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

More interesting is the idea of someone that claims to be an agnostic but, is so dogmatically attached to ignorance as a virtue that they have completely lost the ability to reason or communicate. Just goes to show that fundamentalist dogmatism makes fools of everyone that goes that way.

 

IF it makes you feel good about yourself to claim that I am "all worked up"...knock yourself out.

I'm having a ball here...and filling the time I would normally be spending on the course.

Your assertion that there are no gods...is nothing but a blind guess about what does or does not exist in the REALITY of existence.

Obviously you cannot see that...but it goes with the territory of being an atheist of your type.

No problem. I do not hold it against you.

Continue to make the blind guesses...and I will continue to be dismissive of them.

 

Being happy with it within yourself is fine, it is the endless repetition, insertion of the inanity into every conversation and belief that no one understands the consequence of ignorance that is ridiculous. Idiot savant comes to mind, a legend in it's own lunchtime.

 

Good point!

Never thought of anyone as a fanatical agnostic before but given what Frank is posting the description is appropriate.

And yes, anyone who embraces dogmatism over and above logic and reason is, by definition, a fanatic.

 

William...how ya been, man?

Still following me around.

I appreciate the dedication.

 

What I find incredibly interesting and always have is how similar the theistic dogmatist argument is to the agnostic dogmatist argument. They look like two sides of that same coin.

 

You are aligning yourself with silliness here, Derideo.

My position is that we do not know if gods exist or not...and that anyone asserting in EITHER direction...is simply offering a guess about the REALITY.

Why do you suppose that agnostic position is inappropriate? That I should stifle it in favor of "there are no gods" or "there is at least one god/"

Why do you consider my position to be "dogmatic?"



Anyway, we do agree on so many other things in the forum...I will be satisfied with that.

 

"There is at least one god" and "There are no gods"...are two sides to one coin.

The agnostic position is not either side. For the most part...the agnostic position IS THE COIN.

 

The reference to "so many" is that like 20 atheists or 100 atheists because I've never heard any atheist claim that it can be scientifically proven god doesn't exist.

More importantly whether god exists or not is irrelevant because atheists only address the fact that all of the "religious gods" were inventions of men.

This seems to be a recurring theme for religious believers. They're concerned about "their god" while atheists aren't concerned about any gods. Religious believers want the atheist to address god because that's the religious believer's playing field but the atheist isn't even interested in the game.

How about this. If you believe in god then you prove that the god you believe in exists. Are you a Christian? Then what evidence do you have other than hearsay for the existence of Jesus and even if that existence could be established then what evidence other than hearsay to you have that Jesus was a god (or demigod as described in the New Testament)? Don't show me that evidence because frankly I don't care about it anyway because I'm an atheist.

 

Not worthy of even caring about. What we do know is that whether god exists or not is not relevant to mankind because all religions are the inventions of men.

 

Whether it is relevant of not...is not relevant, Shiva...because the discussion here is about whether or not an assertion "gods exist" or "no gods exist"...is a guess or not.

Those assertions, when made, ARE blind guesses.

(I agree with you that most atheist do not even say "no gods exist" let alone, that it is 100% proven that gods do not exist. But if you listen to the Nazi...he is one of those atheists. He insists that HE has proven that gods do not exist...and that there is something "wrong" with me for not accepting that he and others have proven it.)

 

Well, I for one am an agnostic, not a theist. Though, I do lean towards Deism, as I have stated before. I do not make any claims either way, but I know several atheists, and theists who do, and neither can show any proof. Look at Bill Maher. He is as close to a fundamentalist atheist as one can get, and he commonly states outright that there is no god, and anyone who believes in any god is a moron who needs to look at the "facts".. When asked to point ot the facts he claims to back up atheism, and show direct evidence supporting them, he often attacks those making the requests as "stupid" and "ignorant".

 

And since the very concept of god is a creation of religion it is logical to conclude there is no god

 

No personal offense intended, Frank, and I apologize if it came across in that way.

But to answer your question you are being dogmatic per the definition of the term.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/dogmatic

Your fallacious allegation that atheists who deny the existence of god(s) are just making a "blind guess" is wrong. Theists base their position on their beliefs and their faith. Atheists base their position upon reason and logic to arrive at their conclusion. To allege, against all logic and reason on your part, that atheists must be making a "blind guess" without anything to support your position is dogmatism on your part.

And just to clarify, I have no problem whatsoever with your personal position as an agnostic. I support your right to claim that you don't personally see sufficient reason to go either way.

But it is your dogmatic assertion that atheists are just "blindly guessing" that crosses the line into fanaticism. Atheists are using reason and the lack of evidence to reach a logical conclusion. To insist that it is only a "blind guess" is dogmatism on your part.

That is the reason why I stopped wasting time even discussing this topic with you just as I will stop wasting time discussing "creation science" with fundamentalist Christians who dogmatically insist that there was an "Intelligent Designer" even though there is zero evidence for their allegation.

Agnostics are within their rights to say that they don't personally find there to be sufficient evidence either way but to insist that others must accept your personal version of agnosticism as the only answer is no different to those who dogmatically insist that there is a "creator". Atheists don't care whether someone is a theist, agnostic or even a fellow atheist. They are not "threatened" by those other positions the way that fundamentalist theists are "threatened" by the lack of evidence of their "creator". Your position is "threatened" by everyone who doesn't agree with you that all other positions must be "blind guesses" and that puts you into the category of a dogmatic fundamentalist because, as the saying goes, the shoe fits!

That is how I am perceiving your position on this topic and my opinion is worth exactly what you just paid for it.

I have answered your question and you are free to continue to espouse your fundamentalist agnosticism just as others are free to expose the illogicality of your dogmatic allegation about atheists.

Peace
DT

 

How about "There are no proven Gods".....seems the logical statement.

 

My allegation is specific:

Anyone who asserts there are no gods...IS JUST SHARING A BLIND GUESS ABOUT THE REALITY.

And they are.

Their "beliefs" are blind guesses...just as the "beliefs" of theists are blind guesses.

If you must consider that dogmatism...do so. It is not.

Okay.

There is nothing logical about asserting there are no gods. NOTHING.

If the assertion is a rejection of the belief in gods...fine. That makes sense.

But the assertion "there are no gods" is as much a blind guess as the assertion "there is at least one god."

This is so clear to me I have trouble understanding why you do not get it.

Okay...if you do not want to discuss it with me...fine with me.

But that "Intelligent Design" thing is sorta my point. There is zero (unambiguous) evidence that Intelligent Design occurred. The same thing goes for "there are no gods" though. There is ZERO evidence that there are no gods. The fact that there is zero evidence that there ARE gods...is not evidence that there are no gods.

I think you are wrong here.

My reasoning would go like this:

There is ZERO evidence that there is any sentient life on any planet circling any of the nearest 15 stars to Sol. ZERO!

That lack of evidence of life on any of those planets IS NOT EVIDENCE that there is no life there.

At best, one can say there is no evidence for or against sentient life there.

If some one would assert to you, "There is no life on any of those planets"...you would laugh at them...just as you would laugh at someone who asserted "There is sentient life on the fifth planet out from the sixth closest star to Sol."

I appreciate your sharing, DeRideo...and the courteous way you shared. Thanks.

Peace back at you.

Not all atheists assert "There are no gods."

I have no problem with them. But the atheists like the Nazi...who insist that gods do not exist...ARE BLINDLY GUESSING.

 

That seems to be a very logical statement, Tecoyah.

I certainly do not know of any "god" that has been proven. And I strongly suspect no gods will ever be shown to exist. (That is my blind guess.)

 

Nope it is a logical conclusion which you have failed to challenge. It is not a blind guess which you know and has been proven to you

 

Certainly not. If Your nervous laughter is the best you can do to respond and if it makes you feel less like a loser be my guest.

 

And you left out

I do not know what a god is so the rest of my positions are meaningless.

 

Look Frank, it's very simple, as people have pointed out over and over again. Your position is refuted by a simple counter argument (also known as a reductio ad absurdum argument in logic, which I'm sure you already know, because you fancy yourself a logician): Your position entails the following:

I do not know if Santa Claus exists or not;
I see no reason to suspect Santa Claus CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of Santa Claus is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that Santa Claus MUST EXIST...that Santa Claus is 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.

Your argument justifies an obviously absurd conclusion, which means it must be rejected. Now you will give your stock reply: If YOU want to debate Santa Claus with toddlers fine...blah, blah, blah. But here's the thing, it's absolutely right to suggest that making this claim is the type of reasoning one would expect when talking with toddlers. This type of argument should only be seen in conversations with them. But the reason why this is true (which is a step that you consistently fail to notice) is because you have constructed an argument that is fit only for toddlers; it is an utterly infantile claim. It's your argument. That's the point. Refusing to talk about it is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and say "la la la la." Your position justifies something stupid, and as a result is easily dismissed as nonsense.

 

Something, somewhere that might have done something at some point is meaningless for sure but, it's all we have to work with in the absence of some honesty.

 

No. I'm sad because a mind (yours) is a terrible thing to waste.

 

Here is your argument put another way:

There is ZERO evidence that there is a laptop with the secrets to renewable energy on the moon. ZERO!

That lack of evidence of a laptop on the moon IS NOT EVIDENCE that there is no laptop with such secrets on the moon.

At best, one can say there is no evidence for or against a laptop with the secrets to renewable energy on the moon.

If some one would assert to you, "There is no laptop with the secrets to renewable energy on the moon"...you would laugh at them...just as you would laugh at someone who asserted "There is a laptop with the secrets of renewable energy on the moon."

See why this doesn't work? The lack of evidence for such a laptop is a good reason for NASA not spending billions of dollars looking for it - because it is more rational to claim that no such laptop exists. If it is just a 50/50 (blind) guess as you suggest, they would be completely justified in going back to the moon to look for it.

 

Wrong! Since there is no agreed upon definition or attributes to god here is one that will prove insisting gods do not exist is correct.

Definition-god: A fictitious creation of the human imagination.

No gods exist is now proven by definition. Are we done here?