Do Atheist Bow to Anthromophism?

a reply to: Grimpachi

Given what is know about reality a creator could exist.

That is evidence that a creator could exist.

As far as your beliefs there is a saying, "one can lead a horse to water but that does not mean he will drink".

I am still waiting for whatever evidence you have to refute my position.

Otherwise this discussion sounds more like an adult version of, "My father is better that your father".

Nonetheless it is obvious that in the Eclectic Perspective you really have no idea what you are talking about.

Any thoughts?

a reply to: Kashai

Any thoughts?

A lot of things could exist. Just because they could exist isn't a reason to believe in them.

Otherwise this discussion sounds more like an adult version of, "My father is better that your father".

Very strange. This discussion in my opinion is more like "you should believe in my god because I believe".

I am still waiting for whatever evidence you have to refute my position.

Much earlier in the thread I said "Let's say I want to believe you. Why should I?" Unfortunately, you haven't given me a reason to believe you.

The only thing you have presented so far are some hypothesises. If there was evidence to back up hypothesises they would no longer be hypothesis.

a reply to: Grimpachi

in context you should figure out a way to live to the ripe old age of 20 trillion and you will in all likelihood still have to deal with the fact you do not know everything.

Making your premise as to understanding some absolute in your lifetime irrelevant.

No offence but perhaps you should get over that.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Grimpachi

Given what is know about reality a creator could exist.

That is evidence that a creator could exist.

Accepting the possibility of a potential outcome is in no way synonymous with evidence for that outcome actually occurring.

As far as your beliefs there is a saying, "one can lead a horse to water but that does not mean he will drink".

I am still waiting for whatever evidence you have to refute my position.

Once again, if you had a basic grasp of the scientific method you would know that in science, one does not prove a negative. If your position is that some sort of god exists, the onus then lies with you to prove that god exists. To insist otherwise is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

Nonetheless it is obvious that in the Eclectic Perspective you really have no idea what you are talking about.

Oh sweet irony...

a reply to: peter vlar

If one cannot prove a negative the onus is upon those who present that God does not exist.

Sorry but perhaps you actually should have spent time listening when you were in school.

Guys you are really starting to fall apart....perhaps you should take a few days off an regroup.


Do not worry I will still be available to respond to your comments.

Any thoughts?

a reply to: Kashai

Atheism is not a claim God does not exist.

Atheism is lack of belief in a God until God can be proven.

This has been stated multiple times.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Grimpachi

in context you should figure out a way to live to the ripe old age of 20 trillion and you still have to deal with the fact you do not know everything.

Making you premise as to understanding some absolute in your lifetime irrelevant.

No offence but perhaps you should get over that.

Mature conversations with people possessing a conflicting point of view really isn't your forte is it? The constant rumination a of "get over it" come off as the words of a spoiled child used to getting their way and not understanding how out of their depth they actually are. Or your just a straight troll. Either way, it's rather petty. Especially when you keep stating that others are making statements in absolutist terms when they are not. When someone states that something COULD be true, that's about as far from absolutism as you can get. And then there's telling others what it is that they believe despite being shown that it is not true and being told exactly what it is they believe. It's absolutely ludicrous. Perhaps instead of others "getting over it" you should take your own advice and realize that you just might be wrong yourself.

Any Thoughts?

originally posted by: Kashai
Guys you are really starting to fall apart....perhaps you should take a few days off an regroup.


Do not worry I will still be available to respond to your comments.

Any thoughts?

Actually you continue spinning your wheels making no sense at all.

My thoughts.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: peter vlar

If one cannot prove a negative the onus is upon those who present that God does not exist.

You don't know what the negative in this equation is anymore than you understand the math behind chaos theory.

Sorry but perhaps you actually should have spent time listening when you were in school.

I did. It's why I have the degrees I do and engaged in the research I did. Once again, you are also,utterly clueless. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic. But by all means... Keep going and proving how little you know.

I'm going to go make some popcorn now because this is that comedic.

a reply to: peter vlar

To claim God does not exist is an attempt to prove a negative.

The rest of your comments are simply irrelevant.

a reply to: Annee

Actually I am having a wonderful time in consideration to the OBVIOS fact none of you have provided one iota of data to support you position.

As it stands tonight and in proverb its like "shooting ducks in a barrel".

To all concerned no ducks were actually harmed.

Any thoughts?

a reply to: Kashai

I simply asked you to give me a reason to believe you. Although you seem incapable of doing so there is no reason for you to be rude and storm off.

If by chance some day you can come up with a good reason why people should believe you or people should believe in deities I hope you can share.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Annee

Actually I am having a wonderful time in consideration to the OBVIOS fact none of you have provided one iota of data to support you position.

Prove my position?

That until God is proven I lack belief?

"Shakes Head" ---- carry on

a reply to: Grimpachi

That is pretty much a lame response.

Evidence has been presented in that nothing we understand about nature today can be understood as random.

As simple as !+!=2

a reply to: Kashai

You haven't presented any evidence that deities exist. You have,t even presented a logical reason that people should believe they exist.

To claim otherwise would be dishonest.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Grimpachi

That is pretty much a lame response.

Evidence has been presented in that nothing we understand about nature today can be understood as random.

As simple as !+!=2

Can you provide a list of your science degrees?

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: peter vlar

To claim God does not exist is an attempt to prove a negative.

The rest of your comments are simply irrelevant.

To claim God does exist is an attempt to prove a positive.

So can you prove it or not???

a reply to: Annee

Prove my position?

That until God is not proven I lack belief in a bunch of people understood how to process electricity to there own benefit about 100 years ago.

"Shakes Head"...carry on

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Annee

Prove my position?

That until God is not proven I lack belief in a bunch of people understood how to process electricity to there own benefit about 100 years ago.

"Shakes Head"...carry on

You just keep throwing out nonsense hoping something will stick.

It doesn't.