Right? Basically anything realistically measurable, verifiable, etc...is not considered evidence to you, right?
you forgot to tell about these realistically measurable and verifiable evidences
Last edited:
Right? Basically anything realistically measurable, verifiable, etc...is not considered evidence to you, right?
just one case of ireversibly complex structure in nature
Yes he was, obviouslyHe wasn't implying anything of the kind. Wakey wakey.
"Wakey wakey" wtf?SnakeLord said:He's not talking about the 'existence' of fairies, he's talking about having no evidence and you not believing until you have some. Wakey wakey.
???? I doubt you will be punished for carrying on a conversation.
I don't fault atheists for anything except for believing they're more rational and superior than everyone else
ROFL...what's this about? First you start off saying I shouldn't think I'm superior, then you end up saying atheists do think they're superior and that it's human nature....Just by making that statement shows that you think that you are superior
to those who you seem to ridicule for being who they are. What makes you
have the right to judge others that think differently than you and criticize
them if you don't feel superior to them to begin with? You want those that
don't think the way that you want them to think to believe somehow they
are better but they never make statements like that only you have. If you
can give examples where atheists have made statements which show they
are somehow superior to anyone else. Then find those that believe in God
and you will see that they speak about being the "chosen ones". Everyone
thinks they are better than the other guy, that's just human nature.
Right, so this only applies to court cases where you're "innocent until proven guilty"Man is guilty, but I have no evidence to support this.
Just because there is no evidence to support he is guilty doesn't mean he isn't guilty. BUT, because there is no evidence to support he is guilty, we should not convict him for the crime. atm, the man is irrelevant to the jury because there is no evidence supporting his involvment.
Likewise, just because there is no evidence to support God doesn't mean God doesn't exist. BUT, because there is no evidence supporting his existence, we should not assume he does exist. We should admit the possibility of his existence, but not worship him as if he does. If God exists, atm he is irrelevant to my life because he has not shown his existance.
Atheism is not the belief God doesn't exist, it is the lack of belief in his existance.
you forgot to tell about these realistically measurable and verifiable evidences
ROFL...what's this about? First you start off saying I shouldn't think I'm superior, then you end up saying atheists do think they're superior and that it's human nature....
Atheists really believe that everyone else besides them are just delusional fools, they even tell people that they should not respect peoples' beliefs...
All praise the great atheistic faith
I've never stated anyone is delusional or a fool. I've only said that anyone
that believes in an invisible super being that created everything must have
not looked at the facts that suggest otherwise. I bring out evolution as a
fact along with many other archaeological findings that prove the Bible isn't
correct at all. I have also stated that it is a belief that people base their
faith upon and therefore no facts are needed for such believing.
What evidence suggests otherwise? Evolution? How does that contradict the existence of God? I don't understand...
This is just a clever way of atheists saying "you're inferior and lower than me"
It is a statement which anyone that can read can see that it is not saying
that anyone is a fool as you have stated. It only states that everyone is
correct in their views. Beliefs are seperate than facts, just that simple. As
long as both are kept seperate then all is well.
What's this supposed to mean? Sounds like a re-confirmation that you atheists really believe you're smarter and superior to everyone else...
I don't see how my statement can sound "superior" as you say it does. I'd
think that it is you that has a very big problem trying to rationalize the
difference from someone just saying something and someone saying that
they are superior to anyone.
How very convenient yet true...just like how ancient people couldn't observe, percieve, or measure electromagnetism...according to YOU with YOUR logic that should've meant that electromagnetism doesn't existHow very convenient
Atheists are close-minded, here's why:I often told by the religious that I an atheist am closed-minded, either in conversation, or reading them, call atheists closed-minded on forums and such, however nothing could be further from the truth, I sure the religious don’t understand what closed-minded actually is.
Closed-minded: having a mind firmly unreceptive to new ideas or arguments.
For some strange reason the religious seem to think, they are open-minded, strange isn't it.
just recently two elderly JW ladies knocked on my door, one lady handed me the watchtower, I said ladies I'm an atheist, and I have no believe in any of this, and handed it back, she said you've got to keep an open mind, I was tempted to, give her a piece of mind, for being so arrogant, as assume that I was closed mind all because I had no belief in her fantasy. Whereas I am open to all possibilities, and not single mindedly following one particular deity out of thousands, and thousands, it riles me.
Until now I have never called a religious person closed or single minded.
I wished they would think about what they're saying, but that would be too much to ask I think.
do you find either atheists or theist closed minded if so please elaborate, as I sincerely believe I'm right in my view on this, but also have a keen interest to see if I'm wrong.
thanks pavlos
There's already lots of examples of irreducibly complex things in nature...to escape this conclusion the atheist will say "it doesn't matter if we never ever find a naturalistic explanation, it happened in some unknown naturalistic way"
name one
Hmm...I think you misunderstood, I asked what can be considered evidence of God and got things that aren't realistically measurable and verifiable...that's what was meant by this....I never said there was realistically measurable verifiable evidence....