I've never seen it put so well

I've never seen it put so well.

Other urls found in this thread:

lesswrong.com/lw/ih/absence_of_evidence_is_evidence_of_absence/
lesswrong.com/lw/jn/how_much_evidence_does_it_take/
lesswrong.com/lw/gyf/you_only_need_faith_in_two_things/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Theists aknowledge that it is impossible to disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster, yet they firmly believe he doesn't exist. I think they might have brain damage.

That response would have been better if you'd used something like 'Vishnu'; something over a billion theists believe exists, while several billion believe not.

Atheists tend to be so Rational and Skeptical that they'll believe any story that people tell them about faith and God, as long as it sounds like something worthy of intellectual snark. They don't even know what God they are supposed to disprove, just some vague cloud of "superstition", "man on cloud" and "burden of proof". Just look at this retard

I don't care either way.
>that masterrace feel

Ill take "moving the goalposts from my opponent disbelieving my positive assertion to them asserting a negative" for 50 fallacys, Bill.

Ill spend my time wondering if its because theists are dishonest, or genuinely stupid that they do this, in an attempt to shift the burden of a claim they know cannon be demonstrate, proven, justified or substantiated, namely in the existence or possibility for magic,

which would literally throw cause and effect out the window.

Who created your god?
The council of Nicaea. The council created your god.

>not understanding that it makes zero difference who I used
Do you really not get it?

>The council created your god.
>being this retarded

(((g-d)))

oh look, gnostic theists having no clue about what the words they use actually mean

>See? All your superstition is interchangeable and only WE know of true reason and empiricism, the only true sources of knowledge. Didn't you know? Btw climate change is real.

Absense of evidence is evidence of absense, faggot.

lesswrong.com/lw/ih/absence_of_evidence_is_evidence_of_absence/

Aetheists are skeptical and rational towards things they don't align with or respect. They give unwanted pass to scientists, environmentalists, and medical fields.

It's why they in step with global warming alarmists, vegans, PETA, new ageisms, and practice pharamcutical overload by self medication and drug use.

fpbp

god as a general concept is not the same as a very specifically crafted and well defined joke deity that some cringelord atheist made up

Bayesians and Rationalists are autistic retards who believe they can circumvent induction, and yudkowsky the cult leader doesn't believe in dieting away his fat. At least be some sort of royalist atheist if you're gonna be a faggot.

You believe that things that can't be detected can be detected. I believe that things that can't be detected can't be detected. Where are you trying to go with this?

It does, because a theist can say the flying meme fedora is not comparable because no-one sincerely believes it, and it doesn't have thousands of years of history. They could say similar things about outdated Gods, like Greek, Egyptian, Norse, etc., saying those religions died out because they weren't true. Jews and Muslims have the same God, so you're not making a point. Hindus on the other hand believe in a totally different set of Gods, they're numerable, and their religion is much older than Christianity.

Yes, it is. You do not have evidence for either. They are exactly the same.

Atheism is the biggest bluepill there is, it is the root of leftism and nihilism.

It is obvious that spagetthi can't exist if we don't create them. It is you who believes that spagetthi come from a redhot ball product of an explosion. Thus, the flying spaghetti monster could come into existance someday

>They could say
And they'd be wrong. This isn't an argument.

Therefore all power sky grandpapa.

>ah-hum
Prime Mover argument+Platonician mysticism

The Torah, (and by definition all Abrahamic faiths) contradict themselves in their own religious law.

1.Thou shalt not have no other God's before me.

So the very first law of your religion contradicts the notion that your God is the only God to exist? If Yahweh were the only deity, it would state, "There are no other Gods but I." So in the literal text of your faith your God states that other Gods exist, therefore other religions exist, and their creation stories must be true. If this were the case, it completely destroys any notion of Yahweh creating the Universe, and creating humanity.

Therefore random intelligence coming from rock

You believe that you are the only one who knows which things can and can not be detected, yet you also use induction to believe in gravity and looking both ways before crossing the streets, and you probably have some supremely retarded classical liberal evolutionary idea for where your morals come from. It's precisely your dumb fucking arrogance that you believe you know the first thing about religions that makes you so insufferable. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about because you never studied any of it, just put it under "superstition" and keep posting about christcucks. Sometimes I wonder if you'd have the same fucking attitude if you were to talk to your heroes, like Newton or anybody who lived before 1900 really. Anyway
>We are the Objective ppl, the argument
Great stuff man

You sure showed me with those entirely hypothetical logical arguments. Wow.

>any of these being true
No.

>Bayes' Theorem contradicts induction
You're retarded

Richard Dawkins is literal shit tier. I usually draw comparison to some shitty fad I went through when someone mentions something retarded, but I was never that retarded in my lowest state.

Atheists don't respect religion enough to learn enough about it to have a real debate.... they say retarded shit like "Der well how come Odin (a polytheistic god) isn't god? Or how about Buddah? (a literal mortal man) Check mate religi-fags"

Logical arguments whose only attack against would be to accept a logical paradox
haahahahahahaha get fucked atheist faggot

The logical athiest standpoint is what is sometimes referred to as 'agnostic athiesm', where you acknowledge that you cannot disprove the existence of a deity and therefore leave it on the table as a possibility, albeit a slim possibility in the absence of evidence.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Gravity, cars, evolution, they all have huge amounts of objective, reproducible evidence. Religion does not. You really don't get it???

>Look mom I can come up with any hypothesis and priors I want because I can put it into the mathematical symbols everybody uses

Well at you tried but you couldn't get away from the snark

>yet they firmly believe he does not exist
No, atheists have a lack of belief. They don't state he does not exist or cannot exist, but they simply have a lack of belief due to insufficient evidence for the claim.

There is evidence for a Christian God existing. You just refuse it all because people like you enjoy the feeling they get when they feel they are right. Evidence isn't simple with losers like you. You pick and choose what you want to see. Nice try though kiddo

Have you seen how big the universe is I'm sure he exists somewhere it is a vast place when you think about it the other day I got high and sat and thought about how big the universe was

>doesn't know the difference between polytheistic religion and monotheism.

Maybe try finishing elementary school before you debate religion kid...

There are other gods mentioned in the bible (Baal, Moloch etc.) Those are the gods it's referring to. None of them created anything.

You didn't try at all to understand science and that's why you don't understand science. Why are you mad at me for it?

Yet there is exactly as much reason to believe they each exist.

You believe in plenty of things you can't prove.

Gravity and traffic are real user, they can be measured and effect everything.
>I can jump off this cliff! Yahweh will save me!
>splat
>I can walk across this road! Yahweh will save me!
>splat
Again proving the theists are sub-90 IQ brainlets.

This. Atheists are some of the most pretentious, undereducated niggers to walk the earth. These are people who hate being told they are wrong. People who can't stand someone else being more right than them.

>a polytheistic god
Its plausible enough to see it as though they all encapsulate one divine entity and merely represent individual elements thereof.

Christianity isn't that removed from polytheism, you can quite clearly see its roots.

What are we supposed to disprove though? It's your god so why don't you define it for us then and not move the goal posts when we disprove it?

Spoken like a true believer. Never stop being gullible, okay?

>I can come up with any hypothesis and priors I want
Read these:
lesswrong.com/lw/jn/how_much_evidence_does_it_take/
lesswrong.com/lw/gyf/you_only_need_faith_in_two_things/

That's agnosticism, atheists have as much faith that there is no God as theists do that there is a God.

No, you are wrong. A god who is supposed to have certain motivations (being all good in the modern sense) can be disproved by observing evil in the world. A more abstract God cannot be disproven.

>multiple skydaddies vs one skydaddy
Yeah, real big difference.

Literal retards insist there is Drumpppphhhththttht Russia collusion with 0 proof. So this makes sense.

> evil disprove God.
This cant be real, man

Multiverse. There actually is a god-like flying spaghetti monster.

I've never understood the Cosmological argument, mainly because it has no evidence to suggest God is the primary mover. Unless it wants to admit special pleading/argument from ignorance then I understand it being a viable argument.

>Implying God wants you to cheat at life
where's the fun in that
>Implying God made you to fly or to deflect object moving at 90km/h
He did, he would have created you with wings and a thirty centimeter thick bone carapace with foamy undermuscles to reduce kinetic shock.

Well you wouldn't know. I've spent more time studying science then you have apologetics, theology, hermeneutics... do you even know what those things are? How can you expect to have a debate when you literally don't know a single thing about the topic you want to debate? Name 3 books of the bible....

Atheist scum promotes degeneracy just look at our narcissistic social media. Atheists are the reason why homosexuality is now tolerated you fucking degenerate.

So all theists have the same amount of faith in the existence of God?

>A more abstract God cannot be disproven.
You're essentially saying that you've been backed into the corner and you're forced to describe something so vague and meaningless that it can't be disproved. Do you understand that?

>proving a negative
nigga please.

You can't be free without those. If you wanted to live 100% safe then you would live in a cage

...

From >god as a general concept is not the same as a very specifically crafted and well defined joke deity that some cringelord atheist made up
The point was to prove that a god, in general existed. You're moving the goalpost. The rest is up to faith, really.

God is dead anons. That's the only way to go

There is no multiverse. Can you detect it? No? It doesn't exist in reality.

Yeah except for you I'm a mathematician working for a physics lab. I'm mad cause you fedoras are the same goddamn college kids as from 2007. Still all smug and Rational retardation, haven't learned a thing about religion yet feel smug in their intellectual superiority cause the enlightenment is supposed to have smashed "superstition". Why are you so mad at christcucks?

You're not supposed to disprove anything? It's not my God, but you people are incapable of communicating with religious people. You truly believe that they are mentally retarded and that "define it empirically" is the only valid truth criterion. Your morals however come from community or evolution or psychology or something like that. There will not be an autistic definition of God with a few moving parts waiting to be disproved, because not everything is a scientific theory. But whatever, unfortunately I know you're not really interested in understanding what they think so it feels kind of useless to try and defend religions.


Were you around when those things were written? I'm asking because I know most of lesswrong and the fedora discussion is still the same as it was back then. Btw that website isn't objective logic but highly debated AI-style reasoning. You can not link them and pretend they are arguments, because none of it is fact.

No, it's not. This is why atheists do not have a burden of proof; they make no claims. a belief that a god doesn't exist is a claim. Atheists do not believe in that. Also, agnosticism is a knowledge claim; we can't know a god exist.

I was going to meme arrow 'translation' but then i realized even in english it does not act as a solid affirmation of the existence of other gods.

What the fuck are babbling about?

What about monotheistic Hinduism?

Agnostic = not sure one way or the other
Atheist = absolutely positive there is no god

So why is it that atheists constantly talk about something that doesn't exist.
Sure I could understand Agnostics are curious looking for something to reaffirm their faith, etc. but Atheists but definition are without doubt.

My guess is that these blogger type so called atheist are the most devout believers on the planet, they are just uneducated and unsure what it is that they believe, so they constantly ask for guidance.

>You're not supposed to disprove anything?
But I'm supposed to believe it though? Seems legit.

Ignore this faggot retard: You are 100% correct. Every atheist I've ever known is a fedora wearing retard who will willingly suck the shit out of the asshole of their approved scientist deities without a moment's pause for skepticism. PLEASE MASTER MORE WELL RESEARCHED FACTS FOR ME!

If you love yourself, love your history, love man and love all of creation you're pretty much a believer in God.
God and Satan is the fight between Creation and Destruction.
It is incredibly important for the reader to establish and defend their own worldview.

>haven't learned a thing about religion
What? What would you have this "fedora" group you keep going on about learn? Show me this great usefulness, oh mighty teacher.

You're not "supposed" to disprove anything. Atheists are just edgy unloved creatures who need attention to fill the yearning for true meaning and acceptance. If you were so sure a God doesn't exist you'd shut the fuck up about it and move on with your life instead if identifying with it.

No not really. In fact most Christians would LOVE to be left alone by you people. But, you'd say, they are the ones ruining society and the free marketplace of ideas with their superstition. Gotta stop em!

>Can you detect it? No? It doesn't exist in reality.
Can you see the electromagnetic field of Earth? No?. it doesn't exist.

Wait, birds do and use it for migrational purposes. Now what?

>being skeptical about everything
>except some stuff
???

The first thing about religion and faith besides "man on cloud" and "wrong by definition cause metaphysical" would be nice. It's been over a decade.

> Metabolic disprivelege
Lol

You just have to have faith.

I'm not moving any goalposts, guy who strawmanned "joke diety" into the discussion. You can define God however you like. Unfortunately, if you can't prove the variable exists then how do you plan on proving a statement with said variable?

>I mean it's the universe itself and there's no living will in it but we're gonna call it God and pretend that it's pretty much a super special human-ish thing that I guess is fighting against another special human-ish thing that's bad?
Why are we talking?

No need to get offended

>The rest is up to faith, really.
If you want to believe in something without evidence, that's fine. But it isn't a swaying piece of your argument.

>has nothing to say about jews
good goy

Him being a fatass doesn't mean that his epistemology is wrong, retard.

>you can't keep making fun of us for talking about sky granddaddy, but most of us refuse to stop talking about or believing in sky grandaddy
I don't know what to tell you.

I'm just comfused, you said that verifiable stuff is needed to harm you? And to take steps to mitigate said hazards is somehow denying gods?

>atheists are absolutely sure there is no God
Why bother arguing against something you don't know the definition of?

You're a noisy one. You're not mounting any defense other than, "you people are only interested in snark" and then you wrap that in "fedora this, fedora that". I hope you're better at physics than this.

No, I said that you can't disprove God by showing that harmful stuff exist.

accidentally stumbled across thousands of atheists raging yesterday over NBC showing a Scientology commercial. those guys need to calm down. I think people become atheists because their interpersonal filters dont work, like these same people would be calling everything 'violence' if they end up on the left.

Sorry but I don't build my identity around the existance/non-existance of god, because the whole concept is irrelevant. That still doesn't mean I won't voice my opinion when someone brings religion into the discussion.

Why don't you gather in your safe spaces then if you're so afraid of other ideas? I'm not harassing anyone anywhere. You're free to come here discussing things or not. So am I.

By admitting that variation is impossible on a perfect being, by definition.
Being perfect, He's beyond substance, beyond Good and Evil, and beyond variation, since he's (in order) immortal, undying and omnipresent, perfectly virtuous, and unchanging, being timeless.

>implying God isn't fanfic created by X group for adults to help them get through their miserable lives

It actually does when you look down on everyone else for not being Rational enough.

What's sad is that in spite of your logical pretensions, you still spend your posts this thread insulting people cause you believe it's obvious they are retarded. It's circle jerk behavior. I'm not a Christian you idiot, and yet here you are. Still in college maybe? Anyway since you're clear that you don't want to learn we can stop here. You can always assume that I don't "understand" science.

No, you are the noisy ones. See this thread? There is no defense to be had because atheists argue with "man on cloud" superstition, say it's not empirical and no proof can be given, then strut around like they're smarter than all western thinkers that lived before the 60s revolution. There's no defense to be had against this sort of autism. I believe in physics and work with it every day, I'm not a Christian myself, and yet even in silence they are less insufferable.

Hello have you missed the last few decades? Christians are under attack, not us atheists. Btw your post drips with reddit passive aggression and I'd advise against it.