Exposing Atheistic Myths

[Rhea]

No, you are wrong. If we KNOW that things are only known through minds,

Stop right there.

We do not KNOW that.

Why do you keep saying it as if it’s a fact with evidence? It’s not.
That’s what makes this so stupid.

I am very curious (and excited!) to find out how you stopped using your mind to analyze things!

What other method are you using?!?!?!?

You leapt from
“You can’t PROVE that things exist outside your mind,”
Straight to
“We KNOW that things are only known through minds.”
And thence to
-> therefore they don’t exist at all until a magic creature imagines them into being.


That is sloppy stupid logic whose conclusions do not follow the premise.

I will repeat that the evidence of consilient measurement and detection are a far better proof of things existing out side of minds than is your made-up magical minds that makes things exist outside of our minds. I will further repeat that even if we on;y “know them” through the work of our minds, that does not mean they cannot exist outside f our minds, sitting there waiting for us to get around to “knowing them”.

You keep leaping to a conclusion that since you don’t like the evidence that I’m finding quite reliable to understand and predict the world, that it must mean there’s magic afoot.

This is ridiculous.

Things exist as we can see by their reliable existence.

 

[abaddon]

... "we have no evidence things can exist outside of perception," considering we only know through perception.

Again and again, this confusion about evidence and knowing. Half-Life keeps insisting there's no evidence for a world independent of minds, but that's false. Our perceptions are evidence.

We can extrapolate from that evidence and come to know things from the evidence. Evidence and knowing are not the same thing.

The insistence on limiting knowledge to first-person perception is just a trick to force the wanted conclusion.

 

[abaddon]

It might be that the world isn't as we perceive it.
And we can't know what it'd "look like" if there isn't a mind to see.
So there's no knowing what the big bang looked like, all that long time ago, with no mind to see it. We have to imagine ourselves there.
But that doesn't mean, for the big bang to have happened, then a mind must have been there to see what it looked like... as if "looked like" (the perception) were the most basic property of existing.

I'll add, even if everything needed a mind to perceive it in order to exist, God is not the logically necessary conclusion.
Some variety of panpsychism, for example, or other consideration that mind and matter are not profoundly different, could be considered if that's the case.
Why leap directly to God if you're convinced it takes mind for things to exist?
Answer: Because that's the conclusion you want.

 

[skepticalbip]

And the invention of 'god's magic eye' to account for the physical existence of things that humans can not or do not perceive is a quiet disingenuous attempt to account for a material universe. Apparently this is acknowledgement that there is indeed material things, not just mental images.

ETA:
Such a god seem to me to be a rather silly god. Apparently he had a choice of either creating a natural, material universe that just was or one that required his continued attention to every subatomic particle in the universe or it would all just vanish. The god offered is the one that decided that eternally working his butt off was a better idea than occasionally showing up when needed.

 

[Half-Life]

You leapt from
“You can’t PROVE that things exist outside your mind,”
Straight to
“We KNOW that things are only known through minds.”
And thence to
-> therefore they don’t exist at all until a magic creature imagines them into being.

So why do atheists leap from, "You can't PROVE God exists!" straight to, "This means I know God doesn't exist!"

No atheist can answer the question, "What evidence lead you to believe there is no God?" because there is no evidence God doesn't exist.

 

[abaddon]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

 

[Half-Life]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

But you guys just said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true" when you refer to materialism.

Why not apply this to theism then, too?

 

[Rhea]

So why do atheists leap from, "You can't PROVE God exists!" straight to, "This means I know God doesn't exist!"

Assertion without evidence.
You are making up nasty things to say about atheists. Doesn’t your god frown upon bearing false witness?


Atheists do NOT leap from Half-Life’s one statement to Half-Life’s other statement.
There are thousands of pages on this forum showing we do not leap. Evidence that you just made up that untruth about us.
So where do you get off saying that, Half? Why are you so ready to bear false witness against us?


Seriously. WHY are you so comfortable with emotionally shouting things that are not true in order to gossip about others?
So curious.

No atheist can answer the question, "What evidence lead you to believe there is no God?" because there is no evidence God doesn't exist.

Many atheists have answered that. I know if you search right here on this forum, you’ll find hundreds of answers.

But... do you really care? Or is this untruth that you’ve typed here done on purpose to create a caricature of atheists that look like fools so you can feel like you’re living your holy book? The atheists haven’t actually acted like your god promised they would, so you are compelled to make up a straw man so you can then giddily claim you’ve been a part of your story.


It’s nuts how comfortable you are with gossip and false witness.

 

[Half-Life]

So why do atheists leap from, "You can't PROVE God exists!" straight to, "This means I know God doesn't exist!"

Assertion without evidence.
You are making up nasty things to say about atheists. Doesn’t your god frown upon bearing false witness?


Atheists do NOT leap from Half-Life’s one statement to Half-Life’s other statement.
There are thousands of pages on this forum showing we do not leap. Evidence that you just made up that untruth about us.
So where do you get off saying that, Half? Why are you so ready to bear false witness against us?


Seriously. WHY are you so comfortable with emotionally shouting things that are not true in order to gossip about others?
So curious.

No atheist can answer the question, "What evidence lead you to believe there is no God?" because there is no evidence God doesn't exist.

Many atheists have answered that. I know if you search right here on this forum, you’ll find hundreds of answers.

But... do you really care? Or is this untruth that you’ve typed here done on purpose to create a caricature of atheists that look like fools so you can feel like you’re living your holy book? The atheists haven’t actually acted like your god promised they would, so you are compelled to make up a straw man so you can then giddily claim you’ve been a part of your story.


It’s nuts how comfortable you are with gossip and false witness.

Fine, I will give you a simple multiple choice test.

"God Exists."

A. True
B. False

 

[Half-Life]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

And what would this evidence consist of? I hope you guys aren't believing stuff without evidence.

 

[skepticalbip]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

But you guys just said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true" when you refer to materialism.

Why not apply this to theism then, too?

You do like to play with words. You continually switch between evidence and proof as though they were synonymous. There is a hell of a lot of very strong evidence that material things exist, but evidence isn't 'proof'. There is no evidence that gods exist, only assertions - this however isn't 'proof' that there are no gods.

We now come to reason and rationality. A reasonable person will take the 'hell of a lot of very strong evidence' as a damned good indication to accept the proposition. A reasonable person will take the no evidence as a damned good indication to reject the assertion.

 

[steve_bank]

I do not think the Christian god can be proven or disproven. Science can refute claims like young Earth Creation. But then there is a response that when god created earth he put fossils in the ground.

It never ends and there is no resolution either way.

Objectively we can dispute specific claims and say there is no objective evidence for god, but we can not say that god does not or can not exists.

Size is only known through the mind, just like the yellow of a banana. If you have a plane on a runway it will measure very long. You will not disagree with this, Keith. But, once the plane is in the air flying high, I can hold up that same tape measure and it will look like the plane is about 1 inch long.

Is the plane simultaneously both lengths at the same time? Il'l give you a hint: NO!

Where do these people come up with this kind of reasoning. The Loony Tunes cartoon theme comes to mind. The length of plane using relativity will always be correct. All your perceptions are relative to your inertial deference frame. In this case your XYZ coordinates on the surface of the Earth.

Yes, all perceptions are in the mind, what does that have to do with the price of apples?

 

[Half-Life]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

But you guys just said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true" when you refer to materialism.

Why not apply this to theism then, too?

You do like to play with words. You continually switch between evidence and proof as though they were synonymous. There is a hell of a lot of very strong evidence that material things exist, but evidence isn't 'proof'. There is no evidence that gods exist, only assertions - this however isn't 'proof' that there are no gods.

We now come to reason and rationality. A reasonable person will take the 'hell of a lot of very strong evidence' as a damned good indication to accept the proposition. A reasonable person will take the no evidence as a damned good indication to reject the assertion.

"God doesn't exist" is a statement with no evidence.

So you reject the quoted statement?

 

[skepticalbip]

You do like to play with words. You continually switch between evidence and proof as though they were synonymous. There is a hell of a lot of very strong evidence that material things exist, but evidence isn't 'proof'. There is no evidence that gods exist, only assertions - this however isn't 'proof' that there are no gods.

We now come to reason and rationality. A reasonable person will take the 'hell of a lot of very strong evidence' as a damned good indication to accept the proposition. A reasonable person will take the no evidence as a damned good indication to reject the assertion.

"God doesn't exist" is a statement with no evidence.

So you reject the quoted statement?

You may try actually reading the post you are pretending to be responding to. Have your mother explain it to you if you find it too confusing.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I do not think the Christian god can be proven or disproven. Science can refute claims like young Earth Creation. But then there is a response that when god created earth he put fossils in the ground.

From a purely rational perspective, what exactly do fossils have to do with a claim about magic invisible creatures? Think about it. To a rational person, there is no connection at all.

Can you prove you were not transported here magically from another star system? Not scientifically you can't because one cannot scientifically prove negatives. But that's not the point. If I can provide you with useful information that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not from another star system that's all science needs to do. This is the same process you use without exception to make every decision everyday of your life. Religious claims and tales are nothing but red herrings.

In the entire scientific corpus there is nothing even remotely suggesting the possibility that there are magical creatures as described in stories. Our superheroes like Spiderman are fictional inventions. Is this the realm of science, to 100% disprove fictional, purely emotional supercreatures like gods and Spiderman? No.

 

[abaddon]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

And what would this evidence consist of? I hope you guys aren't believing stuff without evidence.

No God is evident.
Nature's nothing like would be expected if God existed.
And the "philosopher's God" always resolves to semantic bullshitting.

Saying "but maybe" is as unreasonable as saying "but maybe" to the Invisible Pink Unicorn or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Which are spot-on analogies to the blatantly human contrivance, God.

Anyone who considers, even if all known gods are unbelievable, there remains a possibility of a god, should go ahead and speculate on any such possible god and see if ANY conception can be made to be meaningful. It won't, to qualify as a god requires contradictions (all-good and an evil-maker, for example) or vacuous epithets (inherently divine and worshipful, for example).

I hope you guys aren't believing stuff without evidence.

The whole point is not believing stuff without evidence.

 

[Rhea]

But... do you really care? Or is this untruth that you’ve typed here done on purpose to create a caricature of atheists that look like fools so you can feel like you’re living your holy book?
It’s nuts how comfortable you are with gossip and false witness.

Fine, I will give you a simple multiple choice test.

"God Exists."

A. True
B. False

And you don’t even care that it is a stupid test? Designed to obscure truth rather than uncover it?

Are you really this type of person, driven to frantically use parlor tricks and word games to pretend you haven’t heard useful dialogue?

You use a word, “god” that has a zillion meanings, and then try to make it a yes/no question when the evidence is a long discussion - as we’ve said.

Half-Life, this is dishonest if you are actually trying to UNDERSTAND the atheist views. Are you actually trying to understand? Or are you just frenetically playing all the parlor tricks you have as fast as you can play them and when people point out that they see your sleight of hand, you pivot to a new trick and tell yourself you haven’t been found out?


I’ll tell you, one thing that makes me conclude there’s no god working in YOUR life is by looking at your behavior. Nothing divine is on exhibit there. Nothing profound, nothing useful or wonderful. It’s just goofy parlor tricks.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

But you guys just said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true" when you refer to materialism.

Why not apply this to theism then, too?

If you did, you’d be a polytheist, and very busy being devout to a lot of gods.

 

[skepticalbip]

Atheists can answer that question because there's a universe full of evidence that God does not exist.

It's just nonstop assertions with you, Half-Life. Don't you have the curiosity to learn about reality and grow past your many limitations? Or is your life all about believing what you want?

But you guys just said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true" when you refer to materialism.

Why not apply this to theism then, too?

Amazing that you continue to offer strawmen. Who said, "not having evidence of something doesn't mean it's not true". Did you just make this up or did you maybe interchange 'evidence' for 'proof' (they are not synonyms)?

But if we take your nonsense at face value then you are arguing that we should accept any assertions as true for your god, all other gods, Santa Clause, dragons, pixies, leprechauns, etc.

 

[DBT]

"God doesn't exist" is a statement with no evidence.

As we stand, there is no evidence to support a justified belief in the existence of God or gods. Which is why holding a belief/conviction in the existence of these things is a matter of faith.