Atheists Favorite Argument

[DrewPaul]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

 

[Dragonfly]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in a god or gods.
That’s all.

I have no clue what your word salad post refers to, or what you think atheists favorite arguments are.

I’m sure many atheists argue far more about sports/music/politics than whatever you’re going on about.

 

[Quag]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

The only thing I got out of that was that you appear to claim your belief is evidence that your belief is true.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

There is not a shred of evidence for any magical sky daddy.

That's not the "favorite" argument of atheists. It's the only argument, amd the only one any rational person needs.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a magical sky daddy.

You employ this exact same argument for countless ideas. You just suspend your faculties of reason when it comes to the magical sky daddy.

Ironically, your thread highlights you and your problem and nobody else's.

 

[DrewPaul]

Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in a god or gods.
That’s all.

Right. Atheists lack the belief theists have that the the universe was intentionally caused to exist. However they usually say the reason they lack belief is because they allege their is no evidence our existence was intentionally caused. That's not true. They can say its not convincing evidence, its crappy evidence. They can say it doesn't persuade them or they can claim to have better evidence it was naturalistic forces all the way down.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Evidence that god does not exist.

Cancer.
Covid.
Child molesters.
Fascism.
Birth defects.
Disco.

Need I go on?

 

[DrewPaul]

The only thing I got out of that was that you appear to claim your belief is evidence that your belief is true.

No my belief didn't conjure facts f1-f4 to exist.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Right. Atheists lack the belief theists have that the the universe was intentionally caused to exist.

Right, because atheists lack the belief in a sky daddy, period.

 

[devildavid]

Evidence comes in two flavors? You are using legal terms, not scientific ones. Science is not decided upon in a courtroom. Evidence means it must be factual and independently verifiable, as in science. You can't infer the supernatural into existence.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Evidence comes in two flavors? You are using legal terms, not scientific ones. Science is not decided upon in a courtroom. Evidence means it must be factual and independently verifiable, as in science. You can't infer the supernatural into existence.

He really struggles with the entire concept of "evidence".

 

[DrewPaul]

Evidence that god does not exist.

Cancer.
Covid.
Child molesters.
Fascism.
Birth defects.
Disco.

Need I go on?

That's a theological argument. They say God lives everywhere except some parts of NJ. I'm not promoting any particular creator. Scientists in alternative universe will do. They might not have done an ideal job of it.

 

[Galactic Spin]

That's a theological argument. They say God lives everywhere except some parts of NJ. I'm not promoting any particular creator. Scientists in alternative universe will do. They might not have done an ideal job of it.

Just as likely: rainbow unicorns made it out of their own poop.

 

[DrewPaul]

Evidence comes in two flavors? You are using legal terms, not scientific ones. Science is not decided upon in a courtroom. Evidence means it must be factual and independently verifiable, as in science. You can't infer the supernatural into existence.

Not all questions have been or can be settled scientifically. Wish they could. But if you can scientifically prove the universe and life was caused by sheer happenstance please do so.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

Of what purpose or value do you have in other's beliefs?

Here's my take. God exists but not the way He is portrayed in Religion as religion is an invention to control you, your mind, your culture and your body. As soon as y0ou express a belief or challenge another's you are merely attempting to make everyone like you.

Most religions install fear in you at an early age. Most religions also demand tribute in cash or kind.

As soon as someone mentions money I know God left the room

 

[devildavid]

That's a theological argument. They say God lives everywhere except some parts of NJ. I'm not promoting any particular creator. Scientists in alternative universe will do. They might not have done an ideal job of it.

There is absolutely no independently verifiable evidence of these scientists or the alternative universe that they are from.

 

[AGENT J]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

????
tell us you have no clue what atheism is without tell us you have no clue what atheism is

ill never understand false dishonest and or ignorant narratives like this

signed a Christian

 

[Galactic Spin]

But if you can scientifically prove the universe and life was caused by sheer happenstance please do so.

Tell us what you think that evidence would look like. If you can't, then how would you know someone has proven it to you?

So, tell us.

 

[devildavid]

Not all questions have been or can be settled scientifically. Wish they could. But if you can scientifically prove the universe and life was caused by sheer happenstance please do so.

Science never claimed to be done yet. Science doesn't prove things, it observes, records, and tests to verify independently. Science cannot make something up without evidence. It can only expalin physical things and processes to the best of its ability. It doesn't make subjective value statements as you are doing.

 

[DrewPaul]

There is absolutely no independently verifiable evidence of these scientists or the alternative universe that they are from.

There isn't any direct evidence. You have to infer it from facts F1-F4. And you don't have to believe it or be persuaded...it is circumstantial evidence which is all we have. Its all we have for dark matter and dark energy.

 

[FreeStorm84]

Disco.

I'm curious why this is last on your list.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

You list 4 facts.

Then you say they are evidence.

While completely neglecting to argue why they are evidence.

This may be how it works in church, but it's not how things work in educated company.

 

[DrewPaul]

Science never claimed to be done yet. Science doesn't prove things, it observes, records, and tests to verify independently. Science cannot make something up without evidence. It can only expalin physical things and processes to the best of its ability. It doesn't make subjective value statements as you are doing.

Yes they infer the existence of things often. There is no direct evidence dark matter exists. The circumstantial evidence is so strong no one doubts it does.

 

[DrewPaul]

I'm curious why this is last on your list.

Should have been first?

 

[The Mark]

Is the claim there is no evidence, facts, data or any reason at all to believe the existence of the universe and intelligent life was intentionally caused to occur. This claim is essential to atheism because by ruling theism out as a possibility, there is no need to defend the counter claim the universe and intelligent life occurred by happenstance.

Evidence comes in two flavors, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. A video of a suspect with a knife about to stab someone is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence an inference from the facts must be drawn. Normally a spaghetti stain on a shirt of a suspect wouldn't be evidence of anything unless they found spaghetti in the victims stomach. In that case the stain makes it more probable the suspect is guilty.

Evidence are facts that support or make a contention more or less probable than minus said fact. Evidence alone is not proof. There are three general levels of proof. Scientific proof. Very rigorous usually meaning a conclusive experiment can be performed by other scientists with the same results. Criminal proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt with direct or circumstantial evidence. Finally there is in civil cases a mere preponderance of evidence in favor of a claim is all that's needed.

No one really knows why (or how) the universe came into existence or why it resulted in intelligent humans existing. It is a low a information question. There is no direct evidence of how or why it came to exist. We could look at it like detectives do at a crime scene and figuratively put yellow tape up around the entire universe. Anything in the universe is potential evidence.

F1. The universe exists. This is a foundational fact. If the universe didn't exist neither claim would be true. This fact is evidence of either claim.
F2. Intelligent life exists. This is a foundational claim of theism. Theists believe the universe was intentionally caused and designed for intelligent life. Mindless naturalistic forces don't have to cause any life or intelligent life.
F3. The universe is fine-tuned for life. For the belief the universe was intentionally caused for life to exist it must be in a configuration that allows life to exist. No one can claim intelligent life had to exist. No one would predict or expect mindless forces minus any plan or intent cause life to exist. This evidence is so powerful it's the basis of multiverse theory.
F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research and the laws of logic deduction and induction and is also explicable in mathematical terms.

Theism is a belief, an opinion. This doesn't prove we owe our existence to a Creator. It is evidence. that favors that belief.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence that the universe was created intentionally.
Nor any evidence that the solar system or planet was created intentionally.

All the evidence instead points to it being happenstance, or rather the application of natural laws.
Granted, it seems apparent that our understanding of those natural laws is incomplete as of yet, and may never be complete.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

I'm curious why this is last on your list.

A humorous addition because I hated it even as a kid.