OK Atheists.......prove god doesn't exist

Is that the reason you are sad?

 

Actually, I agree with most of what you said here.

Which leads me to:

I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

 

Fine.

At this point for me it becomes redundant. Pink elephants may or may not exist. So long as channelling them in any way doesn't give you some inexplicable authority, by which pink elephants can be used to advance an argument, rather than reason and evidence, it barely matters.

 

Yeah...but the entire of existence is a great mystery.

There are atheists who think rejections of the notion of gods is a result of logic, reason, or science.

IT ISN'T!

The position "there is a god" and its counterpart "there are no gods"...

...are both nothing but blind guesses about the true nature of the REALITY of existence.

That is my point. And anyone who blindly guesses that there are no gods...and who wants to pretend that that blind guess is somehow intellectually superior to the blind guess that at least one god exists...

...has to be corrected.

Which is what I am doing.

 

A being had the power to create all things - the universe, light, time, atoms, sub atomic particles, suns, black holes, gas giant planets, entropy, pugs, the list goes on. Somehow, we humans were the best he could do? In his image, he created something that's one step away from feces slinging primates.

Come on. Why are we not immortal, time traveling, super-beings with the power to create our own universes and our own minion races?

Hmmm...Perhaps we ARE creating our own sub-universes. We have the power. Everything each of us does, every cross roads creating its own universal layer. The parallel universe theory would support that...

Screw that. Stupid theory and stupid conversation. This is why we need a broader higher education system. That way people will get this stuff out of their system in their sophomore year and move on to more practical matters.

 

The rejection of gods or a god is a logical and intelligent conclusion which has been proven. It is quite reasonable.

\It is not a blind guess and you know all of this to be true..

Many people including me have completely destroyed your idiotic and unsubstantiated claim and you know that as well boy.

you have proven you are cowardly and lacking in basic comprehension of logic.

Now answer.

Is it reasonable to assert that there is no Santa Clause?

And now you will prove me correct with your next post

You have corrected no one you have only been crushed and humiliated.Like many pre teen nerds who live in moms basement you think repetition is an argument but it is not especially when like you your claims have been shredded.

 

Why does it have to be corrected?

I could probably attach the atheist view to reason, i.e: it's reasonable to deny the existence of something for which there is no evidence or no logical continuity based on what we can experience/observe. There are basically two ways to make an argument, by relying on evidence, or establishing what logically follows.

A pink elephant living on a habitable planet logically follows, we have precedence for it, we know that certain environments given time and life's building blocks could produce mammals. There's no real reason to believe that some of the exoplanets we observe in our own galaxy don't have similar climates to ours. Add a fruit that affects these elephants pigmentation and hey presto.

We don't really have the same tools to explain God. God is more like saying there are pink elephants which exist in space outside of what we know as a habitable climate. Doesn't logically follow, because elephants as we know it need oxygen. So there is nothing to base it's existence on, but you technically can't disprove it.

Going back to correcting it, unless atheists start forcing people to do stuff it, specifically on account of their atheism, it doesn't matter.

 

If there are gods...what makes you think we humans are the best it can do???

We may be the gnats of the universe.

Or...gods may have wanted to see what would happen if elements were given enough time and space to do whatever gets done. GODS MAY EXISTS...and we humans may still be an accident.

We're not "one step away." We are just recently down out of the trees.

Bottom line: We do not know if gods exist or not...and anyone making a blind guess that at least one does...or a blind guess that none do...

...ARE just making blind guesses.

 

It is NOT logical, not an intelligent conclusion, it has not been proven, and it is not reasonable.

Other than those few things, I agree with you.

Actually...it is a totally blind guess.

Apparently you are unable to see that.

You are so cute when you get all worked up like this. Just adorable.

If you want to talk about Santa...go speak with a toddler...or a fellow atheist. Or maybe mommy will speak with you about it...when you get a bit older.

 

At this point you are merely stating childish and cowardly lies which is your MO.

yes it is a reasonable and intelligent conclusion and not a blind guess . That is a proven fact and you know it.

I did not ask about Santa I asked about the logic of asserting he does not exist because the same logic applies.

But as you always do you run away and expose yourself as a weak intellectual coward.

It is you getting worked up and pissed off kicking the floor and screaming at your mom upstairs because you have been bested.

Start respecting your betters BOY since you do not respect your elders

 

You are correct here, John. My bad.

I should have said...I feel it has to be corrected. And I do. I think that allowing people who blindly guess that no gods exist to suppose that they are arriving there via reason, logic, or science...is doing them a disservice. They should have their error called to their attention.

If you "could"...just do it.

My guess is...you could not show "there are no gods" to be logical or reasonable if you wrote several books on the subject. But I am willing to listen to what you have to say.

Okay.

???

If you want to talk about "God"...speak with whomever it proposing that "God."

I am talking about gods...and I would like to confine myself to that.

I am discussing the question of whether or not "No gods exist" and/or "At least one god exists"...are blind guesses or not.

If you would like to discuss that with me, John, I would love to do it.

Lots of things "don't matter"...or more properly, "may not matter."

But we discuss them, nonetheless. That is the reason for this section of this forum...to discuss things like this that may not matter.

 

Like I said, as logical as denying the existence of pink elephants outside of an atmosphere. We have no precedent for it, nothing to base it on, but can't categorically say for sure that in some realm beyond our experience elephants haven't developed means of breathing in space.

 

Or the old adage, that which can be advanced without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Because without this you can just make up whatever you like, why stop at pink elephants. Planets made of ice-cream? -- inhabited by pickle-nosed llamas whose society is based strictly on absurdism and debauchery?

 

As I mentioned, Nazi...you are so cute and adorable when you get like this. Sorta like a baby with an adorable cry.

It is not "reasonable", it is not an "intelligent conclusion"...and it is a blind guess.

If you want to discuss Santa...do it with a toddler, a fellow atheist...or with mommy.

Cute as the dickens...as they used to say!

 

Is the statement, "At least one god exists"...a blind guess or not?

 

If someone advances the assertion, "In the REALITY of existence...at least one god exists"...I would dismiss it without evidence.

In fact...I do.

If someone advances the assertion, "The REALITY of existence contains no gods"...I would dismiss it without evidence.

In fact...I do.

I'm wondering how you feel about that.

 

Like I said it is you getting worked up repeating the same debunked lie.

You hate it but you know it is true.

it is an intelligent and reasonable and logical conclusion and not a blind guess.

As evidence you will run away from the question as you always do.

Is it a blind guess to assert there is no Santa because the exact same logical standards apply.

you will prove your weakness and evade now

 

It's advancing something with no evidence.

So to flip it. What do you think of the principle 'that which can be advanced without evidence can be dismissed without evidence'?

 

Nah, Nazi, not getting worked up at all...although it is raining and I really wanted to play golf this morning.

You seem a bit agitated today, though. Raining where you are?

I do know it is true that "there are no gods" is a blind guess about the REALITY. Why would I hate it?

"There are no gods" is a blind guess. It is not intelligent, logical, nor a conclusion. It is a blind guess.

If you want to talk about Santa...go ask mommy. She'll answer your questions. Or if she won't...go ask a toddler or a fellow atheist. They love Santa. And you can talk about the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy also.

I love ya, Nazi. You've got spunk. Or is that vanilla ice cream you spilled on your trousers?

 

It seems you either get this, you don't get it or you just like trolling with it. Good to have someone else like yourself on board that understands the absurdity and is prepared to stand up for reason.

 

Yes you are all worked up and mad because as usual your illogical claims have been proven wrong.

Now the question is clearly about logic which you are woefully ignorant of.

Answer up is it illogical or unreasonable to assert there is no santa?

You will run away as always proving yourself wrong. Stating there is no god or gods is a logical and reasonable conclusion as you well know and not a blind guess

Another cowardly evasion in 5..4..3.2..1

 

Agreed!

 

Sure.

But now we're back to ice-cream planet (see how this works?).

You are saying that advancing the existence of something without evidence is the logical equivalent of denying the existence of something without evidence. Straight forward enough. But it does mean we can't deny the existence of my ice-cream planet.

If you're happy with that then fair enough, but it surely messes with the logical faculties of most.

 

Absolutely...it is advancing something with no evidence.

I prefer to call it a blind guess about the unknown REALITY.

Is there something about it that you think differentiates it from a blind guess?

I think it makes sense.

I do exactly that. When things are advanced without evidence...I tend to dismiss them without evidence.

In the case of someone advancing "There is at least one god" for instance...I normally smile and say (or write)...thank you for sharing that blind guess about what exists in the REALITY of existence.

Very dismissive!

You???

 

We are cross posting...and this gets confusing.

Reply to my last post...and when you are through...allow me to respond.