Atheism Destroyed At Last! - The Deba...

Since: Mar 12

Mumbai, India

#955 Apr 12, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> You mean there is no proof for the non-existence of both?
So you believe in vampires?

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#956 Apr 13, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> I am not jide, I am jide oni. You want to destroy my name to avenge the dead atheism?
Atheism can't die until all god belief is dead and buried

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#957 Apr 13, 2014
fadu singh wrote:
<quoted text>So you believe in vampires?
I don't operate on belief, I operate on knowledge.

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#958 Apr 13, 2014
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism can't die until all god belief is dead and buried
i.e. with only universal God knowledge remaining alive.

Since: Mar 12

Mumbai, India

#959 Apr 13, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> I don't operate on belief, I operate on knowledge.
So you have a knowledge that vampires exist just like an omnipotent God exist?

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#960 Apr 13, 2014
fadu singh wrote:
<quoted text>So you have a knowledge that vampires exist just like an omnipotent God exist?
Knowledge of god, yes. Of vampires, what are vampires?

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#961 Apr 13, 2014
fadu singh wrote:
<quoted text>So you have a knowledge that vampires exist just like an omnipotent God exist?
That of an omnipotent God, yes. But of vampires, are there vampires?

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#962 Apr 13, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> i.e. with only universal God knowledge remaining alive.
nope

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#963 Apr 13, 2014
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
nope
Yes, except if nothing exists, since God is the totality of all that exist.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#964 Apr 13, 2014
I warned jide oni a few pages back that this fallacy, i.e. that an assertion is true until it is proved false, would not go unchallenged. Fallacies seem to be his specialty. He claims to have "proved" the existence of the god that he is here to promote, but each of these "proofs" have been riddled with fallacies that have been pointed out: relying on premises that are neither self-evident nor adequately supported, non sequiturs, and circular arguments are the most common ones.

Some logicians are adept at skillfully camouflaging fallacies, but jide oni's are so glaringly obvious that he either thinks this group of skeptics will accept his assertion despite those errors or believes that is logic is sound. Either way, he is simply too clueless to be taken seriously by anyone other than himself and those who are so gullible as to believe what he says without thinking about whether it actually makes any sense--believers who rely more on faith than logic, reason, and evidence to decide what is true and to understand the world and universe in which they live.

It all goes back to the issue of the burden of proof, which logic assigns to the one making a positive assertion and logistics to the one trying to "sell" an idea. That burden falls squarely on jide oni in both of the treads that he began in this forum to promote his "Universal Religion." Thus far, the weight of that burden has been far greater than jide oni has been able to bear.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#965 Apr 13, 2014
All the skeptics of the world will naturally change their mind the very day they realize that God is truth, life, light, love, beauty, symmetry, nature, universe, intelligence, mind, and, in short, all that man can conjecture to approximate any of the comprehensible aspects of the absolute.

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#966 Apr 13, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> Yes, except if nothing exists, since God is the totality of all that exist.
there is no god
Thinking

Wellingborough, UK

#967 Apr 14, 2014
In jedi nonce's case, it's more of a messiah shed.
Mikko wrote:
Thinking

Wellingborough, UK

#968 Apr 14, 2014
He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy.
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
You called yourself a messiah not me

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#969 Apr 14, 2014
Thinking wrote:
He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy.
<quoted text>
Why are you guys trying to avoid intelligent, fruitful discussions? Are you all that daft?
Thinking

Wellingborough, UK

#970 Apr 14, 2014
Agreed. Until you provide conclusive evidence against the IPU, she must exist, etc, etc.
NightSerf wrote:
I warned jide oni a few pages back that this fallacy, i.e. that an assertion is true until it is proved false, would not go unchallenged. Fallacies seem to be his specialty. He claims to have "proved" the existence of the god that he is here to promote, but each of these "proofs" have been riddled with fallacies that have been pointed out: relying on premises that are neither self-evident nor adequately supported, non sequiturs, and circular arguments are the most common ones.
Some logicians are adept at skillfully camouflaging fallacies, but jide oni's are so glaringly obvious that he either thinks this group of skeptics will accept his assertion despite those errors or believes that is logic is sound. Either way, he is simply too clueless to be taken seriously by anyone other than himself and those who are so gullible as to believe what he says without thinking about whether it actually makes any sense--believers who rely more on faith than logic, reason, and evidence to decide what is true and to understand the world and universe in which they live.
It all goes back to the issue of the burden of proof, which logic assigns to the one making a positive assertion and logistics to the one trying to "sell" an idea. That burden falls squarely on jide oni in both of the treads that he began in this forum to promote his "Universal Religion." Thus far, the weight of that burden has been far greater than jide oni has been able to bear.

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#971 Apr 14, 2014
It appears you guys are comfortable with discussing already over-flogged issues, perhaps scared of meeting with a superior mind like that behind the present thread.
My unusual and radical concept of God, rather than be a cause for worry on your part, should gladden your hearts that such a new concept, if tested flawless, will definitely impact positively on the quality of life of the human race.
Unlike those posters who come on the forum as an avenue for recreation, I am here with a heavy heart full of pains resulting from man's ignorance of the actuality of his own existence.
In view of the foregoing, please note that all those distracting, unserious, puerile comments in this thread will no more be entertained, save those which may eventually lead us on to reaching a happy compromise.
Man-made laws are imperfect; they are the necessary products of the imperfect intelligence of the imperfect man;
(Scientific) natural laws are perfect; therefore, they must be the products of a perfect intelligence.
Thinking

Wellingborough, UK

#972 Apr 14, 2014
Prove it.
jide oni wrote:
It appears you guys are comfortable with discussing already over-flogged issues, perhaps scared of meeting with a superior mind like that behind the present thread.
My unusual and radical concept of God, rather than be a cause for worry on your part, should gladden your hearts that such a new concept, if tested flawless, will definitely impact positively on the quality of life of the human race.
Unlike those posters who come on the forum as an avenue for recreation, I am here with a heavy heart full of pains resulting from man's ignorance of the actuality of his own existence.
In view of the foregoing, please note that all those distracting, unserious, puerile comments in this thread will no more be entertained, save those which may eventually lead us on to reaching a happy compromise.
Man-made laws are imperfect; they are the necessary products of the imperfect intelligence of the imperfect man;
(Scientific) natural laws are perfect; therefore, they must be the products of a perfect intelligence.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#973 Apr 14, 2014
jide oni wrote:
It appears you guys are comfortable with discussing already over-flogged issues, perhaps scared of meeting with a superior mind like that behind the present thread.
My unusual and radical concept of God, rather than be a cause for worry on your part, should gladden your hearts that such a new concept, if tested flawless, will definitely impact positively on the quality of life of the human race.
Unlike those posters who come on the forum as an avenue for recreation, I am here with a heavy heart full of pains resulting from man's ignorance of the actuality of his own existence.
In view of the foregoing, please note that all those distracting, unserious, puerile comments in this thread will no more be entertained, save those which may eventually lead us on to reaching a happy compromise.
Man-made laws are imperfect; they are the necessary products of the imperfect intelligence of the imperfect man;
(Scientific) natural laws are perfect; therefore, they must be the products of a perfect intelligence.
This has already been refuted. Human law exists to govern human behavior. There are no scientific laws that do that. The principles of science are not laws in any legal sense: when used in a scientific context, the word "law" has an entirely different meaning, which is why it it is rarely used in the scientific community any more. It has been replaced with more precise and descriptive terms like "hypothesis," "theory," or "principle."

“What counts is not what sounds plausible, not what we’d like to believe, not what one or two witnesses claim, but only what is supported by hard evidence, rigorously and skeptically examined. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”- Carl Sagan, Cosmos: A Personal Voyage, episode 12

A truly superior mind would adhere to that principle, presenting extraordinary evidence to support an extraordinary claim. You present no evidence at all, only more unsupported assertions, challenging us to refute them, but the only refutation that is required is to point out that the evidence is lacking, the logic flawed, and reason absent. That's why I end so many posts as follows:

No evidence

No logic

No reason

No QED.

Since: Jan 14

Ashburn, VA

#975 Apr 14, 2014
There isn't any extraordinary claim in postulating that there are certain forces of nature that exert control over us and over our affairs, over which we have no control at all.
Death/change, for instance, exerts its force on all of existence with an unfailing consistency and permanency, such that all human efforts to equal such permanent constants always meet with sure failures.
If all human efforts, albeit limited, are the products of human intelligence/mind, how stupid is he who dares to ascribe a mindless source to such energy that manifests countless phenomena of perfect consistency and symmetrical wholeness?
Whatever neologism NightSerf might import to 'philosmysticism' to displace 'the natural laws', the fact of the immanent existence of the universal essence that is naturally observable as forms of energy, force, principle, law, order, fiat etc., serves to reduce to wasteful ranting any effort by NightSerf to explain away his disillusionment at the verity of the natural laws and falsity of atheism.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 min Into The Night 18,644
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 9 min ChristineM 10,075
A Universe from Nothing? 10 min u196533dm 572
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 17 min ChristineM 21,215
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 20 min ChristineM 470
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 21 min Eagle 12 776
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 22 min ChristineM 256,587
More from around the web