Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70652 comments on the TurkishPress.com story from Aug 26, 2009, titled Atheists on the march in America. In it, TurkishPress.com reports that:

When South Florida atheists held their first meeting, they were just five friends, having a beer at a bar.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TurkishPress.com.

John

United States

#64722 Oct 13, 2012
There is in my opinion Drew. The only reason it even entered the conversation is the purposeful deflection from your nothing. You have been exposed, but I'm fine playing endless wordgames with you.

I didn't see your accountable position I asked for to pursue this further. You haven't earned the right to be nothing, judge, and jury.

Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64723 Oct 13, 2012
You claimed that there was "more evidence" for a prime mover than for any other position. That means that you are claiming that there is evidence for a prime mover.

You have failed to meet that claim.

I guess you forgot.
John wrote:
There is in my opinion
So "John's opinion" is sufficient to justify your claim?

Is that your rule of evidence? That it merely has to be "John's opinion"?

I see.

No wonder you can't debate.
John

United States

#64724 Oct 13, 2012
Once again you avoided your nothing and fact that I have discredited your arbitrary rules for evidence. This is your forum Drew. I don't debate nothing. Why do you insist on spending so much time on attempting to marginalize belief in a prime mover when absolutely nothing in this arena is evidence to you.
I'm the only believer left and we are simply here because I called you on your hypocrisy. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything. I just asked what you believed and the comedy began.
Now I am willing to compare what each of us consider evidences, reasons, etc. for our accountable positions. You can't go there though. You have nothing and its all here in your forum for lurkers to see.
I'll wait for your nonclaim because I know you don't have a position you can defend. The forum about nothing continues. Thank you loons.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64725 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Once again you avoided your nothing and fact that I have discredited your arbitrary rules for evidence.
How are they "arbitrary", John?
John wrote:
This is your forum
No, it isn't, John. You've lied yet again.

Now, you've still got a claim that you can't back up: That there is evidence for a prime mover. Where's your evidence to support the claim, John? "John's opinion" is not evidence.
John

United States

#64726 Oct 13, 2012
Another error riddled nonclaim. What do you believe Drew? Define evidence. Give an example of evidence in this arena. Nothing is good enough for you. How about you just describe your nothing vs my something? All evidence shows you can't and won't.

Still nothing about atheism in an atheism forum.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64727 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Another error riddled nonclaim.
But enough about your claim for a "prime mover".

You made the claim. Support it.
John

United States

#64728 Oct 13, 2012
Sure, just as soon as you sort your nothing out. Of course that won't happen. Atheism exposed 101. What do you believe Drew?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64729 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Sure, just as soon as you sort your nothing out.
I'm not the one here claiming any particular origin to the Universe. You are.

So why do I have to have an alternative to your "prime mover" before you defend it as the only valid origin story?

Defense attorneys in a murder trial don't have to identify an alternative murderer in order to have the case decided in their favor. All that is necessary is for the prosecutor to fail to make a case.

If you can't make your case for your "prime mover", John, you automatically lose. No alternative case is required. Your case stands or falls on its own.

And since you can't seem to produce any evidence for it, your case falls.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#64730 Oct 13, 2012
It's International Skeptics Day

http://holidayinsights.com/moreholidays/Octob...
John

United States

#64731 Oct 13, 2012
This is an atheism forum Drew. Your forum has obviously decided to attack belief in something larger than us with specificity. My case are the thousands upon thousands of bigoted posts.

This isn't a courtroom Drew. I offered you the chance to compare any accountable position be mine. Accept it or don't. You just need something to occupy the incredibly cumbersome and clear fact that your nothing is irrational and illogical. Most of the world thinks a prime mover is the logical and rational position. Those are just words to you though and I'm just having some fun.

Good luck with your noncase. My case awaits. Don't quit on me though I want to see how llong you loons will keep posting in a forum about nothing. I stand to win some money on this. Thank you!
John

United States

#64732 Oct 13, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
It's International Skeptics Day
http://holidayinsights.com/moreholidays/Octob...
I am skeptical of your nothing. Can you prove it?

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#64733 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
<quoted text>
I am skeptical of your nothing. Can you prove it?
You are begging the question. Do you know what that means?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64734 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
This is an atheism forum Drew. Your forum...
It's not anyone's forum, John, other than belonging to Topix.

The fact that you don't get that is just more evidence that you're an Internet troll.
John wrote:
...has obviously decided to attack belief in something larger than us with specificity.
Because that "something larger" is without evidence, and therefore, any such belief is irrational and deserves to be attacked for its irrationality.

Until you produce evidence (something more than "John's opinion"), it will remain an irrational belief.
John wrote:
My case are the thousands upon thousands of bigoted posts.
It's not "bigoted" to point out when someone is engaging in an irrational belief.
John wrote:
This isn't a courtroom Drew.
If it were an actual courtroom, you'd have been held in contempt of court long ago for your troll behavior. In any event, it's a courtroom of logic and evidence, and you can't seem to produce either one to support your claim for a "prime mover".
John wrote:
I offered you the chance to compare any accountable position be mine.
You don't have an "accountable" position, John. For it to be "accountable", you'd have to actually demonstrate that you will be held accountable to it. You won't make such a demonstration. Quite the contrary. So your position is automatically "unaccountable".
John wrote:
Most of the world thinks a prime mover is the logical and rational position.
And in this case, most of the world would be wrong. Have you ever heard of the "Appeal to Popular Belief" logical fallacy? Because you just engaged in it.
John

United States

#64735 Oct 13, 2012
Translation- Drew has absolutely no evidence. His.forum is the nothing I have said. Further he uses words like logical and rational with no credibility. Make up a rational and logical beginning Drew. Oh, we will just take your word for it LOL.

The court would not hear your noncase Drew. The judge would have to explain to you that my contentions are predicated on a particular action on your end. This is obviously lost on you. Not everyone is meant to be a lawyer Drew. You do have the same ability to massage the truth.

Since you wont explain your nothing or present an accountable position as I have done maybe you can give us an example of evidence that meets your rules for evidence. Oh, oh remember those? The ones you said the Eiffel tower was a substantive example of evidence.

Once again a long winded, zero evidence based diversion in this fight in the forum of nothing.

The appeal to majority was purposeful Drew. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it is at least a quantifiable way to weight. For instance, more people believe in my something than your nothing. I could also just.make up words and insist in their validity.

Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe. What do you believe Drew?
Atheist Silurist

Gloucester, UK

#64736 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Another error riddled nonclaim. What do you believe Drew? Define evidence. Give an example of evidence in this arena. Nothing is good enough for you. How about you just describe your nothing vs my something? All evidence shows you can't and won't.
Still nothing about atheism in an atheism forum.
Oh no, Not John the king of the internet trolls.

Say John, Why are you such a prick?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64737 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Translation- Drew has absolutely no evidence.
Why would I need evidence? I'm not the one here making the claim. You're the one, John. And you can't produce any evidence to support your claim.
John wrote:
His.forum
Doesn't exist, since I don't own this forum. Topix does.
John wrote:
Further he uses words like logical and rational with no credibility.
Says the guy who makes claims (such as "There is a prime mover") but who can't back them up. You're not really in any position to claim that others aren't credible.
John wrote:
Make up a rational and logical beginning
Why? Your claim doesn't rise or fall depending up some other claim. It rises or falls on its own. And since you can't produce any evidence to support it, it falls.
John wrote:
The court would not hear your noncase
You mean,*your* non-case, John, the case where you claim that a prime mover is responsible for the existence of the Universe, but a case that you can't back with any evidence. You'd be thrown right out of court, John.
John wrote:
The judge would have to explain to you that my contentions are predicated on a particular action on your end.
No, John, the judge would have to explain to *you* that your claim isn't backed by any evidence and therefore, you have failed to make your case.
John wrote:
The appeal to majority was purposeful
It was logically fallacious, John. And I caught you at it. Saying "I meant to do that" after the fact won't get you out of trouble.
John

United States

#64738 Oct 13, 2012
Why would you need evidence? You really don't. Of course, if you are going to make rules and attack others beliefs it seems reasonable. Add in a forum and still nothing....well seems illogical and irrational to me. Of course those terms we also disagree on.

Let's start over. What do you believe in this arena Drew?

This isn't court Drew and of course you got it wrong anyway. The judge would ask you to support your claim that there was no evidence for a prime mover. I was clear in my rebuttal, but its ok I'm used to.atheists lying for nothing.

You didn't catch a thing Drew LOL. I hooked you and your too vain to realize it. Good grief.

Perhaps I should just make statements, assumptions, etc. and declare that's your point. Well, I don't have to do that. You have no point. You have no evidence. You have no way to quantify evidence. You do have a zany desire to fight for nothing though. The fight is like a one legged man in.an ass kicking contest, but so be it.

What do you believe Drew?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#64739 Oct 13, 2012
John wrote:
Why would you need evidence? You really don't.
Then why do you keep asking for it, despite the fact that I'm not the one here making a claim as to the origin of the Universe?

Make up your mind!
John wrote:
Of course, if you are going to make rules...
Someone has to, since you are unwilling to do so. Debates have rules. I guess you missed that.
John wrote:
What do you believe in this arena Drew?
That there is insufficient evidence to support any claim as to the origin of the Universe.

Now, John, if you disagree with that, present your evidence.
John wrote:
This isn't court
Lucky for you, since your non-case would have been thrown out immediately due to lack of evidence.
John wrote:
The judge would ask you to support your claim that there was no evidence for a prime mover.
No, the judge would ask *you* to present evidence *for* a prime mover (since you're the one making the claim), and because you fail in doing so, would throw your claim right out of court.
John

United States

#64740 Oct 14, 2012
You skipped the part where I asked what you believed. After three years I'll conclude that's purposeful. I have exposed your rules for evidence and hypocritical stances on myriad issues.
Now, you want debate rules huh Lmao. We know what a failure you have been with these magic rules you create. Those rules have allowed for nothing to be evidence for you. You know even in court at some point a coincidence is a coincidence is a coincidencence,,,, is no longer a coincidencence.
I gather you think the law is your expertise. I will say you are better at it than explaining your nothing. Not good, but better.
I simply challenged your forum when they sought specifically to marginalize belief. There are many reasons and evidences to conclude that something larger than us is responsible for the universe. Read up on it. Start with the army of scientists from various disciplines.
You mistakenly place me as the plaintiff in your boring mock trial. You claim there is no evidence so prove it.
I just said I would debate my something vs anything substantive you obviously fear attempting.
It's a difficult position for you understandably. A true freethinker would reevaluate.

Let's get back to your nothing, or at least mix your deflections up.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#64741 Oct 14, 2012
John wrote:
You skipped the part where I asked what you believed. After three years I'll conclude that's purposeful. I have exposed your rules for evidence and hypocritical stances on myriad issues.
Now, you want debate rules huh Lmao. We know what a failure you have been with these magic rules you create. Those rules have allowed for nothing to be evidence for you. You know even in court at some point a coincidence is a coincidence is a coincidencence,,,, is no longer a coincidencence.
I gather you think the law is your expertise. I will say you are better at it than explaining your nothing. Not good, but better.
I simply challenged your forum when they sought specifically to marginalize belief. There are many reasons and evidences to conclude that something larger than us is responsible for the universe. Read up on it. Start with the army of scientists from various disciplines.
You mistakenly place me as the plaintiff in your boring mock trial. You claim there is no evidence so prove it.
I just said I would debate my something vs anything substantive you obviously fear attempting.
It's a difficult position for you understandably. A true freethinker would reevaluate.
Let's get back to your nothing, or at least mix your deflections up.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.
See you next post with no proof of god liar!!

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 Aliens and evolution (Jun '12) 46 min Brian_G 6,209
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr ChristineM 9,318
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Brian_G 19,765
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr ChristineM 243,290
Atheists have morals too! 3 hr Lelouch0 6
Should atheists have the burden of proof? 11 hr superwilly 26
News Atheism must be about more than just not believ... 14 hr karl44 1
More from around the web