It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dear Atheists: I will prove to you that there is a Creator to the universe. Come debate me.

page: 70
36
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Annee

On a somewhat lighter note, it amuses me how much "ATS" sounds like "atheists".

...CONSPIRACY!!! Lol


LOL, it does, doesn't it.

Atheist discussion has come a long way from a few years ago. It wasn't always exactly welcomed.

And that's all I'm gonna say on that

edit on 10-8-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

I question why you are in this thread if your only claim is that the Creator exits ---- that he always has.

Saying something has always existed means nothing in a debate specific to proof.


That should be exists --- not exits.

Didn't catch it in time to edit.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Ok so I have read some things and if nobody here can prove God does not exist...

Well then they lose...

I would like for a threads like these one time actually be a logic discussion not necessarily a debate, this is the only way a better understanding can come about...
by discussion based in as much fact as you can possibly have...

when neither side is able to be proven, I assure you if this action was actually taken a logical conclusion could be formed...

Both side's jaded by their own opinions...

My statement was logical and based upon a non religious viewpoint...

obviously it was not perceived in such a fashion because of the responses what is the genitalia? which God is it?
Are their other Gods? My God is evil because of...? And so on...
Aside from the personal attacks to make me leave, or attempts to move me to anger...

that is not how you have a discussion or a debate either...

I said what I said,I did not introduce it as fact...

instead as the most logical statement I could render while making it very hard to dispute...

failing to actually find fault in what I did say however eludes to something though...

and seeing as nobody can prove A Creator or God by definition does not exist it means a loss for them by their own logic...

atheists have come a long way and still assume to be correct, more intelligent, and are rather good at patting each other on the back and thus delusional...

I have atleast stated I could be wrong, perhaps there is no God...
But that's not what I believe...



edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: Spell

edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: Edit



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Ok so I have read some things and if nobody here can prove God does not exist...

Well then they lose...



Give up on the "reflecting".

An atheist did not start this thread stating they would prove God does not exist.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle




Kirk the pigeon says he wins.


Pigeon logic
edit on 10-8-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=19681169]Annee[/post

Reflecting...

nah plain and simple truth...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Ok so I have read some things and if nobody here can prove God does not exist...

Well then they lose...



Oh there's that argument from ignorance again.

clearly you were being economical with the truth when you said you had read the link in a previous post, so here's the summary:


Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,
1.true
2.false
3.unknown between true or false
4.being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Personal attacks like I said...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Truth is neither side can be proven right...

So what does that mean?

So if I lose you lose too...

To lay claim otherwise is delusional...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

You really think that is a personal attack?



You seem to be under the impression that just because you claim something then it will make it so. You do that with a lot of things in this thread.

Chess with pigeons go ahead and google it.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I'm not a pigeon...

Before you edited your post it was pigeon logic < human logic

Why was that changed?
edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: ...

edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: ...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: 5StarOracle

You really think that is a personal attack?

You seem to be under the impression that just because you claim something then it will make it so. You do that with a lot of things in this thread.

Chess with pigeons go ahead and google it.



That's hilarious.

Moving the goalposts certainly applies.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

"Playing chess with pigeons " since I already told you to google it then maybe someone will explain it to you.

Until then it will just be over your head.
edit on 10-8-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs




You are getting desperate. You've made that argument in the past and it was debunked. It doesn't do anything to prove god, so your post is off topic. Gender did not have to evolve in perfect synchronization. Why would you use this argument when you used it as the premise of a thread already and it got destroyed?


A few ATS members think that, your bias, so in your mind it's destroyed, but I will continue to mention it to those that are developing their own thoughts. You don't get to gate keep this topic, and there is no desperation, only your frustration that you can't end this discussion 100% in your favor.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Ok so I have read some things and if nobody here can prove God does not exist...

Well then they lose...




Sorry, but burden of proof is on you, not the atheists.


originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Grimpachi

I'm not a pigeon...


So stop acting like one..



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi
I watched a video the guy spoke like he is recovering from a stroke while bashing some mistaken believer... I didn't watch much because it was retarded...

And now I'm certain a clear insult...

it had no substance and does not define me...

Just another lie or ineffective tool introduced to illicit a desired result...

I already know you assume to be my superior...

Since this is your claim...

Prove it...


edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: ...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

WTF??????



Who told you to watch a video??? It wasn't me I assure you.


I have no idea what you watched and I do not really care to know, but what I can say confidently is that if you google what I told you then there are things you can read.

Try rational wiki or simply go ask someone with an education.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

educated people are individuals who are well learned and therefore must agree and know what pigeon logic is?

that being believers do not know the rules...

Or in other words that atheist means more intelligent and of course always right...

this indeed backs up what I said previously...

so tell me why did you remove Pigeon logic < human logic? To just pigeon logic...
edit on 10-8-2015 by 5StarOracle because: ...



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: TheChrome

Not only that every evolving animal had to undergo gender evolution from asexual to sexual, in perfect synchronization, so it's species wouldn't die out. And then one day they just copulate, something they had never done before, they had no instinct to do it, but did it anyway. And what happened while the sex organs were evolving over thousands of years ?

Thanks for bringing some higher intelligence in for the other side of this discussion, why should the one side get a free for all pile on against creation.



No Kidding.

In Statistics, the number Ten to the 50th power (10 with 50 zeros after it) is considered a mathematical impossibility. The chance of a protein molecule forming by chance is 10 to 113, more than twice statistical impossibility. 2000 proteins are needed for a single living cell to function. The chance for achieving all 2000 proteins needed for life by chance is 10 to the 40,000th.

Let that sink in. Statistical impossibility= 10:50th
All proteins needed for life forming by chance= 10:40,0000th
Then you have to overcome these odds 3 times, for three separate and distinct RNA patterns of life.

If I was someone who was fooled by the atheist community, I would be pissed!



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
. . . atheist means more intelligent and of course always right...



No. Atheists use facts.

Facts vs belief.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join