God probably exists ii

[watsup]

What if your incapable of correctly interpreting any evidence?

There is no evidence that is true. Zyg has shown himself to be very intelligent and capable.

 

[watsup]

Not sure if you phrased that back to front by mistake, so let me assume you did and your saying that the advocate for X must define X.

Well perhaps but no atheists has asked for this so far as I can tell, they've simply said "Show us evidence" or "300 posts and still no evidence" and so on, this is what I've seen so far anyway.

What they really mean is "convince us to agree with you" not "show us evidence".



You do realize that this claim itself requires evidence? God might have created the universe and therefore its presence could be evidence of that act, so you cannot say unequivocally that the existence of the universe is absolutely, not evidence for God unless you provide evidence in support of this claim and that would be proof that it arose from some process other than God and that claim would require evidence like such a purported process does actually exist and can lead to the spontaneous emergence of matter and laws of nature and so on.

Can you do that?

Simply not true. Logic requires that a POSITIVE statement requires evidence. If there is no evidence for that statement, then it is logically assumed to be nonsense. Like “the universe is evidence of God”. Pure nonsense.

 

[Big Eye]

There is no such thing. This has been pointed out to you before.

Nobody believes in atheism. Just as nobody who doesn't collect stamps is a stamp collector.




No it absolutely has not. Complete nonsense you can't begin to support with any logical data.
Especially since the "belief in atheism" part is a false premise to being with.

Your arguments are old tired ones. Atheists believe the universe was not made intentionally...that's a ****ing belief that leads to other definite conclusions.

Communism is an example of a murdering atheistic political system.

 

[watsup]

Your point about evolution is a belief, it is unproven ...for instance why did atoms form life, what benefit is there for atoms to do such a thing ?

As I have said this could be a universe of correlation caused by the programmer.

If a force (like consciousness) is entirely natural then it may exist beyond where we assume.

Evolution is not a belief. It is a scientific fact that has huge amounts of fossil evidence.

 

[Dragonfly]

Your arguments are old tired ones. Atheists believe the universe was not made intentionally...that's a ****ing belief that leads to other definite conclusions.

Communism is an example of a murdering atheistic political system.

You're ignorance is astounding.

1) nobody ever said atheists don't believe stuff

2) communism is a political ideology

3) atheism does not equal communism, communism does not equal atheism, never has never will

Males commit rape in astronomical numbers. Because you're a male, you're a rapist. That's your entire argument here. It's pathetic.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So you just go around telling others what they think and believe, while ignoring what they actually tell you they think and believe.

Not at all, I simply disagree with you that atheists don't share beliefs because it seems to me that this is untrue, it seems from my experiences here in these forums at least, that they all believe there's no evidence for God.

 

[Big Eye]

Evolution is not a belief. It is a scientific fact that has huge amounts of fossil evidence.

Adaptation need not be caused by the species that are "evolving", there may be a program outside of those species that causes them to adapt. I know this might go over your head but I can be fairly persistent lol.

 

[watsup]

Your arguments are old tired ones. Atheists believe the universe was not made intentionally...that's a ****ing belief that leads to other definite conclusions.

Communism is an example of a murdering atheistic political system.

Atheism in no way condones murder. I have never heard a communist dictator tyrant say that it does. If they murder people, it is because they are evil, not because they are atheists. One does not follow the other.

 

[Big Eye]

Not at all, I simply disagree with you that atheists don't share beliefs because it seems to me that this is untrue, it seems from my experiences here in these forums at least, that they all believe there's no evidence for God.

Atheism demands that the believer thinks that the universe is unintended...an unproven belief.

 

[Big Eye]

Atheism in no way condones murder. I have never heard a communist dictator tyrant say that it does. If they murder people, it is because they are evil, not because they are atheists. One does not follow the other.

Atheism leads directly to moral relativism...it must because atheists think morals are subjective human constructs.

 

[watsup]

Adaptation need not be caused by the species that are "evolving", there may be a program outside of those species that causes them to adapt. I know this might go over your head but I can be fairly persistent lol.

It does not go over my head, or the head of any other atheist. Ad hom like that does not contribute to reasoned discussion. You are simply adding a condition.that has no merit and no evidence. It is superfluous and unneeded. I could just as easily say that it is wood fairies who created an evolution program and it would be every bit as silly as your conclusions.

 

[watsup]

Atheism leads directly to moral relativism...it must because atheists think morals are subjective human constructs.

As someone stated yesterday, all ethical and moral systems are based on relativism. Thousands shalt not kill— except in war and self defense. Etc etc etc....

 

[RAMOSS]

Adaptation need not be caused by the species that are "evolving", there may be a program outside of those species that causes them to adapt. I know this might go over your head but I can be fairly persistent lol.

Why whould that be? Let's see you come up with a model to back up that speculation.

 

[Dragonfly]

Not at all, I simply disagree with you that atheists don't share beliefs because it seems to me that this is untrue, it seems from my experiences here in these forums at least, that they all believe there's no evidence for God.

You like to play silly words games don't you?

I'm sure the world is chock-full of atheists who believe intelligent life exists outside this planet we call earth.

I'm sure plenty of atheists believe Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster are, or were real.

Many believe that one day, if they keep playing the lottery they'll win.

Atheists believe all kinds of crap. Just like Theists do.


Do you believe in Brahma? Vishnu? Shiva?



This idea of "belief in evidence" that you're playing like a trump (no political pun intended) card is worthless nonsense.
It's not a "I win" scenario you've concocted.

It's just a silly semantics game with goal posts you move willy-nilly when challenged.

 

[Big Eye]

It does not go over my head, or the head of any other atheist. Ad hom like that does not contribute to reasoned discussion. You are simply adding a condition.that has no merit and no evidence. It is superfluous and unneeded. I could just as easily say that it is wood fairies who created an evolution program and it would be every bit as silly as your conclusions.

You accept that nature appears to follow laws...well maybe it's those laws that are making changes to species.You can call it evolution if you like ,but there is no proof that it is caused by the species themselves...the cause may lie outside of them.

 

[Dragonfly]

Atheism leads directly to moral relativism...it must because atheists think morals are subjective human constructs.

Oh please...

What morals are NOT subjective human constructs?

 

[Dragonfly]

Atheism demands that the believer thinks that the universe is unintended...an unproven belief.

Atheism has no demands regarding the universe.

It's unbelievable (pun intended) that you keep arguing this way.

 

[Big Eye]

As someone stated yesterday, all ethical and moral systems are based on relativism. Thousands shalt not kill— except in war and self defense. Etc etc etc....

Well you can believe that if you like, but the main religions have definite actions that you should not do...like murder etc. Death in war need not be murder...if hoards of marauding Mongols are invading your land you are allowed to defend yourself.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

There is no evidence that is true. Zyg has shown himself to be very intelligent and capable.

Except when it comes to spelling his own name.

 

[Dragonfly]

Well you can believe that if you like, but the main religions have definite actions that you should not do...like murder etc. Death in war need not be murder...if hoards of marauding Mongols are invading your land you are allowed to defend yourself.

Do you honestly think if not for religion people would just murder each other???

 

[RAMOSS]

You accept that nature appears to follow laws...well maybe it's those laws that are making changes to species.You can call it evolution if you like ,but there is no proof that it is caused by the species themselves...the cause may lie outside of them.

Here you are doing a misunderstanding. What the 'laws of nature' , as used by scientists (Laws by the way is an obsolete term that has grandfathered principles in it, but is not used anymore) is descriptive, not prohibitive. It describes what happens. (doesn't even say WHY it happens that way).

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

You like to play silly words games don't you?

I'm sure the world is chock-full of atheists who believe intelligent life exists outside this planet we call earth.

I'm sure plenty of atheists believe Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster are, or were real.

Many believe that one day, if they keep playing the lottery they'll win.

Atheists believe all kinds of crap. Just like Theists do.


Do you believe in Brahma? Vishnu? Shiva?



This idea of "belief in evidence" that you're playing like a trump (no political pun intended) card is worthless nonsense.
It's not a "I win" scenario you've concocted.

It's just a silly semantics game with goal posts you move willy-nilly when challenged.

Well nothing you've said there makes me want to alter my view that atheists all believe there's no evidence for God, how about you find an atheist who does believe there's some evidence for God, that'll sway me.

 

[Big Eye]

Why whould that be? Let's see you come up with a model to back up that speculation.

The "model" is simple correlation that is caused by the programmer. so , for instance, if you were playing a driving simulation and the car you were "driving" crashed into a tree ...that crash would be a correlation caused by the program....the tree and the car wouldn't cause the crash, the program would. That's not a perfect example but goes a little way to explain how correlation could look like causation.

 

[RAMOSS]

The "model" is simple correlation that is caused by the programmer. so , for instance, if you were playing a driving simulation and the car you were "driving" crashed into a tree ...that crash would be a correlation caused by the program....the tree and the car wouldn't cause the crash, the program would. That's not a perfect example but goes a little way to explain how correlation could look like causation.

And how is that a model? Be more precise. It sounds a vauge idea that has not meaning besides musing. Show how that works. Define how that happens, propose a test that is proven true, falsifies that concept. That's not a model, that is a poor word game.

 

[Big Eye]

Do you honestly think if not for religion people would just murder each other???

Well the only "civilisations" that acted against religions were murdering cesspits...so it would probably go that way if history tells us anything.