The Passion...

[eegah]

eegah-
I believe in things when there is evidence to support them. There is no evidence for a god, so I don't believe. That does not mean that I'm arrogant ("To be atheist, you must believe nothing bigger exists, so essentially you think you're the center of the universe") or that I believe in nothing. I really get tired of hearing that so excuse me if I seem annoyed.

understood. You know what, I guess I'm pretty much an atheist. I'm a bit fried to a crisp, so please dont take offense. I havent thought about this in a while. I used to say I was an athiest, and people always said you dont believe in anything and I was sick of explaning my position, so I said I was agnostic. I was actually thinking about this today at work and realized the error of my ways. So if you erase all the crap I said back there, I still believe what I said, not the thing about you being silly.  sorry

Apology accepted 

[eegah]

Item 3: Prove God doesn't exist. Do it. Now. Don't present evidence. Evidence is not the same thing as solid proof. PROVE it. Without a shadow of a doubt. 100%.

No. It is not the unbelievers job to prove that nothing exists. The person who claims something has to prove it exists.

Nothing is a something. It's a factor in our reality. Bits of our mathmatics system is based on this. I think my challenge stands.

Prove that the Bigfoot doesn't exist. Do it. Now. PROVE IT. ... Oh, you can't? I guess you have to believe in it then!
Prove that the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist. Do it. Now. PROVE IT. ... Oh, you can't? I guess you have to believe in her then!
Prove that Zeus doesn't exist. Do it. Now. PROVE IT. ... Oh, you can't? I guess you have to believe in him then!
Prove that Aliens with Anal Probes don't exist. Do it. Now. PROVE IT. ... Oh, you can't? I guess you have to believe in them then!
Prove that the Loch Ness Monster doesn't exist. Do it. Now. PROVE IT. ... Oh, you can't? I guess you have to believe in it then!
...
(and so on)
...

If you believe in everything that hasn't been proven false, you will believe in an almost infinite number of false ideas.

[Pak-Man]

But that doesn't mean the possibility of each of those things being true doesn't exist either.

[mrthejazz]

I think Mel Gibson would make an excellent guest riffer.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

I'm not here to win anyone over.  That's not my job.  My job is to piss you off and make you think for a change, rather than vomit the same 10 talking points that christians have used since they bilked their first old person for all their money with promises of greater rewards in their house of gold that contains all their dead pets.

i prefer you just try and make logical arguments instead of silly emotional ones please we are supposed to be adults and all. 

You wouldn't run around saying

"No gods is a something."

Because that would be moronic, even though you tried to do that above.

Because again I am not the one making the assertion. Lets turn this around, if I was to make an absolutely ridiculous assertion, lets say..

True but the CONCEPT of no god is something, thats the SOMETHING that we were asking for proof of. 

Your inability to disprove this, in no way makes it true.

It no way makes it false, both statement have been stated repeatedly in this thread without any REAL progress on what this implies. 

It implies as far as im concerned that beleif in either A is not true or A is true is irrelevant.  You can make no progress on the topic and it is stalled, but with as many supposed relativists on this board as there are it would seem silly to say you shouldnt beleive either way. 

[ScottotD]

Some things are just worth not knowing for sure.

Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends.  There are some things we don't want to know, important things!

[eegah]

But that doesn't mean the possibility of each of those things being true doesn't exist either.

No, but a very small percentage of all of the "possibly true" things in the universe will actually be true. It's better to believe in things that have evidence supporting them than to believe in EVERYTHING.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

No, but a very small percentage of all of the "possibly true" things in the universe will actually be true. It's better to believe in things that have evidence supporting them than to believe in EVERYTHING.

why?  Is there some sort of contest that i dont know about?  be the man who knows the most accurate information about the universe and win a free toaster?  if there is no god then there is no consequence, beleif in any thing superflous is irrelevent.  it because a vastly utilitarian world. 

[ScottotD]

What if you're believing in the wrong god or not interpreting him right? would you still get points for trying?

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

some people belevie yes you do get those "points".

[ScottotD]

I know, it amuses me.  Some people also believe there's double-bonus secret squirrel points for vilifying those that don't share your world view.



Actually, besides the whole not believing in god thing.  It's the hateful, needless and downright stupid shit pulled by people in the name of religion thats probably keeps he away the most.  Everything from the Pope to hate crimes to hiding pedophile priests. 


..that and the terrible/preachy TV shows.

[Tarantulas]

I'm not here to win anyone over.  That's not my job.  My job is to piss you off and make you think for a change, rather than vomit the same 10 talking points that christians have used since they bilked their first old person for all their money with promises of greater rewards in their house of gold that contains all their dead pets.

i prefer you just try and make logical arguments instead of silly emotional ones please we are supposed to be adults and all. 

You wouldn't run around saying

"No gods is a something."

Because that would be moronic, even though you tried to do that above.

Because again I am not the one making the assertion. Lets turn this around, if I was to make an absolutely ridiculous assertion, lets say..

True but the CONCEPT of no god is something, thats the SOMETHING that we were asking for proof of. 

Your inability to disprove this, in no way makes it true.

It no way makes it false, both statement have been stated repeatedly in this thread without any REAL progress on what this implies. 

It implies as far as im concerned that beleif in either A is not true or A is true is irrelevant.  You can make no progress on the topic and it is stalled, but with as many supposed relativists on this board as there are it would seem silly to say you shouldnt beleive either way. 

The proof of gods supposed existence lies in those that believe.  And "because he said so" isn't a good enough answer.

Making decisions based on a irrational belief in ghosts isn't something worthy of respect or a tax break.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

so no hope in getting a rational argument against our stupid superstious beleives?

[Tarantulas]

But that doesn't mean the possibility of each of those things being true doesn't exist either.

The bottom line is that their existence is HIGHLY unlikely since there is no way to scientifically prove their existence.

[Tarantulas]

so no hope in getting a rational argument against our stupid superstious beleives?

The rational argument is this....

Prove to me that god exists using anything other than anecdotal evidence.

Until then, it's just you talking to yourself and believing in ghosts.

The burden of proof lies with the believer, not with the skeptic.

The cop out is that believers don't need proof, so real evidence is ever given.