Where is the Evidence for Atheism?

Where is the Evidence for Atheism?

There are 305 comments on the News24 story from Feb 25, 2013, titled Where is the Evidence for Atheism?. In it, News24 reports that:

Christians hear it all the time in one form or another from atheists and sceptics.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at News24.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#41 Mar 3, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Yes you can.
One small problem with your ascertaition: The word atheism, means without theism, or minus theism, or the lack of theism, or a complete dearth of theism. It means no theism. All are proper, in defining this word.
There is "no theism" in this connotation, it is lacking. The gods are neither there, nor not there in this application of word "atheism".
No. If you use a word that says there is no god, or god is absent, you involved the concept of gods.

To say any element X does not exist employs the concept of X.

This is always true - by definition.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#42 Mar 3, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, it's still an absence of a claim.
How can a claim be the absence of a claim?

How would someone know if they agree with it?

...ugggghhhh

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#43 Mar 3, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Blood sugar getting low lardass and you are upset over no more Hostess?
I understand you hate that we believe on actual observable evidence and not just good feelings and wishes like your ilk does.
Separation of church and state is vitally important. If you wish to live in a theocracy Iran awaits.
<quoted text>
If separation of church and state is vitally important, why didn't they put it in the Constitution, and why hasn't the Constitution been amended to include it?

Is there any subject on which you can converse intelligently?

So far,...no.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#44 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
If separation of church and state is vitally important, why didn't they put it in the Constitution, and why hasn't the Constitution been amended to include it?
Is there any subject on which you can converse intelligently?
So far,...no.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#45 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You obviously hate yourself.
You need help.
T'would be mighty helpful, should someone decide to prove a god, any god will do, and any bit of concrete proof, more than enough to eliminate many millions of nonbelievers. Though myself personally, I might then be a believer, but I would still be atheist, even after you have proven a god to be true.

So instead of your misdirected diagnoses, maybe you should provide the prescriptive cure for what you see as a need for help. Prove a god. Who knows somebody might accept the damned thing as what it is claimed to be, and fall before it.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#46 Mar 3, 2013


The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams—who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world"— Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#47 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It has the exact same meaning as "atheism is the belief that no god exists".
It is the same truth claim. Both are positive claims. The set of facts claimed changes none at all if the internal semantics are changed.
No it is not. Atheism is the absence of theism. It is simple to grasp, try ... you might even manage to get it.
SupaAFC

Kirriemuir, UK

#48 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Any claim for the existence or non-existence of X can be a positive and also negative claim.
It is a positive claim if an alternative explanation for X can be provided. In your analogy, the positive claim behind the "not 18 inches" argument was that it was 17 inches. By providing the evidence that the foot measures 17 inches, you in turn refute the 18 inches claim.

Atheism is not like that; it does not offer a positive alternative. There is no size 17 claim, there is no alternative God claim.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Accepting any set of positive facts also requires acceptance of negative facts, and vice versa.
In your foot size example the negative facts would be that your size is "not" 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, and so on.

The negative facts in the religion debate is that, quite simply, there is no evidence for God. That is why atheism is essentially winning the existence of God debate until positive evidence is brought to the table.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand philosophical polemics.
You don't understand basic logic. If we applied this logic to court cases then it would be impossible to rule people as not-guilty as a lack of evidence for criminal activity is, by your argument, still a positive claim and thus akin to guilt.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#49 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No. If you use a word that says there is no god, or god is absent, you involved the concept of gods.
To say any element X does not exist employs the concept of X.
This is always true - by definition.
The god does not become part of this equasion, before the person is atheist, but rather after, if at all, and that is usually only with an attempted indoctrination of the atheist.

The atheist is the default, we are all born as atheist, and minus any concept of a god.
Babylon

United States

#50 Mar 3, 2013
But Atheism is the absence of all thought.

Note: the "A" then the word "the" followed by the word "is" and then ending with a single letter "m" much like it started with a single letter.
Now this proves the absent of all intelligent thought.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#51 Mar 4, 2013
Babylon wrote:
But Atheism is the absence of all thought.
Note: the "A" then the word "the" followed by the word "is" and then ending with a single letter "m" much like it started with a single letter.
Now this proves the absent of all intelligent thought.
"Theist", that is what we are not thinking of? Is that what you are saying?

In part, you are correct ... we are free of theism and generally never think of it, unless we are here. Would you castigate us for not paying obeisance to the little blue god. He is on the list, along with the god with too many arms. You wish us to see them as real and become theist, don't you?

No problem, just prove they are true and we will believe, and since all the gods have the same amount of evidence showing them to be real(none), you may have a difficult job ahead of you, but even though you can prove them to be true, we still may not bow to them, or any other god for that matter.

But now, a lesson ... An atheist is simply not a theist. That is what the word means. Not a theist, it means that I follow no religious dogma, nor do I see proof of any gods existence. A theist would be one who is a member of a particular sect of religious worship (think whirling dervish) or one who worships any god or gods.

I, the atheist am simply, one without theism, and you can't make me worship any Pagan god, so don't even try.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#52 Mar 4, 2013
Babylon wrote:
But Atheism is the absence of all thought.
Note: the "A" then the word "the" followed by the word "is" and then ending with a single letter "m" much like it started with a single letter.
Now this proves the absent of all intelligent thought.
It is spelled a-the-is-t, and a-the-is-m. So, is that what you are trying to say? >>> A the is "t" <<<<, and >>> a the is "m"<<<?

If so you ain't wrapped too tightly. Maybe you should plug your nose and ears, to prevent any leakage, you've got little enough to work with, as it is.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#53 Mar 4, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text> It is spelled a-the-is-t, and a-the-is-m. So, is that what you are trying to say? >>> A the is "t" <<<<, and >>> a the is "m"<<<?
If so you ain't wrapped too tightly. Maybe you should plug your nose and ears, to prevent any leakage, you've got little enough to work with, as it is.
Hmmm... I thought that Babylon was lampooning some people for using etiology as the sole rationale for deciding what words mean by taking that approach to a ridiculous extreme. Was I wrong?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#54 Mar 4, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>T'would be mighty helpful, should someone decide to prove a god, any god will do, and any bit of concrete proof, more than enough to eliminate many millions of nonbelievers. Though myself personally, I might then be a believer, but I would still be atheist, even after you have proven a god to be true.
So instead of your misdirected diagnoses, maybe you should provide the prescriptive cure for what you see as a need for help. Prove a god. Who knows somebody might accept the damned thing as what it is claimed to be, and fall before it.
Do you understand the distinction between proof and evidence?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#55 Mar 4, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>"Theist", that is what we are not thinking of? Is that what you are saying?
In part, you are correct ... we are free of theism and generally never think of it, unless we are here. Would you castigate us for not paying obeisance to the little blue god. He is on the list, along with the god with too many arms. You wish us to see them as real and become theist, don't you?
No problem, just prove they are true and we will believe, and since all the gods have the same amount of evidence showing them to be real(none), you may have a difficult job ahead of you, but even though you can prove them to be true, we still may not bow to them, or any other god for that matter.
But now, a lesson ... An atheist is simply not a theist. That is what the word means. Not a theist, it means that I follow no religious dogma, nor do I see proof of any gods existence. A theist would be one who is a member of a particular sect of religious worship (think whirling dervish) or one who worships any god or gods.
I, the atheist am simply, one without theism, and you can't make me worship any Pagan god, so don't even try.
Wrong. The root of "atheist" is not "theist".

It is "theos", from the greek.

"Atheist" comes from "atheos", which means to deny the existence of gods.

An atheist believes that no god exists. His position is one of "belief", not fact, as his conclusion extends beyond what can be demonstrated.

"Atheism" is a belief in the same way "theism" is a belief.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#56 Mar 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =sE9_gYhACiAXX
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams—who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world"— Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
You misquoted the First Amendment. You omitted the free-exercise clause of the amendment.

Secondly, you have no idea what the Establishment Clause of the amendment means.

For instance, you do not know what "establishment of religion" means in this context.

Also, you did not notice that the only governmental body that is limited in any way by the amendment is "Congress".

Do you know what "Congress" means?

If a state or local school district permits a prayer, is that an act of Congress?

I'll give you a hint: No.

You're out of your league, Junior. You know so little about the subject, it is not even fun to argue with you.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#57 Mar 4, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>The god does not become part of this equasion, before the person is atheist, but rather after, if at all, and that is usually only with an attempted indoctrination of the atheist.
The atheist is the default, we are all born as atheist, and minus any concept of a god.
That would be convenient for you if true, but the problem is it's a lie.

You'll have to try a little harder, do a little work to support your position.

Atheism is not "no belief".

As an aside, you have no idea what babies are born believing.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#58 Mar 4, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a positive claim if an alternative explanation for X can be provided. In your analogy, the positive claim behind the "not 18 inches" argument was that it was 17 inches. By providing the evidence that the foot measures 17 inches, you in turn refute the 18 inches claim.
Atheism is not like that; it does not offer a positive alternative. There is no size 17 claim, there is no alternative God claim.
<quoted text>
In your foot size example the negative facts would be that your size is "not" 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, and so on.
The negative facts in the religion debate is that, quite simply, there is no evidence for God. That is why atheism is essentially winning the existence of God debate until positive evidence is brought to the table.
<quoted text>
You don't understand basic logic. If we applied this logic to court cases then it would be impossible to rule people as not-guilty as a lack of evidence for criminal activity is, by your argument, still a positive claim and thus akin to guilt.
In every contested case, both sides make a claim that is positive.

The defense offers either the positive claim that the defendant is "not guilty", or the positive claim that the evidence does not establish guilt. Claiming a state of facts supporting "not guilty" is a positive claim. It is a positive claim for an existing set of facts, as opposed to a positive claim for a differing set of facts.

No alternative explanation for X need be provided to make the claim of X, nor the claim of non-X, a positive claim.

The claim of X is also a negative claim, as it is a claim that no set of facts exists for non-X.

I understand logic. You don't.

The claim of atheism is a positive claim, as it is a claim that a set of facts exists which causes the conclusion "there is no god".

The claim of atheism is negative claim, as it is a claim that no set of facts exists which causes the conclusion "there is a god".

Conversely, the claim of theism is a negative claim, as it is a claim that no set of facts exists which causes the conclusion "there is no god".

The claim of theism is a positive claim, as it is a claim that a set of facts exists which causes the conclusion "there is a god".

I can explain it for you; I can't understand it for you.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#59 Mar 4, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>No it is not. Atheism is the absence of theism. It is simple to grasp, try ... you might even manage to get it.
You trivialize your own position, placing "atheist" as anyone or anything who knows or believes nothing.

It's a lie, and it is a deceptive strategy to avoid responsibility.

To you, my dog is an atheist.

He eats his own shit, so you might be right.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#60 Mar 4, 2013
Observable evidence for god fatboy? Imagination doesn't count.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you understand the distinction between proof and evidence?

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Into The Night 94,311
News Geoff Robson is wrong about Richard Dawkins, th... 7 hr nanoanomaly 1
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 7 hr nanoanomaly 5,973
a prayer of salvation for those who are willing (Oct '17) 20 hr Eagle 12 - 142
News Egyptian Parliament considers outlawing atheism May 21 Guest 6
Stephen Hawking, now a believer May 8 superwilly 20
The atheists trick May 8 Eagle 12 - 3