XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism
XPost: sci.skeptic
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 18:43:50 -0600, Free Lunch wrote:
.
>On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:35:17 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 09:11:56 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>>.
>>>On 01-November-2014 7:05 AM, The.W@tcher wrote:
>>>
>>>> For years atheists have demanded what they call "evidence" of God's
existence,
>>>> when what they really have been demanding is proof. When presented with
evidence
>>>> of various types they dishonestly have denied the fact that it is
evidence,
>>>> enjoying the luxury of indulging themselves in their own blatant
dishonesty.
>>>> Their constant demand for proof which they dishonestly refer to as
evidence
>>>> makes it clear that they believe there should be some sort of proof of
God's
>>>> existence available to humans if he does indeed exist.
>>>
>>>true!
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the not too distant past atheists in these news groups have
experienced their
>>>> complete and total ruination which they encountered due to the challenge
>>>> presented to them by mur@.not The challenge was a simple one that they
should be
>>>> able to address and overcome with ease, yet in reality none of them could
>>>> address it at all much less overcome it. The challenge that defeated them
so
>>>> entirely was simply for them to try to explain what sort of "evidence"
they
>>>> think there should be, where they think it should be, and why they think
God
>>>> should make it available to humans if he does exist. That simple challenge
>>>> resulted in their total ruination by exposing the fact that they don't
have the
>>>> slightest idea what sort of proof God should provide us with, much less
where he
>>>> should make it available. In the related followup thread "Why atheists are
>>>> clueless about the evidence aspect." the resulting exposure of their
>>>> cluelessness is examined and it's made clear that no one including the
atheists
>>>> themselves can suggest why any such proof should be available to humans.
That
>>>> failure makes it clear that they have been extreme fools all these years
for
>>>> demanding something we now see there's no reason should be available for
them to
>>>> be presented with.
>>>
>>>yes, they cannot explain why there should be any proof
>>
>> Apparently they can't even make an attempt. They've certainly shown that
>>they don't have any idea what they thought they were trying to talk about. It
>>seems that they're now aware of their position since they don't try to defend
>>themselves or their positon any more.
>
>Go preach your religious nonsense elsewhere. You both know that you have
>no evidence to support any claims about gods.
You blatantly lie that there's no evidence even though we ONLY have
evidence
that God does exist, and there is NO evidence he does not. You make it clear
you
will not refer to the evidence that exists as evidence. You make it clear that
you believe if God does exist, that YOU believe there should be stronger
evidence of his existence. YOU make it clear you believe that if God does exist
there should be some sort of proof that he exists, yet you lie about that. So
you lie that there is no evidence, you lie that you think there should be proof
of it if God does exist, but you don't have the slightest clue what sort of
proof you think there should be, or where you think it should be, or why you
think it should be available to humans. THAT is the amusing though pathetic
position you and your fellow atheists ARE IN. You are also in the position of
being ashamed of being in that position and wanting to deny it, though you will
almost certainly never make any attempt to move out of that position you're
ashamed of being in. LOL!!! Again just describing the position you people are
in
is HILARIOUS!
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
