XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: lunch@nofreelunch.us   
      
   On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:02:55 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   wrote:   
      
   >On 10/7/2014 9:12 PM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:45:46 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 10/6/2014 7:49 PM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   >>>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 9/28/2014 9:05 PM, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:34:35 -0400, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> In article , mur@.not.   
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not   
   believing   
   >>>>>>>>>> any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean   
   believing no gods   
   >>>>>>>>>> exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many   
   atheists   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>       No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated   
   with this planet   
   >>>>>>>> or star system?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>        Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should   
   be", WHERE you   
   >>>>>> think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit   
   for him   
   >>>>>> to provide us with it if he exists.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence   
   >>>>> and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has   
   >>>>> no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be   
   >>>>> no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of   
   >>>>> matter.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people   
   >>>> make up and attribute to some god or other.   
   >>>>   
   >>> I simply stated facts.   
   >>   
   >> Religious claims are not facts.   
   >>   
   >What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?   
      
   The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)