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.
Originally posted by paradox
There is no "knowledge" in claiming something exists in which there is absolutely no evidence what so ever.
No it isn't. The logical fallacy is the one that theists use. Theists are the ones who created a mythical god, they must therefore prove the claim of its existence, or otherwise stop the ridiculous arguments.
Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false
en.wikipedia.org...
Good argument.
Sure they are, when they are substantiated with evidence.
Your logic is flawed for reasons already explained. Theists have been shown to be a little bit on the "slower" side as a whole, so I understand if you need some repeating.
Originally posted by satron
We aren't in court. What I'm saying is like this:
You: There is no God
Theist: Based on what evidence?
You: None
Theist: Then God must exist based on the absence of evidence that it doesn't
It's a silly argument either way, I wouldn't take it seriously.
Originally posted by satron
Theist: Based on what evidence?
You: None
Originally posted by paradox
Only you are forgetting the claim "There is a God" came first.
If it didn't, we wouldn't have to be arguing the nonexistence of a God, because there wouldn't be any God to think of.
We claim there is no God based on the lack of evidence to substantiate the claim that there is in the first place.
You argue that there is a God based on the fact we can not disprove the existence of a completely fictional character.
I think you will see the "silly" award goes to Theists.edit on 3-19-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by paradox
Oh, and I would just like to add something here.
Evidence is a term used for something tangible to substantiate the fact of the existence of something.
In this case there is no 'evidence' to disprove the existence of something that has never existed, as evidence is never used to disprove, only to prove.
Likewise, there is no evidence to prove the existence of something that never existed, which is the situation we are currently in.
Therefore, the only rational thing to conclude based on the lack of evidence ever to support the claim of the existence of a omnipotent being, is that no omnipotent being (god) exists.edit on 3-19-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by xDeadcowx
reply to post by satron
Lets take this outside of the god/faith bubble.
I propose that leprechauns exist.
With the logic you have proposed, i dont need to prove, or provide any evidence, for leprechauns to exist.
They too were written about in a book, so unless someone can prove they don't exists, they must exist.
Aliens, bigfoot, unicorns, faires, elves, gnomes, trolls, orcs, my imaginary friend, all of them exists, because no one can prove they dont.
Pretty silly huh?edit on 3/19/2012 by xDeadcowx because: (no reason given)edit on 3/19/2012 by xDeadcowx because: (no reason given)
I also like to go with the proof that dna shows in all living things.
Originally posted by rtyfx
Actually, the most blatant argument for evolution is the mutation of viruses. The time-frame of these mutations is accelerated, so we are able to observe the effects within months.
Originally posted by rtyfx
The really important question though is do you believe in evil?edit on 19-3-2012 by rtyfx because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by paradox
Originally posted by rtyfx
The really important question though is do you believe in evil?edit on 19-3-2012 by rtyfx because: (no reason given)
No.
Evil is a subjective opinion.
What is 'evil' to one person, might be 'good' to another person for their own reasons and understandings.
'good' and 'evil' are taught to us and are influenced by the environments we are raised in.
Originally posted by rtyfx
Originally posted by paradox
Originally posted by rtyfx
The really important question though is do you believe in evil?edit on 19-3-2012 by rtyfx because: (no reason given)
No.
Evil is a subjective opinion.
What is 'evil' to one person, might be 'good' to another person for their own reasons and understandings.
'good' and 'evil' are taught to us and are influenced by the environments we are raised in.
Do you think murder is evil?