17 votes
Posted 03 May 2016 - 12:19 AM
Posted 03 May 2016 - 10:14 AM
If you don't believe the universe had a creator involved, fine, but if you tell others they are wrong, that is where you need to back it up. Which no one here has done
Evidence-based religion and evidence-based medicine - why not?
Posted 03 May 2016 - 10:04 PM
These guys have a belief without evidence and they cannot even read the topic. I raised new issues so we can come from a life extension level. Is there any evidence for hope of live coming from the atheist position and if so what? Not a squeak. 
Everything that is only physical dies!
It is off topic here but here are several areas which have evidence for theism. Sad to say so far they do not even know what evidence is. I will not discuss any of these issues here because it would be off topic. There are others as well
The kalam cosmological argument and the Big Bang theory
The fine-tuning argument from cosmological constants and quantities
The origin of life, part 1 of 2: the building blocks of life
The origin of life, part 2 of 2: biological information
The sudden origin of phyla in the Cambrian explosion
Galactic habitable zones and circumstellar habitable zones
Irreducible complexity in molecular machines
The creative limits of natural selection and random mutation
Angus Menuge’s ontological argument from reason
Alvin Plantinga’s epistemological argument from reason
William Lane Craig’s moral argument
The unexpected applicability of mathematics to nature
Arguments and scientific evidence for non-physical minds
Posted 03 May 2016 - 10:08 PM
If you don't believe the universe had a creator involved, fine, but if you tell others they are wrong, that is where you need to back it up. Which no one here has done
Evidence-based religion and evidence-based medicine - why not?
Any educated person knows it has always been that way. What is evidence which you claim no one has. Certainly you don't have any.
Posted 04 May 2016 - 09:37 AM
If you don't believe the universe had a creator involved, fine, but if you tell others they are wrong, that is where you need to back it up. Which no one here has done
Evidence-based religion and evidence-based medicine - why not?
Any educated person knows it has always been that way. What is evidence which you claim no one has. Certainly you don't have any.
According to the evidence god/gods answer prayers and communicate with people in just about the same way in just about all religions. Why, then, do all religions claim that they are only true religion? God does not seem to agree. Or perhaps god never contacted anyone to start with?
Posted 05 May 2016 - 12:37 AM
So many do claim God has answered their prayers. He has answered mine. Have you researched or do you have evidence god does not so there is no God or are you just blowing smoke. Is this the best you can do to give evidence for Atheism?
Posted 27 May 2016 - 03:28 PM
Posted 11 October 2016 - 05:52 PM
Posted 12 October 2016 - 01:31 AM
I understand that atheism is a position towards the existence of the supernatural world of god. Therefore, there is no need for "evidence." However, you can question the validity of that position!
And you can give evidence for it. I know atheists do not believe in god.
Atheism is directly against anything supernatural or having to do with any God generally.
so....Evidence
Posted 12 October 2016 - 01:40 AM
To me atheists have a serious lack of research or bias to information. In my opinion there is an abundance of evidence that points towards God and even Christ as God. Scientific and testimonial, and to me, The Bible in itself is mind blowing enough to turn a heart towards Christ, the words of the New Testament in particular are very unique and no other book even comes close to what they speak of. Please if you are a genuine truth seeker, check out my page, Evidence for Jesus Christ, www.facebook.com/truthsofChrist
They need evidence there is nothing there beside the material. This is their place for them to give it. So far they have given very little to none to the question why is there something rather than nothing. I agree with almost everything you have said but here it is their turn.
Posted 12 October 2016 - 01:50 AM
If you don't believe the universe had a creator involved, fine, but if you tell others they are wrong, that is where you need to back it up. Which no one here has done
Evidence-based religion and evidence-based medicine - why not?
Any educated person knows it has always been that way. What is evidence which you claim no one has. Certainly you don't have any.
According to the evidence god/gods answer prayers and communicate with people in just about the same way in just about all religions. Why, then, do all religions claim that they are only true religion? God does not seem to agree. Or perhaps god never contacted anyone to start with?
You are totally off topic. Here the request is for you to give evidence for Atheism not ask questions of Buddhism. And by the way how do you know Buddhists and Muslims prayers are answered the same way. You claim to have evidence. What is it?
Posted 12 October 2016 - 07:21 AM
To me atheists have a serious lack of research or bias to information. In my opinion there is an abundance of evidence that points towards God and even Christ as God. Scientific and testimonial, and to me, The Bible in itself is mind blowing enough to turn a heart towards Christ, the words of the New Testament in particular are very unique and no other book even comes close to what they speak of. Please if you are a genuine truth seeker, check out my page, Evidence for Jesus Christ, www.facebook.com/truthsofChrist
They need evidence there is nothing there beside the material. This is their place for them to give it. So far they have given very little to none to the question why is there something rather than nothing. I agree with almost everything you have said but here it is their turn.
Atheism and Materialism are different things. Not believing in God doesn't necessarily imply that you believe the material world is the extent of reality.
Posted 12 October 2016 - 09:54 PM
To me atheists have a serious lack of research or bias to information. In my opinion there is an abundance of evidence that points towards God and even Christ as God. Scientific and testimonial, and to me, The Bible in itself is mind blowing enough to turn a heart towards Christ, the words of the New Testament in particular are very unique and no other book even comes close to what they speak of. Please if you are a genuine truth seeker, check out my page, Evidence for Jesus Christ, www.facebook.com/truthsofChrist
They need evidence there is nothing there beside the material. This is their place for them to give it. So far they have given very little to none to the question why is there something rather than nothing. I agree with almost everything you have said but here it is their turn.
Atheism and Materialism are different things. Not believing in God doesn't necessarily imply that you believe the material world is the extent of reality.
You gave no evidence nor did you actually provide any reason for your statement. Are not many or most Atheists materialists? Who are those who are not and how do they explain non material issues such as raised ikn the video. Why does this not support the disbelief in God?
Posted 12 October 2016 - 10:04 PM
By the way the midget minds continue to not offer anything meaningful to the discussion but continue to offer logical fallacies and mark people down. Who cares but it makes a mockery out of our grading system. This has been going on for a lloooooooooooooooonnnnngggggg time. One thing I would change is to remove antimony. Have the guts to stand up for your position. This is ripe for bigots.
Posted 14 November 2016 - 08:07 PM
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
The burden of proof that something exists is on the one making the claim. The listener then decides whether enough facts and evidence is presented to believe or not to believe.
Edited by goog1956, 14 November 2016 - 08:10 PM.
Posted 14 November 2016 - 09:56 PM
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
The burden of proof that something exists is on the one making the claim. The listener then decides whether enough facts and evidence is presented to believe or not to believe.
First this is not evidence for Atheism. There is no evidence for Atheism so dismiss it. The burden of proof is upon anyone making a claim such as "there is no God." What is evidence? Your statement is off topic. This is about Atheism.
Posted 18 November 2016 - 07:28 AM
I think what we need to have are some clear definitions of what it is when someone says 'God'
What is 'God'
Does it have a consciousness that we could relate to?
Is it omnipotent?
Is it 'The Universe' itself?
Is it bound by time in the same way we are (linear vs non linear) Timeless?
Is it aware of everything going on or much like the bacteria in our intestines (which is also 'life') totally oblivious unless we go out of our way to examine)
Could a 'creator' have started the process which enabled our universe to shape the way it has but everything else from the moment of the big bang left completely alone.
Perhaps right now, Jesus is on an alien world in a distant galaxy preaching to a race of aliens that are still very 'young' in terms of understanding their universe. Who knows? Do you KNOW?? You might be compelled to say 'NO' but in truth, you have about as much evidence to say NO as I do to say YES. You aren't omnipotent to tell me with surety that, that is not happening now (or has never happened).
I could ask a hundred more questions to help shape a proper definition for 'God' but the point is, religious, agnostic or atheist, every one will answer or think about it a little differently. This makes it hard to debate when the definition of the terminology is not clear and different from person to person and that there will never be a general consensus of what the word 'God' even means.
In my opinion, it wouldn't matter if the truth of our universe was the result of some alien kids funky lab project playing with particle accelerators or some other weird alien device and our entire universe as infinite in size as it is to us, was only microscopic in scale to them and blinked out in their time frame in a nanosecond. If that is the truth, then that alien, is this Universe's God. But no one knows for sure 'the truth'. When we smashed particles in the Hadron Collider, the resulting temperature of that collision was over 7 TRILLION degrees F. Of course, it blinked out almost as soon as it reached that but who knows what was happening inside of that hot zone.
So any atheists here care to give us their terms of reference when they say 'God'? When you said 'God doesn't exist' what do you mean by 'God'? If you think the idea of omnipotence is ridiculous and only say that because you think God by definition MUST be omnipotent, could you be open to other possibilities of a creator of sorts that does not involve those assumed terms.
Do most atheists really believe the universe that they can see with their 2 eyes is all there is to the universe? That thinking is no better than a dog. You really believe that an idea is impossible because you haven't witnessed it? Has mankind truly reached the peak of understanding of the universe that we can say with confidence in matters such as this one thing over another? Everything we know to be real and have some limited understanding only makes up around 4% of the universe. The other 96% is supposed to be dark matter and dark energy. We don't even know what it is. So much we have no idea of yet people sit behind their keyboards pretending that they essentially do.
The universe is infinitely vast in size and wonder. The scale of the energy at the moment of its birth and the precise calculation required to have it evolve to a point that it can harbour life the way it has, I do not believe was a 'fluke'. To me, it is more plausible that our universes creation was not an accident and was planned. Perhaps by the greatest scientific mind the universe will ever have. To make up the perfect calculations for the big bang, the rate of expansion, the way in which matter dispersed etc... You cant make this stuff up. Whatever the truth of God, It is the perfect scientist and mathematician and is perfect.
So tell me atheists.... What do you mean by 'God' when you tell me there is none.
And theists... What rules of definition would you say are mandatory in your belief (eg omnipotence, exists in linear/non linear time, consciousness, ability to interact in the physical world etc)
Posted 18 November 2016 - 08:12 PM
Don't know what you are talking about but "The burden of proof is upon anyone making a claim such as there is no God." Do you have any evidence for Atheism? You can and do have evidences for negatives all the time. As for Shifter's request to define God, that is not directly our topic here. This is about Atheism of any kind. By the way I noticed the usual logical fallacy of name calling is engaged in. Who cares, not me.
Edited by shadowhawk, 18 November 2016 - 08:17 PM.
Posted 18 November 2016 - 10:36 PM
I used the line of 'the burden of proof lies with.....' against you all the time now you're using it you clown.
You are smoking something. You can't read can you. Here, IS THERE EVIDENCE FOR ATHEISM???
Posted 18 November 2016 - 10:56 PM
Atheists believe the only thing that exists is physical. Everything that is purely physical dies. Is there evidence from an atheist perspective that you won't die? This puts us in perspective of Longecity's purpose.
0 members, 8 guests, 0 anonymous users
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: ImmInst.org
