nt250
Senior Member
- Jun 2, 2006
- 1,013
- 72
- 48
- Thread starter
- #81
It's your theory that I'm trying to disprove; your set of requirements to do so. What am I supposed to argue about? If you remain vague I suppose it's easy to not be proven wrong...
On a side note, do I fall into the "just likes to argue" pile if I don't ever actually argue with you about the existence of God?
How am I remaining vague? There is no such thing as an agnostic. Can't get anymore specific than that.
Why are you trying to disprove my theory? To argue with me. See? Itold you self proclaimed agnostics just like to argue, and they ONLY argue with atheists.
"Agnostics" don't like atheists. We make you look riduculous while you try and convince yourselves that you are intellectually superior for saying "I don't know".
Do you keep such an open mind about astrology, tea leaf readers, psychics? Are you willing to say you "don't know" if people can communicate with the dead? All while charging $700 an hour, of course.
Do you find anything patently ridiculous? How about perpetual motion machines? Dowsing? Nigerian bank deposits?
Can you make up your mind about anything? Then why is a god so different? It's different because you believe. You just don't want to admit it because you know how stupid it is.
If you do keep an open mind about all that other stuff, then I take it back. You're just plain stupid.
BTW, you are now arguing with me about finding someone else to argue with. I'd say you've proved me right about my theory.