The Religion of Atheism

" I doubt anyone can actually believe and not believe equally on the issue of the existance of a god. It might be genuinely possible not to care at all but to believe and disbelieve equally defies " belief "

What that means is there is no such thing as an agnostic. Just people who have varing degrees of belief and disbelief. And to carry it a bit further there probably are few if any people who are totally believers or atheists, or are one or the other at all times.

 

I wonder what religion my dog is? (My cats, I'm pretty sure, are Satanists )

 

And, let's never forget, a liar.

I notice you ignored most everything I typed, and in particular, you strangely did not offer a strong and powerful rebuttal to the logical paradox in your viewpoint, no matter how many times we ask you, you can never crack that little nut, nor will you try. The reason is of course that it is a logical absurdity that arises from the position you hold which means you hold the wrong position. What you aren't doing, is honestly looking at your position in light of that discovery and changing your position. What you are doing is closing your eyes as hard as you can and covering your ears when that difficulty is posed and desperately hoping that it will just go away on it's own. You are afraid to face it. so, instead you just shout your emotions like above, and do everything you can to avoid the problem. Usually you will ignore that part of the conversation and focus on something that in your mind you have on stronger ground.

But, let's look at that thing you think you are right about and what it says about your ability to reason:

If you will recall, I predicted this:

But, to recap, I said that one can't 100% be sure that there is no god, but that is only because we can't be 100% sure of anything, and I said it this way(and I said it several other times and ways as well).

Now, with your super logic powers, you deduced that what I said above means this:

And, you stand by this deduction? You are willing to broadcast to the world that this is how powerful your mind is? Would you like to go on record as saying that all of your other thoughts and arguments are equally valid and well thought out? That this is representative of how your mind works?

 

You also said no one can know if anything is real.

Therefore the reasonable mind that requires facts and proof must conclude that NOTHING IS REAL since NOTHING CAN BE PROVEN REAL.

You bet your bippy I do! You said it you own it no amount of back pedaling squirming and double-speak or new-speak can save you. You own it.

You bet your bippy I do! You said it you own it no amount of back pedaling squirming and double-speak or new-speak can save you. You own it.

DUH! What do you think putting it in text does?

Yep, rational, reasonable, logical, and it busted your over the top ridiculous mental masturbation you are trying to sell out here.
Now back to previous duck n dodge squirm programming.

Thats quite the rant about me, nice fiction.

Beyond The Outer Limits,
brought you by Neoatheists inc!

 

Lol, you are asserting that anything with ANY possibility of not being true, is absolutely false. And, you continue below to affirm that you stand by that position over and over again. Now, this of course would have to mean that a god is absolutely, without a doubt, not real. So, you actually have come out as more of an atheist than anybody on this board. Congratulations! while your assertion that "a god 100% without a doubt is fake" is slightly too strong, it is the most logical thing I have seen you say.

I also called you out and will call you out again for not resolving your paradox in which your logic claims that everything is potentially as real as anything else. We can keep adding things to the list of things you consider as real as your father... superman, batman, robin.

 

FALSE
You fail to comprehend what I am saying or you may be trolling I dont know which, and since your premise is unadulterated bullshit everything that follows is unadulterated bullshit.

 

LOL! Or, you are lost and scared and confused. Or, you know you are wrong and can't figure out how to emotion your way out of it. I don't blame you for being wrong, I blame you for not addressing the reasons you are wrong honestly and with thought.

So, let's recap. Since you are such a logic and math wiz, lets try this:

assertion A = 'we exist'
My statement:
p(A) <1
your conclusion:
if p(A)<1 then p(!A) =1

Please correct the above to show my mistake.

Things you think are as real as your father: superman, batman, robin, spaghetti monster, unicorns, and smurfs.

 

OR NOT

OR NOT

I am not the one claiming nothing is real, you are.

Try the lacker version:

assertion A = 'we lack'
My statement:
p(A) <1
your conclusion:
if p(A)<1 then p(!A) =1
if p(A)<1 then p(A) =0

You keep doubling tripling down and get your ass handed to you each time, what are we up to now about 7time double down?

 

in other words, you are saying: if p(A)<1 then p(!A) =1
Right? If not, tell me what you are saying.

So, you think you are somehow addressing the problems in your thinking by talking about 'lacking' which is something we have never talked about? And, in your mind that's a win if you avoid confronting the issue? I mean we are deep in the weeds here, and we have several logical problems with the very few things you have said, and you have yet to address any of them in any way other than trying to change the subject.

Things you think are as real as your father (or are too afraid to think about): he-man, superman, batman, robin, spaghetti monster, unicorns, and smurfs.

 

seems we did!

 

Lol, fair enough, you win that one. I had forgotten since it is such an unimportant tiny part of the conversation that I don't really care about. And, even worse, I gave you an avenue of escape to talk about something unrelated, and that let you pretend not to notice the important things I did say. It feels so strange to be wrong, maybe I should try your techniques:

did
[did]
do.

do
[do͞o]
carry out · undertake · discharge · execute · perpetrate · perform ·
accomplish · implement · achieve · complete · finish · conclude · bring about · engineer · effect · realize · pull off · effectuate

• cook (food) to completion or to a specified degree.
  "if a knife inserted into the center comes out clean, then your pie is done"

I don't think we cooked any food!! (stupid emoji or unconnected youtube video).

Hmm, doesn't feel very good. How do you deal with it so much?

Everybody welcome koko!! Our newest atheist.

Things you think are as real as your father (or are too afraid to think about): santa clause, he-man, superman, batman, robin, spaghetti monster, unicorns, and smurfs.

 

You force me to prove that your bullshit is just that bullshit. If you would simply drop it when you can see your ass has been handed to you instead of creating 10 strawman arguments and doubling down every time your wacky theories are debunked I wouldnt have to 'win' and embarrass you.

No, its the main point and topic as you can see by the conversation we had, when as I said I had to debunk the constant misrepresentations and strawmen you posted.

You gave me stacked deck, thinking I didnt see that train coming, and I did not fall for it and now you are all butt hurt over it.

It shouldnt, you havent gotten one right yet, at least not in the 10 rounds with me, seems more like it should be SSDD for you. ps: thats not my technique btw

I dont mind, you can make foolish screw ups out here as much as you like, wont affect my credibility.

There you go, thought you would be smart with your logic algorithm and challenged me to correct it and now that I have corrected it with regard to the topic, claim that means I am an atheist despite the FACT I have told you I am agnostic umpteen times and you still dont get it.

As an agnostic I neither believe nor disbelieve, in other words abstain in voting either way.

You are the one who defies logic.
You cant prove there is no God, come out here singing reason, logic and rational thinking and insist there is no God despite you have no proof what so ever that is in FACT the case. Totally unreasonable, irrational, illogical by my standards and the standards of classical logic.

 

Lol, no no, please, take that win. But, before you can, could you demonstrate a strawman I have proposed? Or a theory you have debunked?

Yes, very very very important, or... almost useless, one of those two.

Lol, nope, you never do fall for being tricked into defending your arguments or using logic. It hasn't happened once that you have addressed very real concerns with your positions. I haven't tricked you into being right or using logic once.

Oh? What do you base that on? You were right that we once took a detour onto a topic I didn't remember a while ago. Other than that, what have you even proposed? Let alone been right about?

To be fair, I never thought you would understand the logical proposition. And, you obviously didn't since you avoided it completely. Remember how many times I've predicted you would never address a problem directly and you would only dodge and try to change the subject? That was number 755.

No you aren't.

You can't prove there is no: spongebob, santa clause, he-man, superman, batman, robin, spaghetti monster, unicorns, and smurfs. Until you can resolve that little issue, then you are wrong, you lose, you haven't done anything because you can't answer a simple question. You are afraid that it is there to outsmart you. And it is, I am much smarter than you, and you are wrong, so if you answer questions and follow the logic, of course you will be proved wrong. However, avoiding that fact won't make you right.

 

Im amazed how you love to hang yourself.

I said: (the full explanation in the above quote)

you come in with and expect me to fall for your strawman bullshit:

AGAIN:

Lack
1. the state of being without or not having enough of something.

I SAID:

I DID NOT SAY YOU LACK ANY GAS as you pretended, I SAID YOU LACK THE GAS, and explained it could be lacking only 1/4 tank. The only way to express lack gas to mean NO gas is to say you lack ANY gas, which of course is an assinine way to say it, when you could simply say you have NO GAS.

Its all been said long ago and you went and continued on your tangent.

2 fer 2!

Are you having fun yet!

 

Lol, ok, I don't know why, but lets pretend this tiny little discussion about semantics is remotely important. Nothing you posted up there looks good for you. And nothing I posted there could remotely be considered a strawman, but we know you don't understand logic, and certainly don't understand logical fallacies.

So lets try to talk about 'lack' since you are so desperate. Everything I said up there is true. You either get to toledo or you don't. If you lack the gas to get there, then you don't have enough. It can be any level of gas less than the amount required to get to toledo, but there is no ambiguity that you will not get to toledo.

By the same token, if you lack the faith to believe that a god exists, then you can have any level of faith less than that required to accept that a god exists. But, it falls short of that mark, so you lack belief that a god exists(strangely, you don't seem to understand gradations in other contexts). Now, on to the main problem with your argument. If you want to pretend that the burden of proof is on proving that something doesn't exist, then you have to explain how you know EVERYthing else that doesn't exist doesn't exist. That last very critical point is one that you are scared to address because it MEANS you are WRONG. There is no getting around it, so you will weasel into some way of changing the subject to semantics.

And, since god cannot be proven real, then you are saying god must NOT be real. Bad logic, but welcome to the atheist club.

Things you think are as real as your father (or are too afraid to think about): floating city of technologically advanced sea-monkeys in orbit around saturn, spongebob, santa clause, he-man, superman, batman, robin, spaghetti monster, unicorns, and smurfs.

 

The spaghetti monster is real.

 

Only to bowls of spaghetti. I guess the fellow who coined that term was basically some kinda noodle?

 

That was Guito,, He pasta way.

 

Actually Steven Talmund, the man who first encountered the noodly appendage has been mostly forgotten in the sacred texts but is comfortably living in Fresno,Ca.

 

I don't personally think the spaghetti monster is real, but kokomojo does lol.

 

Not only does he think it's real, he will give you a page long rant proving it.

 

ha ha. Good one.

I have another good one. I have converted from being an agnostic to a atheist agnostic theist. Had to get baptized in the River of Incoherent Contradiction.

Come on in boys...the water is fine! Now those agnostic atheists got nothing on me, man! I one upped them.

So now I do not believe in any God, its existence, but do not know for sure, but God exists and you better well believe it!

I am quite the mess.

 

I'm not to sure I believe in agnostics.

 

Lol, and a dictionary definition of a word pulled out of thin air.

 

But how good is the sauce, that is the question? I don't like my noodles straight. And does it come with meatballs?