have not cited an exemption to a general rule at. I have no idea how this applies to my argument you'd have to break it down demonstrate how what I've fits this definition.

I could demonstrate exactly why it does not but I'm growing tired of these unnecessary accusations.

God is just another imaginary friend like all the rest. Why should we treat the god claim any differently? Without resulting to special pleading which is a fallacious argument.

Yes, God is an imaginary friend you know nothing about, not even if he's imaginary. Therefore it would be ignorant to assert he doesn't exist don't you think.

[5thHorseman]

It's ignorance to say he exists with no evidence. The evidence part is for you to show, we have nothing to disprove.

[The Grand Nudger]

Again, I do not agree with your conclusions, how many times must I say gods do not exist?

[Napoléon]

This guy reaches conclusions like this:

We have no evidence for a cosmic space turtle flying through the solar system
\/
Therefore we must say it might exist otherwise it's being ignorant.

Do you HERP when you DERP?

[Violet]

Because this place has become just like a school. Ignorant theists come, assert shit, we come in, try to teach'em some sense. They throw tantrums, repeat themselves and in desperation jump to logical fallacies as if it will help some how.
Been doing more teaching than debating. Theists tell us what we believe, try to redefine atheism and just can't shut up about their delusional shit.
This is why we don't take these kind of threads seriously, it's the same old tired shit over and over again. Just repeating ourselves.

That is why I take lengthy breaks.

It's part of why I avoid the religions and atheism subforums usually :S

Still annoyed that this thread is here (yet) again.

[Ace Otana]

atheist is someone who denies the existence of God.

Denies or rejects.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheist

And once again to say you reject the claim the a God or god's exist, requires clarification.

I'm not required or expected to do anything. The burden of proof is not on me. However I shall answer, I lack belief in god's existence. I've never once claimed that there isn't such a thing. Theists claim there is a god, I reject the claim. I do not believe in god, thus this makes me an atheist. How can anyone fail to get something so fucking simple?

Please explain to me how this applies to my argument.

The special pleading was when you mentioned know-ability of two very smiler characters. You suggested that god is an exception when it comes to unicorns based on what we know of that concept? That is special pleading.

I could demonstrate exactly why it does not but I'm growing tired of these unnecessary accusations.

Please do. I've had a large cup of coffee, hot chocolate and spent a whole day eyeing up women so my hormones are a little more active than usual.

Yes, God is an imaginary friend you know nothing about, not even if he's imaginary. Therefore it would be ignorant to assert he doesn't exist don't you think.

You have any evidence to suggest that he isn't imaginary? Also, I haven't claimed anything. I've looked into the claim, and saw no reason to take it seriously, so I've dismissed it as utter rubbish.

Your move.

[Rayaan]

The OP could learn well enough from the other half trillion threads. I want to learn about a topic I use search feature first. It's not exactly difficult.

I guess some people just like making their own threads. They can also get some attention that way. But not everyone likes to read old threads from the search engine.

[Kayenneh]

I think he's mixed up his quotes now, too.

Yup. A while back ago he merged us into one person. Not that it's bad, with your intellect and my body, we'll be an unstoppable force. Muahahahaaa!

[Alastor]

Wow you guys are the kings misinterpreting and not reading

I failed to supply evidence for my assumptions, so I would like to argue about Epicuras instead.

On second thought I don't actually want to have a discussion where anyone disagrees with me, I'd rather continue to assume god as the creator without addressing any criticism of my assumption.

In support of my assumption, and in place of actual evidence, I offer this plate of word salad, with the provision; of course; that I do not wish to address any criticism.

As usual Rhythem, prove your assumptions and don't just "throw stuff out there" because your upset. I've supplied reasoning for beliefs too many times now and have made no objective assumptions about God. Also, how have I demonstrated I don't want to have a discussion where anyone disagrees with me and how have I not addressed the criticism I'm getting, when I've been addressing it all day. Please prove your statements and don't just type stuff out of anger.

I have to wonder why we even have these threads anymore. [gripe]Seriously... there's at least 250 repeat threads of this. What the hell does someone think they are accomplishing by making *another* one? I can totally get the second one... even a third one. Hell, I could be convinced to understand 15-30 over the course of the forum's existence. But this is ridiculous. The OP has added nothing new. There is nothing new to add. We've been over this more than 250 times. Why do it again?

you've failed to realize that I'm practically the only here actually being civil and also the only one actually reading peoples answers and positions.

Because this place has become just like a school. Ignorant theists come, assert shit, we come in, try to teach'em some sense. They throw tantrums, repeat themselves and in desperation jump to logical fallacies as if it will help some how.
Been doing more teaching than debating. Theists tell us what we believe, try to redefine atheism and just can't shut up about their delusional shit.
This is why we don't take these kind of threads seriously, it's the same old tired shit over and over again. Just repeating ourselves.

Lol, please show me my tantrums, logical fallacies and what I've asserted to be true. Oh, and someone please prove to me why a strong atheist in not an ignorant belief.

I think he's mixed up his quotes now, too.

not sure if I did, its kinda hard to keep in response with all these false claims and accusations.

LOL

Figure of speech fail...

Ummm...no..Napolean...just no....good try though.

What do you know about physics etc to come to this conclusion OP?

Being an atheist is simple. Logic, reasoning and not filling any unknown gaps in with GOD, because we do not yet know the correct answer.'we know that science will get the answers one day.

Just because you think there must be a god because it's just too random is pretty lame. Random happens, look at our evolution.

As I've stated before I do not need to the know the details of creation to understand basic truths about it. Regardless of what science finds about the nature of the beginning of existence remains the same. There is also nothing logical about asserting God doesn't exist because science will find out why one day. Attack my reasons not my convictions. Also, I don't think there must be a God from probability, I just choose to believe in one based on that reasoning, though I could wrong about it. Thinking there is a God because its too random is perfectly logical; anyone who ignores chance in their logic of everything in life will in all likelyhood have a very difficult time making up his mind on anything. Evolution is also very far from random.

It's ignorance to say he exists with no evidence. The evidence part is for you to show, we have nothing to disprove.

Lol, this proves you guys do not actually read what I'm saying at all.

Again, I do not agree with your conclusions, how many times must I say gods do not exist?

and how times must I say that asserting that God does not exist when you know nothing about his nature, and would not even know where to look to find out, is ignorance. Prove why this statement is false. So far, you haven't even actually addressed this statement, which is what this entire thread has been about.

This guy reaches conclusions like this:

We have no evidence for a cosmic space turtle flying through the solar system
\/
Therefore we must say it might exist otherwise it's being ignorant.

Actually there is no proof against space flying turtles but there is a huge load of reason against this as nothing like that as ever been detected or seen, from earth, in this solar system. Furthermore, there is much reason to believe that such an atmosphere is not suitable for a biological life form and very unlikely any lifeform could adapt to such an environment.

See how that works. See how the nature of the object is actually and fully understandable and how much reason I can put forth to deny it. On the contrary, there is no understanding of the nature of God and there are no, non-ignornant, reasons to assert he musn't exist

[Ace Otana]

Lol, please show me my tantrums, logical fallacies and what I've asserted to be true. Oh, and someone please prove to me why a strong atheist in not an ignorant belief.

Already pointed out one logical fallacy (special pleading), you won't get off this "strong atheist/Believe in no god" shit, perhaps a little tantrum?

Don't ask me about strong atheists. I'm an agnostic atheist. I'm not claiming anything. Besides, it's you who needs to provide some evidence for your god. Why must there be a god? What evidence do you have?