A Thought for Atheists

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't get offended by words on a computer screen.

And I didn't ask you to defend that position, just telling you that position exists.

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Irrelevant? Hardly. That IS the main contention of most atheists. It is central and germain to all discussion with the religious.

I never saw Drock say it, which makes it irrelevant to any discussion I am having with him.

 

[Middleoftheroad]

I don't get offended by words on a computer screen.

And I didn't ask you to defend that position, just telling you that position exists.

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Irrelevant? Hardly. That IS the main contention of most atheists. It is central and germain to all discussion with the religious.

Ridiculous to say most. Maybe some atheists feel this way, but my guess would be that most atheists are like me, at one point we were religious and now we are not. I can perfectly understand how someone can believe in god, because I used to myself.

 

[Lokiate]

Yet you are attempting to make me defend a position I do not have. That indicates that you are actually offended by something, what is it?

I don't get offended by words on a computer screen.

And I didn't ask you to defend that position, just telling you that position exists.

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Then why did you make it a part of your conversation? Drock's response to my post, in which I answered a question for somebody in an entirely different conversation, had nothing to do with you, but you still felt it necessary to butt in.

Then you ranted about how nobody should get mad that people use their beliefs to try and belittle atheists, and members of "wrong religions", using some half-assed excuse, and accusation of low self-esteem. Your argument was fucking stupid to begin with, and if you didn't want to discuss it, you shouldn't have gotten involved with a conversation that had nothing to do with you to begin with.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't get offended by words on a computer screen.

And I didn't ask you to defend that position, just telling you that position exists.

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Then why did you make it a part of the conversation? Drock's response to my post, in which I answered a question for somebody in an entirely different conversation.

Because I was making a point to him about how he made a point about what some Christians say.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GuEswXOXo]32 D'oh's in 15 Seconds - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Lokiate]

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Then why did you make it a part of the conversation? Drock's response to my post, in which I answered a question for somebody in an entirely different conversation.

Because I was making a point to him about how he made a point about what some Christians say.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GuEswXOXo]32 D'oh's in 15 Seconds - YouTube[/ame]

Read the edit. I hit submit instead of preview on accident.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Irrelevant? Hardly. That IS the main contention of most atheists. It is central and germain to all discussion with the religious.

Ridiculous to say most. Maybe some atheists feel this way, but my guess would be that most atheists are like me, at one point we were religious and now we are not. I can perfectly understand how someone can believe in god, because I used to myself.

I've actually never seen a single atheist say people who believe in God are criminally insane, maybe such ppl exist but I've never seen or heard one.

Let alone "most", that's just crazy emotional victim talk.

 

[Dr.Drock]

No, the will of the people did.

You are making unwarranted assumptions based on your prejudices. You really should try to approach this with an open mind, you might learn something. I never said God is omnipotent, or anything else. Why do you keep resorting to strawmen? Are you that afraid that you might be wrong?

You're the one who said the Christmas Truce was evidence of God. I'm trying to get you to expand on how that could make any sense.

I do have an open mind, convince me how the truce was evidence of God, and the before and after the truce them shooting their heads off wasn't evidence of God.

And rest assured I'm not the least bit worried about my lack of religion.

No you aren't, you are asking me how I reconcile the Christmas Truce with the existence of an omnipotent God that refuses to stop evil. Since that is not the God I believe in I have no obligation to defend that position.

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

 

[InDoctriNation]

He's not going to elaborate any further in any meaningful way, since the God he is defending thrives on vagueness and obfuscation.

 

[HUGGY]

Irrelevant? Hardly. That IS the main contention of most atheists. It is central and germain to all discussion with the religious.

Ridiculous to say most. Maybe some atheists feel this way, but my guess would be that most atheists are like me, at one point we were religious and now we are not. I can perfectly understand how someone can believe in god, because I used to myself.

I've actually never seen a single atheist say people who believe in God are criminally insane, maybe such ppl exist but I've never seen or heard one.

Let alone "most", that's just crazy emotional victim talk.

Well....allow me to be the first then... People that believe in the sky fairy and try to push that notion on to others or into the governance of others are criminally insane!

There I said it.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Ridiculous to say most. Maybe some atheists feel this way, but my guess would be that most atheists are like me, at one point we were religious and now we are not. I can perfectly understand how someone can believe in god, because I used to myself.

I've actually never seen a single atheist say people who believe in God are criminally insane, maybe such ppl exist but I've never seen or heard one.

Let alone "most", that's just crazy emotional victim talk.

Well....allow me to be the first then... People that believe in the sky fairy and try to push that notion on to others or into the governance of others are criminally insane!

There I said it.

I'm not surprised you say that, because you often go off the deep end on crazy emotion-based tangents.

To say 3/4 of the american population and most everyone around the world are "criminally insane" for having different beliefs than you makes you far closer to criminally insane than they are, and you and I believe in the same number of gods.

 

[Lokiate]

And it is irrelevant to our discussion, just like the fact that some atheists think people who believe in God are criminally insane is irrelevant.

Then why did you make it a part of the conversation? Drock's response to my post, in which I answered a question for somebody in an entirely different conversation.

Because I was making a point to him about how he made a point about what some Christians say.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GuEswXOXo]32 D'oh's in 15 Seconds - YouTube[/ame]

Then you threw a bitch fit, and started making moon-bat accusations before yelling that it was all irrelevant, and ran away.

 

[HUGGY]

I've actually never seen a single atheist say people who believe in God are criminally insane, maybe such ppl exist but I've never seen or heard one.

Let alone "most", that's just crazy emotional victim talk.

Well....allow me to be the first then... People that believe in the sky fairy and try to push that notion on to others or into the governance of others are criminally insane!

There I said it.

I'm not surprised you say that, because you often go off the deep end on crazy emotion-based tangents.

To say 3/4 of the american population and most everyone around the world are "criminally insane" for having different beliefs than you makes you far closer to criminally insane than they are, and you and I believe in the same number of gods.

Jumpin Jezuss on a pogo stick! That's a harsh criticism!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You're the one who said the Christmas Truce was evidence of God. I'm trying to get you to expand on how that could make any sense.

I do have an open mind, convince me how the truce was evidence of God, and the before and after the truce them shooting their heads off wasn't evidence of God.

And rest assured I'm not the least bit worried about my lack of religion.

No you aren't, you are asking me how I reconcile the Christmas Truce with the existence of an omnipotent God that refuses to stop evil. Since that is not the God I believe in I have no obligation to defend that position.

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He's not going to elaborate any further in any meaningful way, since the God he is defending thrives on vagueness and obfuscation.

I never tried to defend Him, which is what makes it frustrating for people like you.

 

[Photonic]

No you aren't, you are asking me how I reconcile the Christmas Truce with the existence of an omnipotent God that refuses to stop evil. Since that is not the God I believe in I have no obligation to defend that position.

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

Let me tell you a little something. I'm an atheist, I'm a Physicist as well.

As far as my beliefs go;

If they are shown to be falsely held beliefs by the science, then there is no reason to hold onto them anymore. No matter how good they make me feel.

I would rather know then live in blissful ignorance.

So I guess the one thing I couldn't give up is my ability to know. I'm fairly sure any atheist would agree with me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then why did you make it a part of the conversation? Drock's response to my post, in which I answered a question for somebody in an entirely different conversation.

Because I was making a point to him about how he made a point about what some Christians say.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GuEswXOXo"]32 D'oh's in 15 Seconds - YouTube[/ame]

Then you threw a bitch fit, and started making moon-bat accusations before yelling that it was all irrelevant, and ran away.

Ran away?

 

[Dr.Drock]

No you aren't, you are asking me how I reconcile the Christmas Truce with the existence of an omnipotent God that refuses to stop evil. Since that is not the God I believe in I have no obligation to defend that position.

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

People label me differently from atheist to agnostic. I'm 99.999999999999999999999% a god doesn't exist, based on math and science, but there's no proof one or more don't exist. Does that .00000000000000000001% make me agnostic or an atheist? I'll leave that up to other ppl as the label isn't important to me, but most have concluded that means I'm an atheist so i just roll with it.

I would think proof would be proof, whether i were looking for it or not, and I'm not seeing how in any way the Christmas Truce is evidence of your god.

I have no moral or intellectual problem in believing in a god or gods, as long as there's proof.

 

[daws101]

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

Let me tell you a little something. I'm an atheist, I'm a Physicist as well.

As far as my beliefs go;

If they are shown to be falsely held beliefs by the science, then there is no reason to hold onto them anymore. No matter how good they make me feel.

I would rather know then live in blissful ignorance.

So I guess the one thing I couldn't give up is my ability to know. I'm fairly sure any atheist would agree with me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

People label me differently from atheist to agnostic. I'm 99.999999999999999999999% a god doesn't exist, based on math and science, but there's no proof one or more don't exist. Does that .00000000000000000001% make me agnostic or an atheist? I'll leave that up to other ppl as the label isn't important to me, but most have concluded that means I'm an atheist so i just roll with it.

I would think proof would be proof, whether i were looking for it or not, and I'm not seeing how in any way the Christmas Truce is evidence of your god.

I have no moral or intellectual problem in believing in a god or gods, as long as there's proof.

Your beliefs aren't important to you?

You want proof that there is a God, but you do not want proof that evolution is real? Your intellectual dishonesty is showing again. You are the one that proclaimed yourself an atheist, yet you want to wiggle by trying to argue that your 20 significant digits of certainty gives you an open mind, it doesn't. If you actually had an open mind you would accept evidence and actually examine it, just like you do with any scientific theory.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm simply asking you to expand on how the Christmas Truce is evidence of God.

Ignore every other word I've said, and please simply expand on the point you made earlier.

It is evidence of God the same way that a platypus is evidence of evolution.

You can't look at just one thing and draw a conclusion. That is not how science works, which anyone who actually understands it knows. When you look at something and immediately try to explain it in terms that preclude any alternate explanations you have a closed mind. Atheists already know there is no God, so they refuse to examine the evidence that shows he exists with an open mind.

Remember when we got into this discussion because you challenged my assertion that atheists were intellectually dishonest? Remember how you reacted when I pointed to some evidence? I can't have this discussion separate from what you said because the point of this discussion is that your mind is closed. I cannot prove God exists, all I can do is show you that you are not looking for Him.

Let me tell you a little something. I'm an atheist, I'm a Physicist as well.

As far as my beliefs go;

If they are shown to be falsely held beliefs by the science, then there is no reason to hold onto them anymore. No matter how good they make me feel.

I would rather know then live in blissful ignorance.

So I guess the one thing I couldn't give up is my ability to know. I'm fairly sure any atheist would agree with me.

Do you know that dark energy is real? Or do you, like most scientist, simply accept it based on observation and theory?