Debating Atheism With Arcoon Effox

[Faustine Liem]

1aphy

That's just a narrow-minded interpretation of God.

And I'm sure we'll leave out the bible then. No need for the bible to showcase god exists then right? or ANY holy book at all. *smiles*

Quote:

Atheists like to think that because they can disprove retarded fundamentalist Christians, that they've disproved God in all his forms.

Nope, but the starving kids sure do a good job at disproving a loving god. If I can think around free will, then god can as well.

Quote:

There's still ideas such as First Cause, Cosmic Order, Causality etc.

There's still abiogensis, evilution, etc.

Quote:

that can all be considered 'God-like'.

Hmm, so gravity is god? You think gravity is god?

Quote:

Atheism and Theism are both equally true/untrue.

Don't care. I'm making waffles.

Quote:

It's a personal choice to look at the universe and say there is or isn't some kind of divine purpose or order. Both are equally grand claims.

That's not what people claim always. Its not a grand claim to say, here is how the world works, I can prove it, these people over here proved it, and all those people proved it. Its a huge claim, unsubstantiated, to say there is some deity. Its like the difference of saying gravity exists, compared to saying demons grab things and push them towards the earth.

Quote:

Both require grand evidence.

We have evidence, its called an expanding universe.

Quote:

It's not constructive to argue it in either direction.

Unless you are talking to a inbred flat earther. Then it is just entertaining.

Quote:

Saying people who believe in God are moronic idiots (like TAA does)

He doesn't always do that if you actually pay attention. He's said, go ahead believe in god, but that doesn't mean I can't laugh at you for doing so. How many people mock mostly creationists compared to believers? That is the question.

Quote:

is just arrogant, granted, some religious people are idiots.

*cough* *COUGH* *cough*

Quote:

However, belief soley in God (excluding religion entirely) isn't inherently stupid as many fedora wearers would believe.

That is just a stupid statement there. Not all atheists wear fedoras. Plus, they are TRILBIES what you are thinking about, not real fedoras. Learn your hats there buddy.

Quote:

Even if chaos were the nature of the universe,

Kinda.

Quote:

then chaos would be the agency of the universe, and I'd consider it god-like.

No its not god-like. Don't worship chaos, you'll only get burned. Go with the cool things like the Colonial marines. Exterminadus friend. EXTERMINADUS.

Quote:

If someone looks at the universe and sees God in all it's complexity, it's no different than someone who looks at it and sees meaninglessness, or an absence of God.

There is a huge difference between seeing god, and being able to predict the motions of the planets.

Quote:

A lack of belief in God (as many atheists here would describe themselves), means nothing. It's just a personal choice.

Good to know you know this. Now tell OTHER people here. In fact go to the ED and tell that to the little girl that believes in Alantis and crap and wants to live in a fairy tale world where everyone agrees with her. She needs to wake up and realize that people are people, and more often then not they won't agree with you.

[Arcoon Effox]

Xiam

Arcoon Effox

Stan just Stan

Provide your case which supports Atheism

So, are you looking for a debate or an interrogation? Because what you've said to (and at) me so far feels a lot more like the latter.

In a debate, both parties understand the subject material going in, present individual cases either for or against it, and then rebut the points that the other has made. You have not done that.

I think this is actually what bothers me the most about "debates" around here, actually... both side keeps trying to shirk the responsibility of evidence and demand it from the other.

I'm not trying to "shirk the responsibility of evidence", I'm telling the guy to state his case. As I told him, until I even know what it is he's selling in detail, I have no idea whether or not I'm buying.

Xiam

For OP to have any leverage, he needs to define for you exactly what he means by a god, or the definitive article, the God.

Before you can refute something, you must first define it,

That's more or less what I've asked him for:

Me, to Stan

...perhaps you should have actually said something, because then I'd have had something to respond to. I mean, strictly speaking, I won't really even know if I disagree with anything you claim until I actually know what that is. Beyond inferring that your schtick revolves around rewording tired-a** Christian arguments to sound all sciencey and logical, I know next to nothing about you or where you're even coming from.

So far, he's not done so... and instead just steamrolled on with his prewritten arguments.

Xiam

Arcoon Effox

I thought you were supposed to be all about logic or whatever, but you seriously just asked me to provide empirical proof for a negative, didn't you...?

You can prove a negative though. Empirically. Like... if someone says to you, "I have X thing in my hands," you can prove them wrong by pointing to their empty hands and saying, "Look, you lying b*****d, you're not holding anything."

That's Evidence of Absence, and I may or may not have brought that up based on what he had said next.

Because of what he did say, I won't be mentioning it. Instead, I have to decide just how I'm going to respond to this collection of straw men he served up...

Xiam

The problem comes less from "proving a negative" than requiring material evidence for or against something immaterial.

That was what I was referring to, yes. My comment was about how someone whose argument is supposedly rooted in logic ought to have understood that God cannot be tested empirically, so he cannot be proved or disproved by such means.

Xiam

And yes, much of the blame is on the theists.

I'm nit sure I'd use the word "blame", but yeah; if their case were more solid - if they even had one scrap of legitimate evidence - it would be a lot more difficult to be an atheist.

Xiam

They make so many logical leaps and move the goalposts so readily that just about any evidence contrary to their claims is met with either denial or excuses. For instance, if the Bible says something wrong, they insist it's not wrong, you're just interpreting it wrong.

That made me think of this:

[Faustine Liem]

1aphy

1. Not sure what you mean. Catholic God, maybe, idk.

Or in other words.

Quote:

2. God doesn't have to be loving.

No he does, but that is for sure what most people believe him to be. Ever loving and kind. You just don't get kinder then aids and cancer.

Quote:

3. Not sure what those are, but I've heard of evilution. Elaborate.

Abiogensis? Is the theory of how life started. Its entirely different to evilution, as to why I made it its own thing.

Quote:

4. No. Why do you think that?

Because later you imply chaos is a god. How some space stuff is god, so one of the fundamental forces, al la gravity, has to fit in that 'god' concept there too.

Quote:

5. Good for you.

Quote:

6. I didn't say deity. I said divine order or purpose.

And that doesn't matter. What I said still applies.

Quote:

7. Evidence for the big bang? What caused that? How are we able to observe said evidence?

Expanding universe? Its part of the evidence of the big bang if that is what you are asking. But here is a good little bit on it.

Quote:

8. Okay.

Quote:

9. TAA probably believes a lot of things that can't be proven with certainty, or which there is no empirical evidence for. Should we laugh at him? The answer is yes, because he is a degenerate neckbearded fedora wearer.

You know what would you say that about the OTHER big guys? Like seriously. TJ is a neckbeard because he CHOOSES to have a beard, and grows one. Also he doesn't own a trilby. As again, a fedora is like what Freddy Kruger wears, not one of those other hats with the smaller brim.

Quote:

10. Are you okay?

I was going to put in your name, or Eva, but I decided to just do none of that.

Quote:

11. They still look stupid, especially when atheists wear them.

How do you know ONLY atheists wear them? I only own one because of THIS stupid stuff. I own it because its FUNNY to have it. And I haven't worn it in about a full year. In a month it will be a whole year. And Don't get me wrong here, I own a WINTER hat, this hat is just awful in any day that it is not freezing cold.

Quote:

12. Hard to say,

Quote:

13. >implying god should be worshipped. either way, if Chaos is the agency of the universe, then we have to accept that.

NO NO NO. NO Chaos I say to you. That makes you a heretric. I'll have to call in the big guns if you do.

Quote:

14. "God in all it's complexity" The motions of the planets are part of the complexity.

Then someday someone can mathematically qualify god. Not prove he exists, but basically make an equation as to WHAT 'he' is. Is that what you want to think?

Quote:

15. There's no sport in bullying children.

Oh please I got MUCH worse as a child. She needs to grow up sooner or later otherwise she is going to end up worse for wear in the future.

Quote:

If someone finds it more comfortable to live in a fantasy world I'm not one to burst their bubble.

Kay.

Quote:

Besides, maybe Atlantis IS real.

In the way it is based on actual cities, sure.

Quote:

Maybe this person has seen it, and subjectively is 100% convinced,

No she is pretty clear that she believes it to be fake and is WHINING about how people just don't believe its fake/real anymore. Its pretty stupid.

Quote:

but since such evidence hasn't been revealed to us, we can't believe in it. If I saw Atlantis with my own eyes, I wouldn't care how many people told me it wasn't true. I'd believe it was real.

I'd need more then just my eyes. I'd need hard evidence. As in ruins and such. The eyes and brain and be tricked. I could be on a hallucinogenic thing, and as such something that numerous people can confirm exists.

Quote:

16. What are we arguing about again? I forget.

I don't know.

[Xiam]

Faustine Liem

1aphy

However, belief soley in God (excluding religion entirely) isn't inherently stupid as many fedora wearers would believe.

That is just a stupid statement there. Not all atheists wear fedoras. Plus, they are TRILBIES what you are thinking about, not real fedoras. Learn your hats there buddy.

Hey now, whoa there. Back the ******** up.

Faustine Liem

1aphy

It's not constructive to argue it in either direction.

Unless you are talking to a inbred flat earther. Then it is just entertaining.

And not all flat earthers are inbred. Just because a person is stupid doesn't mean they're a product of incest.

Arcoon Effox

Xiam

They make so many logical leaps and move the goalposts so readily that just about any evidence contrary to their claims is met with either denial or excuses. For instance, if the Bible says something wrong, they insist it's not wrong, you're just interpreting it wrong.

That made me think of this:

Yeah... I mean, there's a point about the cultural context of the Bible, but it's one most Christians don't even bother with, and they try to draw from a European or American pool of reference. Unless it's convenient for them.

Really, "convenience" may explain a lot. sweatdrop

Faustine Liem

1aphy

2. God doesn't have to be loving.

No he does, but that is for sure what most people believe him to be. Ever loving and kind. You just don't get kinder then aids and cancer.

Ugh, Supernatural gifs make me cringe. Let's just start with this. Historically speaking, people don't always believe in loving gods - the Greeks, for instance, pretty much admitted the gods were fickle creatures who seem to just ******** with mortals on a whim. And just because people believe it now doesn't mean it's true, I figured you'd be among those to assert as much. Or hell, I don't think the Jews even strictly believe it to be loving, at least in the human sense. Just check the Old Testament, there's less about love than there is about how ******** displeased Yahweh is with everyone. I've said it before, but it's probably a tone brought about by their exile in Babylon. Among a lot of other things they wrote...

Faustine Liem

1aphy

Faustine Liem

1aphy

There's still ideas such as First Cause, Cosmic Order, Causality etc.

There's still abiogensis, evilution, etc.

3. Not sure what those are, but I've heard of evilution. Elaborate.

Abiogensis? Is the theory of how life started. Its entirely different to evilution, as to why I made it its own thing.

Uh, are we aware "evolution" is being misspelled? Am I missing a joke here?

Faustine Liem

1aphy

4. No. Why do you think that?

Because later you imply chaos is a god. How some space stuff is god, so one of the fundamental forces, al la gravity, has to fit in that 'god' concept there too.

I thought the implication was that any driving force could be defined as a god by human beings, up to and including chaos.

Faustine Liem

Like seriously. TJ is a neckbeard because he CHOOSES to have a beard, and grows one.

Okay, got to single this out. Are you implying that there are neckbeards who don't choose to have neck beards? What are you saying, exactly?

Faustine Liem

1aphy

11. They still look stupid, especially when atheists wear them.

How do you know ONLY atheists wear them? I only own one because of THIS stupid stuff. I own it because its FUNNY to have it. And I haven't worn it in about a full year. In a month it will be a whole year. And Don't get me wrong here, I own a WINTER hat, this hat is just awful in any day that it is not freezing cold.

How did you interpret "especially when atheists wear them" as "only atheists wear them"?

Faustine Liem

1aphy

Besides, maybe Atlantis IS real.

In the way it is based on actual cities, sure.

"Cities" nothing, a whole nation! emotion_awesome

[Gravity is Just a Theory]

Well, Arcoon is still being coy. He obviously does not want to discuss the intellectual basis for the grounding of his worldview. Probably, one might think, because his Atheism is based on an intellectual VOID, leaving no intellectual, rational content to discuss.

This is the case for all Atheists, yet somehow they believe themselves to have an enhanced intellect purely by virtue of having adopted this intellect-free, evidence-free, logic-free worldview foundational VOID.. They come to believe seriously that dodging intellectual responsibility for their mindless rejectionism is a feature demonstrating high intelligence and elitism, so the condescension and insults they throw out which are based in their own intellectual vacuum represent elite superiority. In actuality they are merely sputttering juvenile arrogance in the sense of know-it-all self-delusion. An intellectual VOID does not produce superiority in any form or manner. The Atheist VOID is merely a relief from authority by virtue of simplistic rejectionism-without-cause.

When someone claims to be the sole possessor of X but refuses to demonstrate that X, he is either seriously mentally deluded, or a liar. When Atheists claim the sole possession of logic and evidence, yet refuse to show it because they also claim to exist in an intellectual vacuum, that is so transparently false that if it were a lie, the intelligence of the liar would be seriously reflected upon. If that is self-delusion, then the sanity of that deluded person would be seriously reflected upon.

At a minimum, the claim of possession of logic, when made by a person insisting upon such an internally contradictory position, is monumentally falsified due to the internal contradiction, a contradiction which he cannot admit to or release. That's because it is necessary for his own protection from having to self-reveal the irrationality of his non-intellectual (actually anti-intellectual) worldview, based solely in the Atheist VOID.

[Gravity is Just a Theory]

Arcoon,
Are you afraid to speak directly to me? To answer the questions I gave above? To address the issues that I have posted?

What are you afraid of?

[Gravity is Just a Theory]

Lucky~9~Lives

Arcoon Effox

Stan just Stan

[Show me] all of your empirical, material evidence

emotion_eyebrow I thought you were supposed to be all about logic or whatever, but you seriously just asked me to provide empirical proof for a negative, didn't you...?

It's almost like that's empirical evidence that he's not all about logic...
- razz

Apparently you hereby agree that you have no material evidence to support your "lack of belief". And you apparently agree that evidence cannot be had, and that since you have none, then you can't realistically demand any material evidence either. If that is not the case then we can discuss the nature of materialistic grounding and the logic of Category Errors.

Since Atheists generally claim to be the sole possessors of logic and evidence to support their Atheism, then your Atheism must be supported solely by logic, having no possible evidence. That means that your decision which you placed on "Ask A Mormon" thread is based in logical analysis of all possible "reasons" which have ever been given for the existence of a deity:

"Since you know I'm an atheist, you ought to already know my answer to this question, but here you go anyway: "There's no reason to believe that there is one". "

Of course this devious answer does not apply to the question: Do you believe that there is a creating deity, yes or no. You avoided the yes or no by the slippery assertion of not having any reason to believe that there is. Which obviously doesn't commit you to either yes or no, and does commit you to a behavior of purposeful deception.

But if you just can't decide (btw agnosticism is NOT Atheism, even under your definition of Atheism as being nothing, just an intellectual vacuum), then your harassment of theists is without any ideological justification, isn't it? Of course it is. But certainly that is not the case, is it? Nope. You obviously do have ideological justification for your behavior, or else you are insane. Let's go with the "sane" hypothesis for now.

Very obviously you do, in fact, have that which you claim not to have: ideological justification for your Atheism. And as we have established, there is no possible material evidence which justifies your Atheism. None. So, of course that just leaves logic, and your further conundrum:

EITHER you have logical, disciplined arguments which refute all possible reasons (logical arguments) for the probable existence of a creating deity, OR you do not have.

IF you do have logical, disciplined arguments which refute all possible reasons, THEN what are they?

IF you have such rational argumentation, but refuse to share it, THEN there are two following possibilities:
a) You cannot support your conclusions with logic and are perceived as embarrassed to show your logical process;
b) You actually have no logical, disciplined arguments at all, and are perceived as lying.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt here under the Principle of Charity, I assume that you do have logical, disciplined arguments which refute all possible reasons for the probable existence of a creating deity.

If you do have such logical reasoning, then kindly reveal that to us here on this thread, and explain why you conclude that there "is no reason to believe". It is your chance to convert theists by the use of disciplined logic. I should think that you would jump at the opportunity.

[Faustine Liem]

Stan just Stan

Arcoon,
Are you afraid to speak directly to me? To answer the questions I gave above? To address the issues that I have posted?

What are you afraid of?

You know I was suspcious before. But now I realize this, you are in love. You want to BANG Arcoon. Its pretty obvious that you have a waifu, and that waifu's name is Arcoon. Like seriously, there is NO other reason why'd you make this whole thread, constantly go 'NOTICE ME SEMPAI' over and over and over again.

[Lucky~9~Lives]

Stan just Stan

Lucky~9~Lives

Arcoon Effox

Stan just Stan

[Show me] all of your empirical, material evidence

emotion_eyebrow I thought you were supposed to be all about logic or whatever, but you seriously just asked me to provide empirical proof for a negative, didn't you...?

It's almost like that's empirical evidence that he's not all about logic...
- razz

Apparently you hereby agree that you have no material evidence to support your "lack of belief". And you apparently agree that evidence cannot be had, and that since you have none, then you can't realistically demand any material evidence either.

Apparently, I'm someone else.

[Faustine Liem]

1aphy

18. She believes it's fake AND real? I don't get it. I've never heard of this person before.

Yeah. Here let me get some of her crap.


My opinion about the following four mythical countries: Lemuria, Atlantis, Shangri-La, Mu ; have been banned. People that shared my fantasy world back in 2013 were taken off the Internet in 2014. People these days say they are continents, but back in 2013 people were saying they were islands. I hate this year.
Whats wrong with what doesn't exist. People used to believe in what doesn't exist in 2013, so why are people in 2016 so against this?
Lemuria did not exist in prehistoric times. There was never a continent Atlantis, or Lemuria, or Mu.
Back in 2013, the female gender used to agree with me. Since 2016, i must say, i hate women now. I hope they all get raped. Let me add ... Its because this year, a violet eyed asian albino girl is the universal opposite of all present day women. That is actually the only reason i would hate women. I would hate men under any conditions other than that.
You a hypocrite for attacking me for supporting what does not exist, but defend women who make up the opposite of what does not exist. If you think what exists is the opposite of what does not exist in reality, than you are the stupid one not me.

That's the highlights. Quite frankly I'm just too tired to deal with the brat anymore.

[Arcoon Effox]

1aphy

Evidence for the big bang?

Cosmic Microwave Background

Xiam

Faustine Liem

"evilution"

Uh, are we aware "evolution" is being misspelled? Am I missing a joke here?

Maybe. "Evilution" is a deliberate corruption of the word 'evolution', and is primarily used by evangelicals, creationists and fundies who think they're being clever as they attempt to portray the theory of evolution in a negative light (1, 2, 3). See also: "Devilution"

Anyway, I think that Liem was sarcastically riffing on that.

Xiam

Faustine Liem

1aphy

However, belief soley in God (excluding religion entirely) isn't inherently stupid as many fedora wearers would believe.

That is just a stupid statement there. Not all atheists wear fedoras. Plus, they are TRILBIES what you are thinking about, not real fedoras. Learn your hats there buddy.

Hey now, whoa there. Back the ******** up.

Strictly speaking, there is a difference. Fedoras are wide-brimmed hats which are typically made have deep-pinched creases on the front, and top typically sport a broad band. Trilbies have much smaller brims (which are even shorter in the back, and typically upturned), a somewhat bowled top, and a narrower band. Think Indiana Jones's hat vs Uncle Buck's.

[Arcoon Effox]

Faustine Liem

Stan just Stan

You know I was suspcious before. But now I realize this, you are in love. You want to BANG Arcoon. Its pretty obvious that you have a waifu, and that waifu's name is Arcoon. Like seriously, there is NO other reason why'd you make this whole thread, constantly go 'NOTICE ME SEMPAI' over and over and over again.

The reason he made this thread was because SARL0 manipulated him into it. You can see the situation begin developing into what it's become here if you're interested; scroll down from there and watch the fun as it unfolds.

When you're done there, you can go here. It's another thread where SARL0 derails the topic by attacking atheism, but in this one she starts s**t-talking behind my back. When she gets called on it, lo and behold, before long her new hero pops up again, and starts regurgitating his stock arguments on Rumblestiltskin.

[Rumblestiltskin]

Arcoon Effox

Faustine Liem

Stan just Stan

You know I was suspcious before. But now I realize this, you are in love. You want to BANG Arcoon. Its pretty obvious that you have a waifu, and that waifu's name is Arcoon. Like seriously, there is NO other reason why'd you make this whole thread, constantly go 'NOTICE ME SEMPAI' over and over and over again.

The reason he made this thread was because SARL0 manipulated him into it. You can see the situation begin developing into what it's become here if you're interested; scroll down from there and watch the fun as it unfolds.

When you're done there, you can go here. It's another thread where SARL0 derails the topic by attacking atheism, but in this one she starts s**t-talking behind my back. When she gets called on it, lo and behold, before long her new hero pops up again, and starts regurgitating his stock arguments on Rumblestiltskin.

Which, after I responded, it seems he went silent. Seems like he doesn't want to talk to me. I guess I scared him off. I guess my tsundere act was too tsun... crying