Atheism is a belief.

[S.A.M.]

As the cultist continues with their barrage of nonsensical rhetoric and hypocrisy, their thinly veiled motives to derail the discussion are clearly evident.

I'm just showing how atheism is a belief. :shrug:

If you are so supportive of evidence based reasoning why do you refrain from backing up your own statements?

 

[superluminal]

Tools are willy nilly?

WTF?

That is the definition of faith

Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Look at your own definition sam. Faith is Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Some beliefs (as in my example) DO rest on logical proof or material evidence. As per my example.

So you believe that all planets have gravity?

No. It's a certainty, since by definition, all mass posesses the property of gravitation.

Do they (the physical laws) hold up under all circumstances?

Yes. As far as we know. There may be CP violations that explain the absence of antimatter in the universe (i.e. why there's matter in the first place and it wasn't all self annihilated with equal amounts of antimatter).

Whats your understanding of gravitation rely on?

Dropping shit on my foot! What else? Repeatable, hard evidence? Are you really going to go to the philosophical bitter end with this nonsense?

Sam, this really is diverting from the contention that atheism is a belief, and just what beliefs are. If you have a point, why not just make it?

 

[S.A.M.]

Not a single question is meant to generate discussion, but are merely attempts to derail the discussion away from topic.

Have you ever heard yourself, honeybuns?

Science, like evidence, is another subject cultists avoid and will attempt to use from their arsenal of triggered responses fallacious arguments and twisted definitions that only serve to demonstrate their intellectual dishonesty. They have no interest in understanding science whatsoever as the explanations from science will conflict with their indoctrination.

The vain attempts of cultists at supporting their indoctrinations are comical at best. Their deceptions are based on redefining terms and complaining of semantics.

Questions from indoctrinated cultists that are ridiculous in the extreme are not meant for discussion, but are merely last ditch efforts of triggered responses. They are meant for the discussion to be derailed and diminished.

In the context of the above request, we wonder just how far the cultist will go to demonstrate their hypocrisy as they have yet to demonstrate anything else, and yet will demand demonstrations that people do in fact exist. Absurd.

As the cultist continues with their barrage of nonsensical rhetoric and hypocrisy, their thinly veiled motives to derail the discussion are clearly evident.

 

[superluminal]

I'm just showing how atheism is a belief.

Atheism is a word that means "lack of belief". I've already provided definitions to that effect. So unless you contend that antimatter is matter, or that not dying is dying, or that non-belief is belief, you'd be wise to rethink this absurd position.

 

[S.A.M.]

Look at your own definition sam. Faith is Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Some beliefs (as in my example) DO rest on logical proof or material evidence. As per my example.

Belief rests on logical proof?
:roflmao:

No. It's a certainty, since by definition, all mass posesses the property of gravitation.

So you do believe that all planets have gravity.

Yes. As far as we know. There may be CP violations that explain the absence of antimatter in the universe (i.e. why there's matter in the first place and it wasn't all self annihilated with equal amounts of antimatter).

Is that a yes or a no?

Dropping shit on my foot! What else? Repeatable, hard evidence? Are you really going to go to the philosophical bitter end with this nonsense?

Sam, this really is diverting from the contention that atheism is a belief, and just what beliefs are. If you have a point, why not just make it?

Repeatable hard evidence that relies on the infallibility of natural laws.

 

[superluminal]

Belief rests on logical proof?

Does it?

So you do believe that all planets have gravity.

Do I?

Is that a yes or a no?

Is it?

Repeatable hard evidence that a ball drops on your foot is the "proof" that it happens on every other planet?

Is it?

:roflmao:

 

[superluminal]

Have you ever heard yourself, honeybuns?

Have you?

 

[superluminal]

So you do not believe ANYTHING without evidence?

Do I?

 

[superluminal]

Don't be silly. Provide me with evidence that you exist.

Do you?

 

[superluminal]

Say, do you atheists believe that all people on this forum are real?

Do we?

 

[superluminal]

So what you are saying sam, is that you think we atheists are the most enlightend people you've run across on this forum? That's what you're saying, right?

 

[superluminal]

Whats wrong with godless? Or are you asking for a definition that covers the absence of religion as well?

Are we?

 

[superluminal]

Not to the godless, that would be like explaining color to the blind.

So what you are saying is that blind people can't detect wavelengths of light?

:roflmao:

 

[superluminal]

Editing your posts again after I've already answered them? Is that what you're doing?

 

[greenberg]

Don't be silly. Provide me with evidence that you exist.

Questions from indoctrinated cultists that are ridiculous in the extreme are not meant for discussion, but are merely last ditch efforts of triggered responses. They are meant for the discussion to be derailed and diminished.

In the context of the above request, we wonder just how far the cultist will go to demonstrate their hypocrisy as they have yet to demonstrate anything else, and yet will demand demonstrations that people do in fact exist. Absurd.

I can hardly believe such exchanges are taking place.
In fact, I am so befuddled by them that I try to take them seriously - because I can hardly believe this is happening. On a forum like this. From people who consider themselves "rational" and "scientific".

Q, do you even want to be taken seriously?

 

[(Q)]

I'm just showing how atheism is a belief. :shrug:

If you are so supportive of evidence based reasoning why do you refrain from backing up your own statements?

Cultists who are so far detached believe they are actually contributing to a discussion when they are merely monologuing their hypocrisy.

 

[S.A.M.]

Atheism is a word that means "lack of belief". I've already provided definitions to that effect. So unless you contend that antimatter is matter, or that not dying is dying, or that non-belief is belief, you'd be wise to rethink this absurd position.

I cannot perceive, hence it does not exist

"lack of belief" is a misnomer. Semantically or etymologically or even by basic standards of epistemology it makes NO sense

 

[(Q)]

I can hardly believe such exchanges are taking place.
In fact, I am so befuddled by them that I try to take them seriously - because I can hardly believe this is happening. On a forum like this. From people who consider themselves "rational" and "scientific".

It's a result of your childhood indoctrination, your befuddlement is quite normal.

 

[S.A.M.]

Q, do you even want to be taken seriously?

No he does not. When he wants to be taken seriously, he does not use verbosity to hide behind.

 

[superluminal]

I cannot perceive, hence it does not exist

So what you're saying is that perception is dependent on existence?