krimsa Forum Posts (1,345)

RE: Prove to me....

While you are at it, also show how the two dont cancel each other out. I cant prove god doesnt exist and you cant substantiate that it does exist....No point on either side.

RE: Prove to me....

Okay please illustrate that.

RE: Prove to me....

Healthy Living please read some of the arguments against substantiating a negative premise.

RE: Prove to me....

Wait, I thought we had to to not prove that he doesnt exist first?

RE: Can a rational person beilieve in the Bible? or any religion?

The Big Bang Theory-Georges Lemaître

Natural Selection- Charles Darwin (Origin of Species)

RE: Prove to me....

I directed that towards wildflower, not you HL. You cant quote emoticons.

RE: Prove to me....

Wonderful comeback there...

RE: Can a rational person beilieve in the Bible? or any religion?

Thanks. I was also going to give her the "Argument from Ignorance" link but was afraid she wouldnt understand the title and think I was insultng her.

RE: Prove to me....

Well perhaps you should pick your allies a little more wisely next time.

RE: Prove to me....

Well just wanted to point out the actual character of the person being addressed...its painfully obvious.

RE: Prove to me....

I asked you why you were so offended by the bible to which you never answered...The point that was made was that you constantly complain that the Atheists are somehow "attacking" or "stirring the pot" yet 9/10 we begin our threads using passages from the bible! So how is the discussion of god or the bible offensive to you? I will await your answer with baited breath since you failed to give me one yesterday on the afore mentioned thread.

RE: Prove to me....

Disty was the person that we pointed out the "Are there Atheists on Uranus" thread to by the way...

RE: Prove to me....

Otherwise I could say, well I cant see god. Okay I have substantiated my negative assertion.

RE: Prove to me....

I’m not sure how much of this thread you have read/comprehended? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you didn’t read it and are jumping to conclusions. One can not substantiate a "negative assertion." In other words, the burden of proof does not fall upon the Atheist to substantiate the non-existence of god, the tooth fairy, or even the Chupacabre. This responsibility falls upon the person making the positive assertion, i.e. those claiming the existence of some kind of grand creatrix.

RE: Prove to me....

Then what is it? What do you want? Do you want us all just to magically agree that there either is or is not a god? That won’t happen. Whether you are requesting that we substantiate a negative (impossible) or that we supply evidence for a positive assertion, it is STILL a debate. Right now you are experiencing the backlash of requiring that we "debate" in an illogical format. That was your own doing.

You can drop the logical fallacy premise and proceed.

RE: Prove to me....

Why not just shift the argument to the substantiation of a positive assertion? Ask members to post why they feel that the existence of a god or omnipotent, divine being is feasible. Ask them to provide supportive evidence and to identify which god they are addressing as there are people of other faiths on this site of course.

That is something that can be logically debated and argued.

RE: Prove to me....

That is the same premise you started out with....

RE: Prove to me....

Especially not out of a logical fallacy.

RE: Prove to me....

You are what?

RE: Prove to me....

Yes, Im afraid the nasty atheists are sticklers for the details!

Anyway, last night you had relented and said instead you would accept actual proof for God's (have you defined which god yet?) existence. That would be the substantiation of a positive assertion which is possible. In that sense, you had modified the debate from illogical to logical.

What happned to that?

RE: Prove to me....

Yeah, I thought they were funny. Shall I keep going? Actually I was amazed that we have actually heard these arguments. I think some out of your own mouth! Miss has on her profile that she is a Taoist yet attempts to act as apologetic on these forums?

RE: Prove to me....

I sense a bit of unwarranted condescension on your part here sir. All we have explained to you, is it is impossible to produce evidence for a negative assertion. Either demanding that we partake in an irrational argument or a cohesive debate is still asking for a debate.

Negative Proof refers to the fallacy of using an argument, about a phenomenon P, of the form:

P has not been observed
Therefore P does not exist
An argument of this form is most convincing when the existence of P seems implausible.

RE: Prove to me....

Yes its like a really crappy game of chess.

RE: Prove to me....

Well at least you admit it can’t be done. It’s not too difficult to grasp. You are simply using an "old theists stand by." People who are searching for excuses to believe silly things frequently make this statement. We deny the existence of god because there is no foundational evidence to support such a claim. Now you are deeming our denial invalid because it is impossible to prove a denial.

RE: Prove to me....

How did it contradict itself?

RE: Prove to me....

You can’t just throw out the parameters of logical debate in lieu of a hypothetical question. I realize you don’t want us to be rational but we must to some degree. It also wastes everyone's time to place the burden of proof on the atheists. They don’t have to disprove anything and the fact that we can’t disprove it, doesn’t really help your case. It doesn’t at all actually. Thus the video presentation.

RE: Prove to me....

Oh yeah, Greendragon pissed off some Xtians didnt he?

RE: Prove to me....

I dont know how much it will help though.

RE: Prove to me....

I agree with Stress Free up to a point. What I mean by that is children don’t have any concept of god UNTIL they reach an age where they begin to question such things. That is when they will be influenced by their parents, society, and whatever other external influences they come into contact with. The child is literally like putty that can be molded. If said child has two atheists parents who do not push any kind of spiritual agenda and speak in frank terms about science, nature and death being the end of life, then that child will essentially become an atheist until he or she is exposed to something else that seems to make more sense. Then it becomes a personal decision and choice.

RE: Can a rational person beilieve in the Bible? or any religion?

The burden of proof falls upon the believer. The Atheist has no responsibility in substantiating a negative assertion.