Why atheism is a belief.

[JoopWoop]

tahh daahh. I think you might have got it.

You're asking for unobtainable evidence.

You have no evidence, then why should I believe? Without evidence the odds of God existing essentially drop to 0.

What valid alternatives do you have? And if you don't have any, why negate without evidence to do so?

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Your post may as well read:
"No we're not objective and logical, only anything we say and believe is."
Are you really that far gone that you fail to see the hypocrisy in that?

The sad thing some atheists seem to think they have a higher level of intelligence when they fail to see their own flaws.

Where did I refer to a 'we'?
Reading comprehension fail.

Next time, respond to what I wrote and not what you apparently wanted to respond to.

---

What valid alternatives do you have? And if you don't have any, why negate without evidence to do so?

Here's one:
Reality. Thanks to science, we've found out that reality disagrees with a literal interpretation of your silly fictional book.

[Cyberman]

Hey, you're the one who asked what would constitute evidence. All I was asking for was, to borrow your phraseology, obtainable evidence. Prayer, as promised in your holy book, would produce a tangible real-world effect, which could then be tested. If you don't want to provide any evidence that's perfectly fine by me. I'm perfectly happy to have it on record that I didn't ask for anything that you ought to consider unreasonable, at least according to your own scripture.

[AthiestAtheist]

What valid alternatives do you have? And if you don't have any, why negate without evidence to do so?

Alternative to what, exactly? No alternative is required. That is a major burden of proof fallacy. You are claiming something without proof, and without proof, there is no justification for belief.

[JoopWoop]

Your post may as well read:
"No we're not objective and logical, only anything we say and believe is."
Are you really that far gone that you fail to see the hypocrisy in that?

The sad thing some atheists seem to think they have a higher level of intelligence when they fail to see their own flaws.

Where did I refer to a 'we'?
Reading comprehension fail.

Next time, respond to what I wrote and not what you apparently wanted to respond to.

---

What valid alternatives do you have? And if you don't have any, why negate without evidence to do so?

Here's one:
Reality. Thanks to science, we've found out that reality disagrees with a literal interpretation of your silly fictional book.

Ok got it, you're not very bright.

---

What valid alternatives do you have? And if you don't have any, why negate without evidence to do so?

Alternative to what, exactly? No alternative is required. That is a major burden of proof fallacy. You are claiming something without proof, and without proof, there is no justification for belief.

So no explanation for existence is required? It's safe to assume that existence simply is, no proof required. Somehow this isn't a belief, but do tell me more.

---

Geez usually atheists at least tend to be smarter than the average idiot. WTF happened here?

[AthiestAtheist]

So no explanation for existence is required? It's safe to assume that existence simply is, no proof required. Somehow this isn't a belief, but do tell me more.

Saying that existence requires an explanation is a belief, I am simply not saying that it requires an explanation, but that is irrelevant. You keep changing the subject, so I ask you to read this again:

You are claiming something without proof, and without proof, there is no justification for belief.

Instead of running around calling people stupid, you could instead try, I don't know... thinking!

[JoopWoop]

So no explanation for existence is required? It's safe to assume that existence simply is, no proof required. Somehow this isn't a belief, but do tell me more.

Saying that existence requires an explanation is a belief, I am simply not saying that it requires an explanation, but that is irrelevant. You keep changing the subject, so I ask you to read this again:

You are claiming something without proof, and without proof, there is no justification for belief.

Instead of running around calling people stupid, you could instead try, I don't know... thinking!

Yes everything requires nothing. I haven't claimed anything, yet you claim I have. I just remain open to the possibility in the absence of proof either way, yet the 'thinking' position requires negation without justification as "Saying that existence requires an explanation is a belief."

This makes no sense whatsoever.

[Epimethean]

But you see, the fact that we find no evidence of thought in his posts cannot be used as evidence that there is no thought: Ergo, he must really think profoundly because we cannot understand him.

More rubbish from the wasteland lovers of monorailism.

[AthiestAtheist]

But you see, the fact that we find no evidence of thought in his posts cannot be used as evidence that there is no thought: Ergo, he must really think profoundly because we cannot understand him.

More rubbish from the wasteland lovers of monorailism.

Lolz0rz! That must totally be his thinking!

---

Also, monorailism isn't a word.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Ok got it, you're not very bright.

Ah, you say that as though your criticism matters.

You've talked a great deal about how intelligent you are and yet you present points you yourself won't even bother to defend despite the fact that, as you say, you make such great sport in making us look like idiots.
Well, you've talked a big game and failed to deliver. You've presented your points and when push came to shove, your really best method of arguing your position is to hurl insults.

No one is impressed. In short...

Geez usually atheists at least tend to be smarter than the average idiot. WTF happened here?

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you, the amazing JoopWoop, otherwise known as the man who has nothing to excuse himself from his own idiocy. He can't defend his own points, so he has now stooped to the lowest common denominator. Calling everyone stupid.