The Problem with Atheists

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:23PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:23PM

-->

@Goldtop

Ah, so it is a reading comprehension problem, as I suspected.[ad hominem]

I never said anything about logical support.[hair splitting] I asked you to provide evidence for your claims, which you have yet to do.[appeal to ambiguity/appeal to ignorance/refusal to clarify] If you don't understand the written word,[ad hominem] you have a big problem that no one here can solve other than you.[appeal to ambiguity/appeal to ignorance/refusal to clarify]

Please explain how logic itself fails to meet your standard of evidence.

Perhaps you might provide an example.

Refusal to define your terms is an appeal to ambiguity.

If I have no idea what your standard of evidence is, then there is no hope of satisfying your request.

I am trying to have a reasonable discussion with you on this topic.

#32

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

09.20.2018 05:24PM

3

6

09.20.2018 05:24PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Good point. I'd say abiogenesis is more of a hypothesis.

They believe it as if its fact though.

#33

Debates: 0

Posts: 4,959

2

3

09.20.2018 05:25PM

2

3

09.20.2018 05:25PM

-->

@Mopac

Zeus is GOD with a capital "G" which by your nonsensical claims makes him the only true God.

Topic's author

#34

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:26PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:26PM

-->

@ethang5

Thanks for the note.

I remember Goldtop, but I thought they were usually in favor of logic...

#35

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:26PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:26PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Do you not understand the concept of empirical evidence? If not, go and educate yourself, then come back and support your claims with evidence.

Your so-called logic is absurd.

#36

Debates: 0

Posts: 4,959

2

3

09.20.2018 05:27PM

2

3

09.20.2018 05:27PM

-->

@ethang5

More ignorance from the terminally bewildered, it is amusing. Should we wait for it's tears or just laugh anyway.

Topic's author

#37

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:28PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:28PM

-->

@Mopac

Nowhere in the definition of "YHWH" does it say that he exists outside of Hebrew/Christian mythology or is God.

#38

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:32PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:32PM

-->

@ethang5

Just a heads up, Goldy is a well known troll from DDO. Don't take him too seriously.

Still as childish as ever. You do realize that's how children talk, E? Lol.

#39

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

09.20.2018 05:46PM

3

4

7

09.20.2018 05:46PM

-->

@3RU7AL

@disgusted

A pronouncement of syllables is not God.

The Ultimate Reality is God.

Do you know what that means?

What that points to is The Holy Name, The Eternal Name that is not uttered with words.

The letter kills, the spirit gives life.

Topic's author

#40

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:47PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:47PM

-->

@Goldtop

Do you not understand the concept of empirical evidence?

There are many types of evidence, thank you for being more specific.

If not, go and educate yourself, then come back and support your claims with evidence.

Are you talking about empirical evidence as defined in definition 3 by Merriam-Webster?

i.e. - capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment

Your so-called logic is absurd.

Your attempt to apply scientific laboratory standards of evidence in support of the absence of free will is absurd.

There is no scientific laboratory in history that has ever claimed to have identified anything even remotely like free will.

There is also no scientific laboratory in history that has ever claimed to have identified anything even remotely like god(s).

There are a great many things that lie squarely outside the scope of scientific observation, free will, ghosts, and god(s) are among the most obvious.

Topic's author

#41

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:49PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:49PM

-->

@Goldtop

Still as childish as ever. You do realize that's how children talk, E? Lol.

I agree with you on this point, children do have a tendency to rely heavily on ad hominems.

#42

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:51PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:51PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Empirical evidence, also known as sensory experience, is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience.

You're welcome. Go.

#43

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:53PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 05:53PM

-->

@3RU7AL

You mean, like this ad hom?

I remember Goldtop, but I thought they were usually in favor of logic...

Topic's author

#44

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:55PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:55PM

-->

@Mopac

The Ultimate Reality is God.

Do you know what that means?

What that points to is The Holy Name, The Eternal Name that is not uttered with words.

The letter kills, the spirit gives life.

If your god doesn't have a name (or not uttered with words), why do you keep calling it god?

If your best description of the thing is "Ultimate REality", then why not just say that.

For instance, if you went around telling people something like, "I have devoted my life to the pursuit of Ultimate REality" this would actually make you sound slightly more reasonable.

Topic's author

#45

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:57PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 05:57PM

-->

@Goldtop

You mean, like this ad hom?

I remember Goldtop, but I thought they were usually in favor of logic...

That is a sincere complement. I believe you are a reasonable person.

Topic's author

#46

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:22PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:22PM

-->

@Goldtop

Empirical evidence, also known as sensory experience, is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience.

You're welcome. Go.

Thank you for defining your standard of evidence.

However, I have never claimed, and furthermore I have never heard anyone ever claim that free will can be detected by smell, sight, taste, touch, or sound, and as such, free will itself would seem to lie quite obviously outside the scope of your preferred definition of empirical evidence.

#47

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:24PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:24PM

-->

@3RU7AL

That is not my standard of evidence, it is THE standard of evidence, common knowledge on a debate forum.

#48

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

09.20.2018 06:42PM

3

6

09.20.2018 06:42PM

-->

@Goldtop

Still as childish as ever. You do realize that's how children talk, E? Lol.

I do. I remember when you did that weird thing of posting the same "tell it to the tree" stupidity to every post to you. That was childish. You seem to have managed to keep the boy in you.

#49

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:44PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:44PM

-->

@ethang5

I never said any such thing about trees. Go play your childish games elsewhere.

Topic's author

#50

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:45PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:45PM

-->

@Goldtop

That is not my standard of evidence, it is THE standard of evidence, common knowledge on a debate forum.

I'm not sure what would make you think that. I've always been under the distinct impression that argumentum ad logos was de rigueur.

You might be better suited to the science forum than the religion forum.

Please explain how anyone is supposed to detect free will, you know, empirically.

#51

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:55PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 06:55PM

-->

@3RU7AL

You might be better suited to the science forum than the religion forum.

You might be better suited to support your empty claims in any forum. You haven't done that.

Topic's author

#52

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:57PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 06:57PM

-->

@Goldtop

Please explain how anyone is supposed to detect free will, you know, empirically.

#53

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

09.20.2018 07:02PM

3

4

7

09.20.2018 07:02PM

-->

@3RU7AL

That is what God means.

It only sounds unreasonable because you don't know that is what the concept of God means.

Now you know.

I think that is some good news for the day.

#54

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 07:05PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 07:05PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Can you not observe someone making a decision? Can scientists not monitor brain activity? Did you not freely post on these forums?

You clearly have a long way to go here.

#55

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5

09.20.2018 07:17PM

3

5

09.20.2018 07:17PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Please explain how anyone is supposed to detect free will, you know, empirically.

He doesn't know what is non-empirical and prob never will. He's a pure materialist/atheist and anything outside that he's dumb-founded, nothing registers, religious topics go straight over his blank head. Logic and common sense alone don't exist and do not resonate in his one-dimensional brain. His whole foundation is built on an illusion thinking and believing only that which was produced by some scientist is somehow truth lol. Then he mocks others for believing in what those who's expertise transcends those little boundaries. How hilarious, he clings to one illusion and refuses to believe anything outside that. That is the epitome of these kind of folks in a religious debate/discussion.

Topic's author

#56

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:30PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:30PM

-->

@Goldtop

Can you not observe someone making a decision? Can scientists not monitor brain activity? Did you not freely post on these forums?

You clearly have a long way to go here.

Now we seem to be getting somewhere.

I can observe animals making decisions.

Do you believe that animals also have free will?

Topic's author

#57

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:34PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:34PM

-->

@Mopac

That is what God means.

It only sounds unreasonable because you don't know that is what the concept of God means.

Now you know.
I think that is some good news for the day.

Merriam-Webster says,

God

1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: such as

a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe

b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind

2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship

specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Greek gods of love and war

3 : a person or thing of supreme value

had photos of baseball's gods pinned to his bedroom wall

4 : a powerful ruler

Hollywood gods that control our movies' fates

#58

Debates: 0

Posts: 1,706

2

1

2

09.20.2018 07:36PM

2

1

2

09.20.2018 07:36PM

-->

@EtrnlVw

He doesn't know what is non-empirical and prob never will.

The non-empirical and the non-existent are indistinguishable from one another. You of all people have never shown otherwise.

He's a pure materialist/atheist and anything outside that he's dumb-founded, nothing registers, religious topics go straight over his blank head.

I understand a great deal more than you, who can't even understand simple definitions of words that high school students understand.

Logic and common sense alone don't exist and do not resonate in his one-dimensional brain.

Your concept of logic and sense are delusions of God worlds, God realms, Spiritual Beings you claim to talk to and other ridiculous and childish fantasies that have nothing to do with reality.

His whole foundation is built on an illusion thinking and believing only that which was produced by some scientist is somehow truth lol.

No, it's called reality, something from which you have divorced yourself. My foundations is built of facts, evidence and understanding while yours is built on whatever your vivid imagination produces.

Then he mocks others for believing in what those who's expertise transcends those little boundaries.

You have no expertise in anything that you've ever discussed here or ddo. It's all fantasy conjured from your head. That's why everyone says your posts are delusional, just like you complained about earlier. The show fits, wear it or discard it.

How hilarious, he clings to one illusion and refuses to believe anything outside that. That is the epitome of these kind of folks in a religious debate/discussion.

You cling to delusion, you refuse to accept reality and have to fabricate lies and make up things as you go along. This has all been well documented and is your legacy wherever you go.

There's nothing wrong with having religious discussions, but that's not what you do.

Topic's author

#59

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,283

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:37PM

3

4

9

09.20.2018 07:37PM

-->

@EtrnlVw

He doesn't know what is non-empirical and prob never will. He's a pure materialist/atheist and anything outside that he's dumb-founded, nothing registers, religious topics go straight over his blank head. Logic and common sense alone don't exist and do not resonate in his one-dimensional brain. His whole foundation is built on an illusion thinking and believing only that which was produced by some scientist is somehow truth lol. Then he mocks others for believing in what those who's expertise transcends those little boundaries. How hilarious, he clings to one illusion and refuses to believe anything outside that. That is the epitome of these kind of folks in a religious debate/discussion.

That sounds like it might be almost, but perhaps not quite a strawman.

Let's see if Goldtop agrees with your paraphrasing of his ideological position.

#60

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5