Total Posts:72|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Realization

SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:24:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

That is the nature of theism. God may give them the faith and His inspired Word. But there is no evidence He also gives them the intellect to defend existence.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:27:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
You do realize that it's also the atheists right? That's why I don't and won't post much anymore.

"So you worship a magical sky wizard!? ! Derp!"

*Now I'm waiting for some for some atheists to come in say, "Well, you DO worship a magical sky wizard so what's the problem in characterizing it as such?"
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:30:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:27:10 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
You do realize that it's also the atheists right? That's why I don't and won't post much anymore.

"So you worship a magical sky wizard!? ! Derp!"

*Now I'm waiting for some for some atheists to come in say, "Well, you DO worship a magical sky wizard so what's the problem in characterizing it as such?"

I don't usually read comments left by atheists since I disagree with a lot of them on this site. So, if that is the case, then ****.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:34:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:27:10 AM, popculturepooka wrote:

We should try again to make at least 3 good threads a week...
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:42:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Yes Ben has been making more threads lately, and Mhykeil seems to be having a break down.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:44:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

That doesn't make it just.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:47:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:44:51 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

That doesn't make it just.

No but until they come up with rebuttals that occupy our thinking minds instead of ones devoted to mockery then I don't see things changing. What would you prefer we do? Their faith makes criticism pointless.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:48:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

Problem is, most the atheists' arguments here aren't that good. They are just as bad as the theists' but they don't tend to see it as such because it's their side.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:52:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:47:46 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:44:51 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

That doesn't make it just.

No but until they come up with rebuttals that occupy our thinking minds instead of ones devoted to mockery then I don't see things changing. What would you prefer we do? Their faith makes criticism pointless.

What's the point then? Criticizing theists is not going to change anything, you should let people believe what they want to believe so long that it isn't bringing more evil/misery than good, and if it is bringing more evil then we are obligated to bring the people bringing that evil into this world to justice.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Electric-Eccentric
Posts: 1,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 11:11:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
the main problem with this world and the way that it works is that it is FILLED with people that want to believe their MANY versions of superstitious fueled make believe and pretend realities.

When you have a world that is FILLED with such superstitious thinking and beliefs you get a ME$$ for sure.

And WHERE to place the BLAME?

Some invisible God that lives in the sky, some scientific swiss cheeze theory or maybe ask the people that live up your nose?

WHAT about ME EE?

I tease ALL that play their make believe and pretend.

Why can't, won't and don't the superstitious try harder at teasing me?

Because I don't believe in ANY superstitious nonsense and concepts.

That stuff is for little children and those that are not interested in GROWING UP and taking on the responsibilities for their own thoughts and actions and not wasting their personal TIME trying to justify and place the blame else where.

Are you people that BLIND and LOST that you can't figure out that there must be a REASON that I AM that I AM?

Do you view me as EVIL and NO FUN?

Much like a small child might if I teased them about santa and such?

You say that would be EVIL to tease a little child about their belief in deceptions and lies called good?

Makes sense I guess...
Life is what YOU make it,
Most just try and fake it...
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 12:08:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:48:27 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

Problem is, most the atheists' arguments here aren't that good. They are just as bad as the theists' but they don't tend to see it as such because it's their side.

What do you think of my arguments against a creator god?
http://www.debate.org...

Still working on the kinks of it, but after discussing with a mathematician (just graduated that day actually) that has a deep understanding of philosophy, and a lot of other people yesterday (it was ask an atheist day), I think I have it at a decent level of development.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
TheUncannyN
Posts: 95
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 4:09:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Constant repetition of previously annihilated arguments, circular reasoning, appeals to scripture, willful ignorance, and adherence to old myths and fables? All of these things deserve neither respect nor serious consideration at this point. Can atheists be total jerks to theists? Sure. Do we really care that we are being jerks? Not me.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 4:12:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:52:02 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:47:46 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:44:51 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

That doesn't make it just.

No but until they come up with rebuttals that occupy our thinking minds instead of ones devoted to mockery then I don't see things changing. What would you prefer we do? Their faith makes criticism pointless.

What's the point then? Criticizing theists is not going to change anything, you should let people believe what they want to believe so long that it isn't bringing more evil/misery than good, and if it is bringing more evil then we are obligated to bring the people bringing that evil into this world to justice.

I agree. However it is the theist who strikes first with the first claim, and thus a reply is needed. Because this is just an internet forum what we say here has little to no influence IRL. But in general it is the theists who hold the majority of political power, how do we bring them to justice when they control the reigns of what constitutes justice? Time and a constant rebuttal to their theistic claims, and once they've exhausted cordial criticism then we move on to mockery.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 7:52:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:48:27 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

Problem is, most the atheists' arguments here aren't that good. They are just as bad as the theists' but they don't tend to see it as such because it's their side.

Well on here yea, it's all the same back and forth ad nausuem.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 9:34:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:42:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Yes Ben has been making more threads lately, and Mhykeil seems to be having a break down.

I'm not breaking down. I'm trying to break down a wall of sophistry and fallacious antics that the majority of Atheist use to juke and jive AWAY from logical rational discussion.

We can't have a rational discussion about god till we can agree what rational is.

My posts have been epistemological in nature, and I hope have shine some light on the pathetic tactics some use.

Like default positions. not logic. pragmatic assumptions that are assigned by atheist majority vote then even on the merit of risk assessment in type 1 +2 errors.

The party line of no evidence, which doesn't even make sense because every argument to discern truth references an observation in reality, and every argument to describe reality references a core truth. So this "no evidence" is just derision not logic.

And of course a great amount of shifting the burden. I get told to present reasons for not believing in fairies, when I didn't say they existed or not.

Atheist make every claim and want some one else to work out the logical argument.

Atheist = pathetic wind bags.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:03:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 9:34:48 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Yes Ben has been making more threads lately, and Mhykeil seems to be having a break down.

I'm not breaking down. I'm trying to break down a wall of sophistry and fallacious antics that the majority of Atheist use to juke and jive AWAY from logical rational discussion.

The same can be said of theists. Ben is a great example of a person who uses jargon and personal definitions to make incomprehensible leaps of mental gymnastics.

We can't have a rational discussion about god till we can agree what rational is.

And until we agree what God is. But my bet God will be ill defined an so watered down as to become Sagan's magic dragon.

My posts have been epistemological in nature, and I hope have shine some light on the pathetic tactics some use.

I hope I'm not one of those "some" ;)

Like default positions. not logic. pragmatic assumptions that are assigned by atheist majority vote then even on the merit of risk assessment in type 1 +2 errors.

Default positions are problematic, but idk what you mean by the vote or 1 +2 errors.

The party line of no evidence, which doesn't even make sense because every argument to discern truth references an observation in reality, and every argument to describe reality references a core truth. So this "no evidence" is just derision not logic.

not at all. If I were to claim (believe) a tsunami were coming, but the people do not see it, seismologists detect no earthquakes, no receded waters, by what logic can I continue to claim a tsunami is coming and expect others to believe me? Sure there's the black swan dilemma, but verifiable evidence is what supports logical premises. You can't expect rational mined people to take you claims at face value w/o something to show for it. That's the basis of what makes faith valuable.

And of course a great amount of shifting the burden. I get told to present reasons for not believing in fairies, when I didn't say they existed or not.

Theists made the claim first and must prove that claim. It's just that simple. The claim of the supernatural, be it God, fairies, dragons, santa etc all come from the same base of the supernatural unverifiable to exist by man. If you make a claim about your God, why can't I just completely reject all of your values and conclusions in favor of my own God, one that says your God doesn't exist? Both are epistemologically equal. Frankly anything beyond deism I find absurd and without basis.

Atheist make every claim and want some one else to work out the logical argument.

No, we wait for you to make the claim and then pick it apart.

Atheist = pathetic wind bags.

If your only understanding of atheism is from this site then sure.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:15:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:24:45 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

That is the nature of theism. God may give them the faith and His inspired Word. But there is no evidence He also gives them the intellect to defend existence.

What evidence would you expect if God did give theist an intellectual capability to discern reality?

Would it be Descartes that is called the father of philosophy and advanced the first basic principles of science because he thought real knowledge came from nature and he wrote in his third book meditations III an argument for a personal god?

Would it be Mendel called the father of genetics, a jesuit priest, who discern hereditary traits?

Would it be Newton with his advances of Optics and Gravity, who thought the bible was the secret to all knowledge and had a code in it, from god?

Would it be Edward Jenner who came up with a vaccination to eliminate Small Px off the earth, who was a devout religious man and said "The deviation of man from the state in which he was originally placed by nature seems to have proved to him a prolific source of diseases."... and "I am not surprised that men are not thankful to me; but I wonder that they are not grateful to God for the good which he has made me the instrument of conveying to my fellow-creatures."

Would it be Max Plank who the quantization of energy and time are named after in physics who said "Both religion and science need for their activities the belief in God, and moreover God stands for the former in the beginning, and for the latter at the end of the whole thinking. For the former, God represents the basis, for the latter " the crown of any reasoning concerning the world-view."

Luis Pasteur, Kepler, Galileo, Copernicus, Francis Bacon, Boyle, Heisenberg, William Thompson Kelvin, Muhammad ibn Musa Al-Khwarizmi (Algebra), and onward...

Do these names sound familiar to you? They are the giants of Science and Math.

Also Pope Benedict XVI wrote an argument called "The Argument from Intelligibility" which says God gives man rational minds to find God.

And the roots of so many peoples positivism, evidentialism, (and other such fallacious elevations of methodologies to being applicable Logic to all inquiry), HAS it's roots in Methodological Naturalism (remember the idea that Nature is an educator of God) espoused by popes and theist philosophers of nature (that's what they used to call scientist).

So yeah keep it up with the party line. just say there is no evidence over and over again. Don't want theist to have an impact on science, just say there is no evidence for such. Hey remember you can;t prove a negative so when challenged just say you can;t prove there is no evidence.

Page right out of the play book. "Sophistry 101: or how to argue atheism"
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:18:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 12:08:12 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:48:27 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

Problem is, most the atheists' arguments here aren't that good. They are just as bad as the theists' but they don't tend to see it as such because it's their side.

What do you think of my arguments against a creator god?
http://www.debate.org...

Still working on the kinks of it, but after discussing with a mathematician (just graduated that day actually) that has a deep understanding of philosophy, and a lot of other people yesterday (it was ask an atheist day), I think I have it at a decent level of development.

I don't think a B theory of time negates God. I have even argue that from God's view time is static from beginning to end. While the entities inside time are presented with real choices. Temporal relativity so to speak.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:30:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:03:10 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 9:34:48 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Yes Ben has been making more threads lately, and Mhykeil seems to be having a break down.

I'm not breaking down. I'm trying to break down a wall of sophistry and fallacious antics that the majority of Atheist use to juke and jive AWAY from logical rational discussion.

The same can be said of theists. Ben is a great example of a person who uses jargon and personal definitions to make incomprehensible leaps of mental gymnastics.

We can't have a rational discussion about god till we can agree what rational is.

And until we agree what God is. But my bet God will be ill defined an so watered down as to become Sagan's magic dragon.

My posts have been epistemological in nature, and I hope have shine some light on the pathetic tactics some use.

I hope I'm not one of those "some" ;)

Like default positions. not logic. pragmatic assumptions that are assigned by atheist majority vote then even on the merit of risk assessment in type 1 +2 errors.

Default positions are problematic, but idk what you mean by the vote or 1 +2 errors.

Default positions are in systems. Logical discussion do not have default positions. If we take that due to human limitations we assign default positions or established presumptions in certain systems we find these presumptions are based on risk assessments of the end result of system performing a type 1 error (false positive) or a type 3 error (false negative).

But it seems when challenged these default positions change with what atheist conclude is popular opinion among them.


The party line of no evidence, which doesn't even make sense because every argument to discern truth references an observation in reality, and every argument to describe reality references a core truth. So this "no evidence" is just derision not logic.

not at all. If I were to claim (believe) a tsunami were coming, but the people do not see it, seismologists detect no earthquakes, no receded waters, by what logic can I continue to claim a tsunami is coming and expect others to believe me? Sure there's the black swan dilemma, but verifiable evidence is what supports logical premises. You can't expect rational mined people to take you claims at face value w/o something to show for it. That's the basis of what makes faith valuable.

A claim is a statement it is not an argument. If you claimed there was a tsunami on it's way try to construct a valid argument that didn't reference as a premise some evidence. you can't.


And of course a great amount of shifting the burden. I get told to present reasons for not believing in fairies, when I didn't say they existed or not.

Theists made the claim first and must prove that claim. It's just that simple. The claim of the supernatural, be it God, fairies, dragons, santa etc all come from the same base of the supernatural unverifiable to exist by man. If you make a claim about your God, why can't I just completely reject all of your values and conclusions in favor of my own God, one that says your God doesn't exist? Both are epistemologically equal. Frankly anything beyond deism I find absurd and without basis.

No. You can't keep shifting the burden. I'm talking about when Atheist say God is imaginary and stuff. I'm not talking about what the definition of Atheism is. If you say god does not exist you are making a claim and incur a burden of proof because you are stating something about reality.\

And the claim of fairies has nothing to do with god. Those are red herrings. Argue about unicorns does not change the truth value of God existing.

If I showed unicorns exist does that mean all supernatural things exist? No of course not and equally so one "supernatural" entity not existing does not mean all don't.

And plenty of things were once thought philosophical questions and became science, thought supernatural and discovered real.


Atheist make every claim and want some one else to work out the logical argument.

No, we wait for you to make the claim and then pick it apart.

yes trollish. most Atheist here are.


Atheist = pathetic wind bags.

If your only understanding of atheism is from this site then sure.

No it from youtube videos and other vocal atheist, and atheist literature and websites like iron chariots and rationalwiki.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 10:53:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:30:24 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:03:10 PM, Bennett91 wrote:

Default positions are problematic, but idk what you mean by the vote or 1 +2 errors.

Default positions are in systems. Logical discussion do not have default positions. If we take that due to human limitations we assign default positions or established presumptions in certain systems we find these presumptions are based on risk assessments of the end result of system performing a type 1 error (false positive) or a type 3 error (false negative).

In order to have a discussion there are typical pre agreements, default positions such as agreeing on the definitions of "rational" and "God". As for risk assessment, I don't know what this has to do with atheism. This is where pascals wager comes in, not believing is the ultimate risk.

But it seems when challenged these default positions change with what atheist conclude is popular opinion among them.

lol you must not know a lot about atheists. I don't know where you're getting this from.

The party line of no evidence, which doesn't even make sense because every argument to discern truth references an observation in reality, and every argument to describe reality references a core truth. So this "no evidence" is just derision not logic.

not at all. If I were to claim (believe) a tsunami were coming, but the people do not see it, seismologists detect no earthquakes, no receded waters, by what logic can I continue to claim a tsunami is coming and expect others to believe me? Sure there's the black swan dilemma, but verifiable evidence is what supports logical premises. You can't expect rational mined people to take you claims at face value w/o something to show for it. That's the basis of what makes faith valuable.

A claim is a statement it is not an argument. If you claimed there was a tsunami on it's way try to construct a valid argument that didn't reference as a premise some evidence. you can't.

Arguments are made up of statements, truths and what not. duh. A claim, supported by evidence makes an argument. I don't see what your point is here. A claim is what grabs peoples attention, the following evidence is what makes the claim worthy of that attention. If I were to claim that a tsunami is coming or God exists, there would be a purpose behind those claims, reasons, arguments for why you should believe me. A claim w/o evidence is either speculation or fantasy.

And of course a great amount of shifting the burden. I get told to present reasons for not believing in fairies, when I didn't say they existed or not.

Theists made the claim first and must prove that claim. It's just that simple. The claim of the supernatural, be it God, fairies, dragons, santa etc all come from the same base of the supernatural unverifiable to exist by man. If you make a claim about your God, why can't I just completely reject all of your values and conclusions in favor of my own God, one that says your God doesn't exist? Both are epistemologically equal. Frankly anything beyond deism I find absurd and without basis.

No. You can't keep shifting the burden. I'm talking about when Atheist say God is imaginary and stuff. I'm not talking about what the definition of Atheism is. If you say god does not exist you are making a claim and incur a burden of proof because you are stating something about reality.\

And the claim of fairies has nothing to do with god. Those are red herrings. Argue about unicorns does not change the truth value of God existing.

When we say God is imaginary, we usually equate it to other imaginary creatures that have the same supernatural basis. Your God is just as real as Zues and river nymphs. If you're not satisfied with these comparisons either disprove Zeus or prove your claim.

If I showed unicorns exist does that mean all supernatural things exist? No of course not and equally so one "supernatural" entity not existing does not mean all don't.

Well you said you'd get to work verifying God, so if you prove unicorns exist then you'd certainly gain more credibility for your other super natural claims.

And plenty of things were once thought philosophical questions and became science, thought supernatural and discovered real.

You mean thought supernatural then had their scientific basis discovered. Earthquakes used to be the work of an angry God, now its known to be plate tectonics. The same will apply to current claims of the actions of God. My sig also speaks to this.

Atheist make every claim and want some one else to work out the logical argument.

No, we wait for you to make the claim and then pick it apart.

yes trollish. most Atheist here are.

Your rejection of our criticisms does not mean we're trolls, it just means you're ignoring our criticisms.

Atheist = pathetic wind bags.

If your only understanding of atheism is from this site then sure.

No it from youtube videos and other vocal atheist, and atheist literature and websites like iron chariots and rationalwiki.

And what do you think about Envisage's arguments?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 11:28:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Both sides do this with about equal frequency.
I mean, with atheists, for instance, there is the constant taking of verses way, way, way out of context, the assumption that God must abide by the moral code of Liberal America to be a moral God, that God can't possibly have a good reason that we cannot see for something seemingly illogical or immoral, etc. It's totally hypocritical to assume that only theists do this, or that atheists do this a lot less than theists. Believe me; I've seen some quite hateful remarks from some atheists that made me want to visit them in real life and puncture their throats (then again, I've got a temper). Of course, you've likely seen many hateful remarks from theists, but still.
But anyhow, the main reason that theists are hostile to atheists and atheism is because outspoken atheists are generally hostile to theism and theists.
Also, if you are vocally proclaiming that all claims of God's existence are false, then you are by default in direct opposition to the beliefs of theists. This is not just atheism, but also anti-theism; a word with "anti" at the beginning of it doesn't go well for you if you can be described by the word attached to "anti". That makes atheists, in a sense, the enemies of theists, and vise-versa. It's almost as if atheists and theists are two different species of humanity, in a way. I mean, if you recognize that a group is going to create a world where belief in the God who you've entrusted your eternal destiny and temporal existence to is scorned or possibly even forbidden, wouldn't you feel a degree of hostility to such people? I mean, looking at it from a theist perspective, any time an atheist comes around, he or she typically does something that totally p**ses you off. The unpopularity of atheists as a group is at least slightly their own fault, just as the behavior of many Christians has contributed to anti-Christian sentiments. Likewise, atheism usually seems to sprout in people who've been largely exposed to the overly dark side of religious belief and not enough of the positive side (that and those who are too "intelligent" for faith). Thus it's natural that they would feel hostility towards theists. It's only natural that both sides dislike each other.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 11:36:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:53:03 PM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:30:24 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:03:10 PM, Bennett91 wrote:

Default positions are problematic, but idk what you mean by the vote or 1 +2 errors.

Default positions are in systems. Logical discussion do not have default positions. If we take that due to human limitations we assign default positions or established presumptions in certain systems we find these presumptions are based on risk assessments of the end result of system performing a type 1 error (false positive) or a type 3 error (false negative).

In order to have a discussion there are typical pre agreements, default positions such as agreeing on the definitions of "rational" and "God". As for risk assessment, I don't know what this has to do with atheism. This is where pascals wager comes in, not believing is the ultimate risk.

Rational is the valid inference between premises to conclude a likely truth beyond a reasonable doubt. God is a transcendental personal mind incomprehensible to a complete concept of human wit.


But it seems when challenged these default positions change with what atheist conclude is popular opinion among them.

lol you must not know a lot about atheists. I don't know where you're getting this from.

It's either a case of special pleading that "God does not exist" is the only default position. Or their default position on alien life is yes, on fairies is no, big foot maybe... Why? because it is more popular atheist opinion, status quo basis.


The party line of no evidence, which doesn't even make sense because every argument to discern truth references an observation in reality, and every argument to describe reality references a core truth. So this "no evidence" is just derision not logic.

not at all. If I were to claim (believe) a tsunami were coming, but the people do not see it, seismologists detect no earthquakes, no receded waters, by what logic can I continue to claim a tsunami is coming and expect others to believe me? Sure there's the black swan dilemma, but verifiable evidence is what supports logical premises. You can't expect rational mined people to take you claims at face value w/o something to show for it. That's the basis of what makes faith valuable.

A claim is a statement it is not an argument. If you claimed there was a tsunami on it's way try to construct a valid argument that didn't reference as a premise some evidence. you can't.

Arguments are made up of statements, truths and what not. duh. A claim, supported by evidence makes an argument. I don't see what your point is here. A claim is what grabs peoples attention, the following evidence is what makes the claim worthy of that attention. If I were to claim that a tsunami is coming or God exists, there would be a purpose behind those claims, reasons, arguments for why you should believe me. A claim w/o evidence is either speculation or fantasy.

So you concede you can't make a valid argument without evidence.


And of course a great amount of shifting the burden. I get told to present reasons for not believing in fairies, when I didn't say they existed or not.

Theists made the claim first and must prove that claim. It's just that simple. The claim of the supernatural, be it God, fairies, dragons, santa etc all come from the same base of the supernatural unverifiable to exist by man. If you make a claim about your God, why can't I just completely reject all of your values and conclusions in favor of my own God, one that says your God doesn't exist? Both are epistemologically equal. Frankly anything beyond deism I find absurd and without basis.

No. You can't keep shifting the burden. I'm talking about when Atheist say God is imaginary and stuff. I'm not talking about what the definition of Atheism is. If you say god does not exist you are making a claim and incur a burden of proof because you are stating something about reality.\

And the claim of fairies has nothing to do with god. Those are red herrings. Argue about unicorns does not change the truth value of God existing.

When we say God is imaginary, we usually equate it to other imaginary creatures that have the same supernatural basis. Your God is just as real as Zues and river nymphs. If you're not satisfied with these comparisons either disprove Zeus or prove your claim.

Okay done with you. If you can't articulate why God is imaginary other than because you said so, you are not interested in rational discussion. Especially if you think you can say what ever you want and have the other party defend the opposition.

What if I was agnostic and asked "What makes god imaginary?"


If I showed unicorns exist does that mean all supernatural things exist? No of course not and equally so one "supernatural" entity not existing does not mean all don't.

Well you said you'd get to work verifying God, so if you prove unicorns exist then you'd certainly gain more credibility for your other super natural claims.

Unicorns did exists and do. The word translated as unicorn in the Latin bible is the genus name for Rhinoceros. The Word "Re'em" is the Hebrew word and the descriptions of the animal are of an animal strong, looks like something that can pull a plow, but is untamable. this could be a wild ox or rhinoceros.

There are scientist debating what gravity is, or even if it exists. I doubt I can impact the discussion on God around here.


And plenty of things were once thought philosophical questions and became science, thought supernatural and discovered real.

You mean thought supernatural then had their scientific basis discovered. Earthquakes used to be the work of an angry God, now its known to be plate tectonics. The same will apply to current claims of the actions of God. My sig also speaks to this.

God performs actions in mysterious ways. When you remove the mystery you only discovered how God does it.


Atheist make every claim and want some one else to work out the logical argument.

No, we wait for you to make the claim and then pick it apart.

yes trollish. most Atheist here are.

Your rejection of our criticisms does not mean we're trolls, it just means you're ignoring our criticisms.

If you are not a participate in discussion but just seeking to harass theist that is trollish. This is especially obvious in interfaith discussions by the likes of annicole, MCB, Yassaine, ect... Those are threads started with the common ground of "god exists" but Atheist as you say can't help but attack.

Trollish.


Atheist = pathetic wind bags.

If your only understanding of atheism is from this site then sure.

No it from youtube videos and other vocal atheist, and atheist literature and websites like iron chariots and rationalwiki.

And what do you think about Envisage's arguments?

If the infinite set is a complete set of all possible entities:

Just because A1 exists does not mean it is mutually exclusive to A2. It is just as likely that A2 is contingent upon A1.

P3 is correct if nothing exists. 0+0+0 ad infinite does not contradict itself. but entities are contingent and mutually exclusive to each other.

Making the set of real entities from the set of infinite entities dependent on small sample comparisons.

And that is ACTUALLY how we make models of reality, we take a small sample of observations comparing a small number of items and extrapolate to the whole of reality.
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 11:43:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 10:52:02 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:47:46 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:44:51 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:43:36 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:42:33 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

The atheists are jerks to theists, frequently mocking them and insulting them. You should look at both sides of the coin before passing judgment.

Yes but at least we can come up with good arguments that result in their lame responses warranting mockery and insults.

That doesn't make it just.

No but until they come up with rebuttals that occupy our thinking minds instead of ones devoted to mockery then I don't see things changing. What would you prefer we do? Their faith makes criticism pointless.

What's the point then? Criticizing theists is not going to change anything, you should let people believe what they want to believe so long that it isn't bringing more evil/misery than good, and if it is bringing more evil then we are obligated to bring the people bringing that evil into this world to justice.

The 'point' is that upon supplying a post into a public forum, that post is able to be scrutinized, and responded to. Like the posters ability of posting, others have the ability of responding, and so be it if the content of that post is spurious, or a disagreement occurs.

Specifically, as it pertains to the evaluation of theists claims, the intent of responding or initiating discussion is to enable the exchange of information, hence the reason atheists ponder theists beliefs, and theists ponder atheists lack of a belief.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2015 11:43:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 11:28:00 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Both sides do this with about equal frequency.
I mean, with atheists, for instance, there is the constant taking of verses way, way, way out of context, the assumption that God must abide by the moral code of Liberal America to be a moral God, that God can't possibly have a good reason that we cannot see for something seemingly illogical or immoral, etc. It's totally hypocritical to assume that only theists do this, or that atheists do this a lot less than theists. Believe me; I've seen some quite hateful remarks from some atheists that made me want to visit them in real life and puncture their throats (then again, I've got a temper). Of course, you've likely seen many hateful remarks from theists, but still.
But anyhow, the main reason that theists are hostile to atheists and atheism is because outspoken atheists are generally hostile to theism and theists.
Also, if you are vocally proclaiming that all claims of God's existence are false, then you are by default in direct opposition to the beliefs of theists. This is not just atheism, but also anti-theism; a word with "anti" at the beginning of it doesn't go well for you if you can be described by the word attached to "anti". That makes atheists, in a sense, the enemies of theists, and vise-versa. It's almost as if atheists and theists are two different species of humanity, in a way. I mean, if you recognize that a group is going to create a world where belief in the God who you've entrusted your eternal destiny and temporal existence to is scorned or possibly even forbidden, wouldn't you feel a degree of hostility to such people? I mean, looking at it from a theist perspective, any time an atheist comes around, he or she typically does something that totally p**ses you off. The unpopularity of atheists as a group is at least slightly their own fault, just as the behavior of many Christians has contributed to anti-Christian sentiments. Likewise, atheism usually seems to sprout in people who've been largely exposed to the overly dark side of religious belief and not enough of the positive side (that and those who are too "intelligent" for faith). Thus it's natural that they would feel hostility towards theists. It's only natural that both sides dislike each other.

You do somewhat have a point, though. I think it's because members like Bulproof, Beastt and ThinkFirst are posting less these days.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2015 12:07:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 11:43:54 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 4/17/2015 11:28:00 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 4/17/2015 10:19:45 AM, SNP1 wrote:
Over the past month, there has been less discussion about the existence of a god and more strawmans about atheists. It is like the theists that are currently active don't have the ability to discuss things without attacking their own strawman version of atheism.

***NOTE***
This is not all theists, but a rising number of the active theists are acting like this.

Both sides do this with about equal frequency.
I mean, with atheists, for instance, there is the constant taking of verses way, way, way out of context, the assumption that God must abide by the moral code of Liberal America to be a moral God, that God can't possibly have a good reason that we cannot see for something seemingly illogical or immoral, etc. It's totally hypocritical to assume that only theists do this, or that atheists do this a lot less than theists. Believe me; I've seen some quite hateful remarks from some atheists that made me want to visit them in real life and puncture their throats (then again, I've got a temper). Of course, you've likely seen many hateful remarks from theists, but still.
But anyhow, the main reason that theists are hostile to atheists and atheism is because outspoken atheists are generally hostile to theism and theists.
Also, if you are vocally proclaiming that all claims of God's existence are false, then you are by default in direct opposition to the beliefs of theists. This is not just atheism, but also anti-theism; a word with "anti" at the beginning of it doesn't go well for you if you can be described by the word attached to "anti". That makes atheists, in a sense, the enemies of theists, and vise-versa. It's almost as if atheists and theists are two different species of humanity, in a way. I mean, if you recognize that a group is going to create a world where belief in the God who you've entrusted your eternal destiny and temporal existence to is scorned or possibly even forbidden, wouldn't you feel a degree of hostility to such people? I mean, looking at it from a theist perspective, any time an atheist comes around, he or she typically does something that totally p**ses you off. The unpopularity of atheists as a group is at least slightly their own fault, just as the behavior of many Christians has contributed to anti-Christian sentiments. Likewise, atheism usually seems to sprout in people who've been largely exposed to the overly dark side of religious belief and not enough of the positive side (that and those who are too "intelligent" for faith). Thus it's natural that they would feel hostility towards theists. It's only natural that both sides dislike each other.

You do somewhat have a point, though. I think it's because members like Bulproof, Beastt and ThinkFirst are posting less these days.

i don't hate Atheist. I dislike people who speak and give no answer to why they said so.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2015 12:48:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/17/2015 11:36:38 PM, Mhykiel wrote:

Okay done with you.

Are you really done? Because if you can't grasp the simple concept that I don't believe in your God for the same reason you don't believe in other Gods or mythical creatures then as usual there's no discussion to be had here. I find it humorous that in your response you're just as guilty of the things you accuse me of. So perhaps it's better we do end it.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2015 1:10:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/18/2015 12:48:17 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 4/17/2015 11:36:38 PM, Mhykiel wrote:

Okay done with you.

Are you really done? Because if you can't grasp the simple concept that I don't believe in your God for the same reason you don't believe in other Gods or mythical creatures then as usual there's no discussion to be had here. I find it humorous that in your response you're just as guilty of the things you accuse me of. So perhaps it's better we do end it.

The rest of this post, uncensored, is here: http://www.debate.org...