Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke

[Jan Ardena]

How is it possible to have only 1 god when there are many gods.

Who said there is only ''1 god''?
Have you not been paying attention?

Many gods is much more logical than 1 god.

Agreed.

Nearly everything which exists, there are many of.

You're on a roll here.

Monotheism came into being by combining gods in order to claim a more powerful god than others.

And back down we go.

People can & do worship gods as much as you worship your wisp of smoke.

So bitter.
This is the problem with atheism (modern). You get bitter, and angry, when your position is revealed.
The article is brilliant, because it proves itself correct, when atheists read it.

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Seriously tho, you need to stop saying things to others you should be saying to yourself.

I don't lie to myself
That's what you do.
You really believe you're an actual atheist, as opposed to being merely a professed one.

jan.

 

[iceaura]

You can't fathom anything prescriptive about them?

Not in general, no. They are often, in some respects, actually opposed to prescription - not merely neutral, but discouraging.
Of course, they are not inherently theistic in the first place - so they might not exist at all, according to science as reported by the OP.

No.
Plenty of jokes there that are not even that specific.

Not that I've seen. They deal mainly with Jan's God and the theism of Abrahamic heritage, as far as I recall.

You have been setting the scene with your swaggering indignation for some time now.

Any time you want to take up the matter of science forums attracting the kinds of posts from theists exemplified by the OP and its apologists here, there's plenty of room - the scene is not crowded, and has no theists at all so far.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

Who said there is only ''1 god''?
Have you not been paying attention?



Agreed.



You're on a roll here.



And back down we go.



So bitter.
This is the problem with atheism (modern). You get bitter, and angry, when your position is revealed.
The article is brilliant.

jan.

///
You contradict yourself again.
I have not been angry for over 50 years.
You must be seeing your faults in others.

<>

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

I don't lie to myself
That's what you do.
You really believe you're an actual atheist, as opposed to being merely a professed one.

jan.

///
How many points are you up to in your silly game?

<>

 

[Jan Ardena]

///
You contradict yourself again.

How so?

I have not been angry for over 50 years.

I think you're in denial (not surprisingly).

You must be seeing your faults in others.

This kind of comeback seems to be the last resort of professed atheist. Boring!
You're all pretending this thread is about the existence of God, because you don't want to face up to the fact that your position is empty, pointless, and dangerous.
It is simply atheists rejecting, and denying.

jan.

 

[iceaura]

I don't lie to myself

You lie about other people, and to other people, continually. You post in bad faith, by reflex and routine. The OP you posted - lead with falsehood - illustrates your approach, your defense of it by slander and bullshit and insult and deflection here is completely typical of you.

And you base all of it on your claimed theistic beliefs, explicitly. So do others who post like that on science forums like this one.

The question is why theists do that. It's the only matter of substance for discussion the OP raises.

Ok: You claim you are not lying to yourself. If we take that as hypothetically the case (no evidence, no argument, but possible however unusual and unlikely) - we have remaining a variety of more cynical, less innocent, possibilities.

 

[Jan Ardena]

///
How many points are you up to in your silly game?

<>

What silly game?

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

You lie about other people, and to other people, continually. You post in bad faith, by reflex and routine.

You're simply deflecting away from the OP.
Rejection, and denial. That's what atheists do, to not believe in God.

It's the only matter of substance for discussion the OP raises.

The OP is brilliant, as it proves itself correct.

Ok: You claim you are not lying to yourself. If we take that as hypothetically the case (no evidence, no argument, but possible however unusual and unlikely) - we have remaining a variety of more cynical, less innocent, possibilities.

Rejection, and denial. The atheist occupation.
That has a nice ring to it. Don't you think.

jan.

 

[iceaura]

You're simply deflecting away from the OP.

I have dealt with the OP, directly, in every post of mine on this thread.

You have yet to address the main issue with at all. Why is that?
Why do you post falsehoods like the OP on science forums?

You claim you aren't lying to yourself, with the OP or the bad faith subsequent to it. What are you telling yourself, then?

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

I think you're in denial (not surprisingly).

jan.

///
You do not know me. That crap simply demonstrates even more what an obnoxious fool you are.

This kind of comeback seems to be the last resort of professed atheist. Boring!
You're all pretending this thread is about the existence of God, because you don't want to face up to the fact that your position is empty, pointless, and dangerous.
It is simply atheists rejecting, and denying.
jan.

///
Until you explain your supposed belief & why you believe, you are empty & pointless. You do not even have a position. Saying god is is not professing anything.
You not only give us no reason to believe your wisp of smoke, you give us no reason to believe you believe.
I do not bother with rejecting wisps of smoke.

<>

 

[Jan Ardena]

Why do you post falsehoods like the OP on science forums?

Why is the OP a falsehood?

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

You do not know me. That crap simply demonstrates even more what an obnoxious fool you are.

Temper!

Until you explain your supposed belief & why you believe, you are empty & pointless.

That's not the point of the thread.

Saying god is is not professing anything.

That's ''God Is'', if you don't mind thank you.

You not only give no reason to believe your wisp of smoke, you give no reason to believe you believe.

I've no idea what you're talking about.

I do not bother with rejecting wisps of smoke.

Only God. I know.
Can we get back to the topic at hand, maybe?

jan.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

Temper!



That's not the point of the thread.



That's ''God Is'', if you don't mind thank you.



I've no idea what you're talking about.



Only God. I know.
Can we get back to the topic at hand, maybe?

jan.

If somehow you could know I am not angry, how disappointed would you be. Do you try to make people angry.

It is the point of any attempt at discussing your supposed god.

You write it how you will & I will write it how I will, regardless of whether you mind.

Only god is a wisp of smoke, as far as you seem to believe.

You evidently have no idea what any of this is about.

The topic of the OP is ridiculous, which has been explained to you over&over&over.

<>

 

[Jan Ardena]

If somehow you could know I am not angry, how disappointed would you be. Do you try to make people angry.

Then show it by not being nasty.
You're right, I don't know you, and you don't know me.

It is the point of any attempt at discussing your supposed god.

What is the point in discussing the existence of God, in this thread.
If anything we should be discussing the non existence of God, because that is what you believe, or something similar.

I'm okay, and comfortable with my belief'
Why aren't okay with yours?

You write it how you will & I will write it how I will, regardless of whether you mind.

I understand that. But it becomes confusing.
If you weren't so bitter you would use the proper cases.
Yazata, Sarkus, Baldeee, James R, all do, and it doesn't compromise their position. It makes for good grammatical distinction.

Only god is a wisp of smoke, as far as you seem to believe.

It's comments like this that lead me to believe you are bitter, and angry.
There's no need to be like that, otherwise.

You evidently have no idea what any of this is about.

Here we go again!

jan.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

Then show it by not being nasty.
You're right, I don't know you, and you don't know me.



What is the point in discussing the existence of God, in this thread.
If anything we should be discussing the non existence of God, because that is what you believe, or something similar.

I'm okay, and comfortable with my belief'
Why aren't okay with yours?



I understand that. But it becomes confusing.
If you weren't so bitter you would use the proper cases.
Yazata, Sarkus, Baldeee, James R, all do, and it doesn't compromise their position. It makes for good grammatical distinction.



It's comments like this that lead me to believe you are bitter, and angry.
There's no need to be like that, otherwise.



Here we go again!

jan.

///
My comments do not lead you to believe I am bitter & angry. You are getting all that somewhere else.

Capital letters are not proper for the words god & is.

As usual, you try to take the coward's way out. Still, you give us no reason to believe you believe.
If you do not believe, you are an atheist.

<>

 

[iceaura]

Why is the OP a falsehood?

Trolls pound sand.

The multiply repeated and detailed answer is pages back, and pretending to have missed it is,
like all your posting here, for reasons you have yet to explain or account for,

dishonest.

The discussion topic is why. Why do you come on a science forum, and post like that?

 

[Musika]

Trolls pound sand.

The multiply repeated and detailed answer is pages back, and pretending to have missed it is,
like all your posting here, for reasons you have yet to explain or account for,

dishonest.

The discussion topic is why. Why do you come on a science forum, and post like that?

More setting of the scene ...

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

///
I do not have a big problem with people living for 1oos of years. 1 of the many problems tho with the Holy Babble is most seem to have children only after 100s of years. Absurd.
While I have never known an adult who did not know where the sun goes at night, I have known many who do not know what stars are & are mystified by eclipses.
May the AllSeeing Eye Of AllFather Odin watch over you.

<>

To be clear, I meant most who lived 100s of years seem to have children only after 1oos of years not most people.

On the patio at 21:00, I pointed to just over the roof of the next house & told my friend "Often at midnight, I stare at a star right there".
He said "But there is no star there".

<>

 

[Jan Ardena]

The multiply repeated and detailed answer is pages back,

Obviously it was inadequate. Try again.

The discussion topic is why.

The thread title provided, is the topic of this thread. Get over it.

Now. Why is the OP a falsehood?

jan.