Atheist logic against them
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-01-2014, 04:48 PM
Atheist logic against them
He needs evidence dag gummet!



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 04:55 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
I quit watching this at 34 seconds when he said he has a fuckin unicorn....if anybody watches the whole thing and there's actually something that can be said about it, let me know

~Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 04:56 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
I just found funny the way he tried to shift the burden of proof. Unicorns are not important it's the structure of argument that he is tried to imply.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 04:58 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
Wow does this guy have it all fucked up!

It is not our job to prove the existence of god or pink unicorns in his garage. Why do theists always lay the burden of proof for what they believe on atheists. If you want us to believe in your god or pink unicorn then provide sufficient evidence.

Onward, my faithful steed!
[Image: ezgif-save_zps4d93a674.gif?t=1395781443]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 04:59 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
But for the record...if I claim there's pink unicorns, fine! So be it...some may believe me, some may not~proof or no proof...but the second I start demanding that people mutilate their genitals, pay special taxes, and commit murder in the name of this fucking unicorn, THEN it is MY responsibility to prove that it exists....I wish this guy was somebody I knew in person!

~Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kellyrm's post
30-01-2014, 04:59 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
Btw if we follow his way of thinking it means we must believe everything we can't disprove.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 05:01 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
To be honest, I couldn't give a shit less weather some sort of god was real or not. The actual existence isn't the issue. The things that are done that directly affect ALL PEOPLE in the name of this religion that I do NOT subscribe to is what pisses me off. They can have their beliefs, fine. But when it crosses over into my life and the lives of my children, then I have a problem!

~Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 05:15 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
(30-01-2014 04:48 PM)donotwant Wrote:  He needs evidence dag gummet!




:15 sec-

As a prophet and gnostic atheist, lemme tell you something - you mention "god," you are building "a ladder to heaven," and yes, that ladder, in its entirety, has been effectively disproved.

No.

It is not on me to disprove the gods that I can imagine (as my imagination is IMAX to your puppet theatre), it is on you to define the god you proclaim. otherwise - fuck off, troll.

:32 sec-

He has a pink unicorn in his garage.
He fails to upload a pic. Dodgy

:42 sec-

"Unicorns don't exist."

Well, actually, they're called Rhinoceri...

1:19 sec -

"Atheists are the pinnacle of rational thought. I understand that...."

I lol'd. He lost. Already...

1:43 sec-

"I need evidence..."

What's funny here, is the videologger's incomprehension of "invisible pink unicorn" and conflation with "such being in his garage."

I don't know what the fuck is in his garage - he is still failing to upload a pic - but - "invisible pink unicorn" is a physics problem. "Pink," for one "does not exist," but beyond that, what is registered as "pink" is otherwise expressed as "photons vibrating at a certain frequency," and the problem with "invisible" and "pink" thus becomes self=evident... but he doesn't get that far...

2:25 sec-

"Otherwise people gonna believe me, not you..."

I'm gonna assume I don't hafta explain argumentum ad pupulum.

3:00 sec-

"You're assuming that they're false prior to the evidence that they're false..."

No, douchebag, we're assuming that you're a lying, cheating, conniving dirtbag theist like the rest of them. An assumption based upon experience, rather than faith.

There ain't much beyond that. Dodgy

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 05:19 PM
RE: Atheist logic against them
This guy is just waffling along.

He has a point that absence of evidence does not prove evidence of absence - but that's about it & he is stretching that to its extreme limit.

I don't have to serve something or follow its rules when evidence is absent.

It is shifting the burden of proof to prove a negative which isn't technically possible (to a certain extent - we can make a very reasonable inference that something does not exist if it lacks coherence and does not fit into other well established network of coherent beliefs & knowledge)

In some cases belief in a personal God is contradictory (eg if the scripture allegedly revealed by that God has errors) - in such cases we can have absolute proof such a being does not exist (at least in the form described by the contradictory scriptures).

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: