OK Atheists.......prove god doesn't exist

As I said as rule it happens with the greatest minds who has given as fundamental physical and mathematical theories - they run into God one after another.
It is more than entertaining, it is a kind of inspiring.

 

You confessed when you got found out, tell me what your other options were!

 

Does it happen to plagiarists as well?

 

People form their knowledge about other people from other people's words and actions.
It is of no importance what other people know about themselves.
I have been demonstrating blind beliefs with no root in reality formed by people throughout all my posts.
As the latest example look throughout this tread.
The blind belief that one cannot prove negative is like a rule for atheists.

 

Not to confess, like you do.

 

The burden of proof lies with the one making the positive assertion. It's not my job to disprove the ten million religions and deities I don't believe in.

 

No, they burn in hell. Why are you asking.? You are not suggesting that Cantor was plagiarist when he detailed on some well known Xn theology, are you?

 

[/QUOTE]

So you were unable to offer a reason to change my lack of belief, you just deny I could think that way.

Understand the difference, you were caught out plagiarising. You have only your subjective opinion for what I think. Got It?

 

No I am stating that you plagiarised Cantor and asked if you had found god?

 

I couldn't think that reading my post somebody could ever suggest that I was attributing the text quoted by me to myself. But I guess one never knows how minds forming beliefs which have no roots in reality work.

 

I couldn't think that reading my post somebody could ever suggest that I was attributing the text quoted by me to myself. But I guess one never knows how minds forming beliefs which have no roots in reality work.

 

It's you who are being deluded; Drug tests don't look for absence of drugs, but rather their presence. That you are drug-free after that is a matter of conclusion based on circumstancial evidence based on the technologies available, not a direct proof of an absence. You can't prove a negative.

 

Then what are you confessing to?

 

And is what is described God or not? Your description may be "well" but it is only a description, it is not what you describe.

 

And what if I came from the future or another, more advanced civilisation with tech that makes it possible to somehow stash an elephant in a pocket-sized space? (I am not BTW - it's just rethorical)

Just look at the Lock Ness monster: If it could be proven that it does not exists, it's pretty much the end of it right? In this case we don't say that the LNM is inexistant - we say that there are no proof about its existance.

If god's existance could be proven, then we wouldn't have faith; we would have science.

 

You take this god exist debate very seriously. I was not serious at all .

 

It is true in fact and atheists have no blind religious beliefs

 

Total bullshit and you were hilariously destroyed and humiliated by me and others on other threads when you used such weak and lame arguments.

 

OK, by the way, did Cantor discover god in the mental institution he died in?

 

A test looks for presence of something, for instance for presence of you in this world. What are possible outcomes of the test ?

 

Cogito ergo sum

 

No. He created his fundamental mathematical theories without help of mental institution, atheists in their everlasting quest to shut up the truth manged to put him in.
Quite a usual thing for atheists to do. Can you stay on topic?

 

Actually Xn theologian Descartes changed it to " I think I am" but in any way it is a very good start point. You found not be absent. Negative is proven.

 

Who were these atheists?