XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism
XPost: sci.skeptic
From: me@nothere.biz
On 31-December-2014 12:23 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2014 09:23:57 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>
>> On 31-December-2014 3:59 AM, Free Lunch wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 15:55:08 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30-December-2014 2:11 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 14:02:04 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30-December-2014 1:27 PM, Malte Runz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "felix_unger" skrev i meddelelsen
>>>>>>> news:cgdpvbFdtgnU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (snip)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ... atheists cannot prove God does not exist, you can only believe it
>>>>>>>> to be the case, and so you have faith that belief is correct.
>>>>>>> And so do you, have faith, when you believe in the non-existence of
>>>>>>> invisible pink unicorns in a parallel universe, right?
>>>>>> I have faith (confidence) in a belief that such a proposition is
>>>>>> nonsense is true
>>>>> Yet the IPU relies on exactly as much evidence
>>>> wrong. there is no evidence for the IPU
>>> Which is exactly as much evidence as you have for every other deity.
>> wrong
> So you allege, but you never manage to present any evidence for any
> deities.
you've been given the evidence numerous times but you deny it is
evidence. when will you get off the merry-go-round?
>
>>>>> as the deity you worship.
>>>> and still you lie about me. if you continue to do so, I will disengage.
>>>> I might as well, you have persisted on every occasion that I have
>>>> engaged with you.
>>> It's hard to believe you are atheist
>> I am not
> Then why do you seem to try to hide which deity you worship?
you really are stupid
>
>>> since you spend so much time
>>> attacking atheism and defending theism.
>> I have been arguing against claims that atheists make, and make about
>> themselves. you ppl just never seem to get this.
> You have been making claims, not arguments.
bullshit
> Your assertions are without
> substantiation. No evidence or valid argument ever follows from your
> claims.
absolute nonsense. I don't know if you're completely stupid or
completely dishonest, but it has to be one or the other- or perhaps a
combination of both
> Which deity do you think has supporting evidence?
>
> Why can't you be bothered to present that alleged evidence to us?
>
>>>>>>> I don't believe we're all brains soaking in pods in a matrix, either,
>>>>>>> even if I can't prove it, and it doesn't take faith to not believe it.
>>>>>>> I live my life, as if we aren't 'soakers' and as if there are no gods.
>>>>>>> All three possibilites are equally absurd, and to make it a question
>>>>>>> about faith shows a lack of understanding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But... why can't you and so many of the, openly, theistic minded,
>>>>>>> understand that it does not take faith to not believe in something,
>>>>>>> which takes faith to have belief in the existence of?
>>>>>> it doesn't take faith to not believe, but it takes faith to believe that
>>>>>> a belief is correct/true. ie.. one has faith that ones belief is
>>>>>> correct. Is it not so?
>>>>> It is not so.
>>>>>
>>>>> It takes no faith not to believe in deities.
>>>>>
>>>>> It takes no faith to accept scientific evidence.
>>>>>
>>>>> It takes no faith to accept logical proofs.
>>>> ok, prove there is no God. you can't.
>>> I have no need to prove there are no deities. You demand that I make a
>>> general proof of the negative, something you know cannot be done.
exactly. you have only your belief, so no reason to claim any moral high
ground, as you keep trying to do.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
