Bad atheist arguments

[ding]

Who or what is the first un-caused, first cause?

Who said there was one..?

Ok, for the sake of argument let’s assume there’s not. What caused space and time to exist?

It's a good question. It's one cosmologists study daily. I myself dont know the whole of it. However more, and more facets of that gem are being teased out as study continues. Well both have to stay tuned to the discoveries as they come in.

That's a great non-answer. But we are discussing the implications of there not being a first cause, right?

That implies that there is an unending loop which had no beginning, right?

That is THE answer. You dont have to like it but it remains true irrespective of your feelings on the matter...

You are still dodging it.

Isn’t the implication of no first cause that the universe has existed forever?

 

[ding]

Ummmm..... I haven' done that.

Yet another lie. You have regurgitated the gotta kover argument countless times.

Goddamn ding, honest discussion with you is just not possible. Furthermore, your tricks have never worked on anyone, ever. How is this enjoyable for you?

You are accusing me of what you do.

 

[ding]

100%

That was his response to 24,000 written manuscripts.

"His"

And, apparently, he had 4 names!

Yeah, his. See?

Pete said "there is no god"
Joe said "there is no god"
allen said "there is no god"
alex said "there is no god"

Ah yes, an example of the trend. Youre going to need more examples. Like, a lot. Also, You're lying, as that is not all that he has ever argued.

I'm not lying about anything. And I don't need anymore examples. You have zero basis for your beliefs. You have arguments against believing in God. Not the same thing.

Acknowledging the fact that there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists is not a ‘belief.’

Again, religion and ‘god’ are creations of man – ‘god’ does exist as an idea, as a human construct, as a metaphor – but there is no extraterrestrial omnipotent deity that hears prayers, intercedes on the behalf of mortals, and issues edicts of religious dogma that must be followed lest transgressors are consigned to eternal damnation; that ‘god’ in fact does not exist.

That would be your uninformed perception of my perception of God.

My perception of God is consciousness without form.

 

[ding]

Atheists don’t need to argue anything

We just don’t believe the religious theories we have had presented

That's odd, because you always seem to be arguing about it.

Wrong.

Denouncing the fallacies, sophistry, and lies propagated by theists is not to ‘argue’ – such as the lie that to be free from religion is a ‘belief.’

Again, the lies are yours. You have constructed a logical fallacy strawman.

It’s much harder for you to knock down my beliefs so you construct your own to knock down.

 

[rightwinger]

Atheists have the best argument......I just don’t believe it

 

[Vastator]

Who said there was one..?

Ok, for the sake of argument let’s assume there’s not. What caused space and time to exist?

It's a good question. It's one cosmologists study daily. I myself dont know the whole of it. However more, and more facets of that gem are being teased out as study continues. Well both have to stay tuned to the discoveries as they come in.

That's a great non-answer. But we are discussing the implications of there not being a first cause, right?

That implies that there is an unending loop which had no beginning, right?

That is THE answer. You dont have to like it but it remains true irrespective of your feelings on the matter...

You are still dodging it.

Isn’t the implication of no first cause that the universe has existed forever?

Wrong I gave you a direct answer. You just don’t like it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sounds like you are hedging

Well, it would sound that way , to someone who operates from faith instead of evidence. Notice that fools say the same about scientists and their language.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We know it expanded.

And before it expanded, we know it didnt expand, given that the universe is boundless(which includes time). See how easy that was? You should think these things through.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are literally arguing that the universe sat in a static state and then mysteriously began to expand.

Not really. That's not an accurate description, when talkong about imaginary time. And again, you are confining yourself with laws of physics that just dont apply.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are accusing me of what you do.

False. You have regurgitated the first mover argument countless times.

 

[luchitociencia]

Sounds like you are hedging

Well, it would sound that way , to someone who operates from faith instead of evidence. Notice that fools say the same about scientists and their language.

You might learn the differences of concepts when applied to the several cases when these are put on the table.

A religious dude is not a fool because he believes in a god.

An atheist dude is not a fool because he follows science.

A religious dude becomes a fool when discussing with guys like you about the existence of god.

An atheist dude who insists in believing that evolution happens, time dilates, the universe was formed from a microscopic particle in the middle of nothing, this guy becomes the foolish person in the world.

You must understand you can't demand scientific evidence from a religious belief.

But, at the same time, you must put over the table the sure evidence that time exist and that a mere microscopic particle can become millions of galaxies. Science doesn't need those good for nothing theories

Your lack of evidence shows that believing in those theories is what makes you a fool, because even when you can't prove them by any means, you still following them.

 

[james bond]

Atheists have the best argument......I just don’t believe it

Until the second coming, final judgment, and the rest.

 

[james bond]

Well, it would sound that way , to someone who operates from faith instead of evidence.

That's you and your "faith-based belief" in the magic of evolution. None of it has any evidence as it is all a lie. What science it has is to go left, go right, and to fake you out.

 

[rightwinger]

Atheists have the best argument......I just don’t believe it

Until the second coming, final judgment, and the rest.

Sounds cool to me
Jesus shows up, I will buy him a beer

 

[james bond]

Atheists have the best argument......I just don’t believe it

Until the second coming, final judgment, and the rest.

Sounds cool to me
Jesus shows up, I will buy him a beer

Buy your atheist friend a beer. When you see Jesus, then it will be too late.

 

[ding]

Ok, for the sake of argument let’s assume there’s not. What caused space and time to exist?

It's a good question. It's one cosmologists study daily. I myself dont know the whole of it. However more, and more facets of that gem are being teased out as study continues. Well both have to stay tuned to the discoveries as they come in.

That's a great non-answer. But we are discussing the implications of there not being a first cause, right?

That implies that there is an unending loop which had no beginning, right?

That is THE answer. You dont have to like it but it remains true irrespective of your feelings on the matter...

You are still dodging it.

Isn’t the implication of no first cause that the universe has existed forever?

Wrong I gave you a direct answer. You just don’t like it.

I am waiting to here you agree that if there is no first cause then that means the universe has existed forever.

Do you agree?

 

[ding]

Sounds like you are hedging

Well, it would sound that way , to someone who operates from faith instead of evidence. Notice that fools say the same about scientists and their language.

You are the one operating on faith. I have have evidence. Starting with the universe was created from nothing. It literally popped into existence 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

That’s my starting point.

 

[ding]

We know it expanded.

And before it expanded, we know it didnt expand, given that the universe is boundless(which includes time). See how easy that was? You should think these things through.

Which requires multiple explanations such as did it exist in that state forever before it began to expand? What kept it from expanding? What made it start expanding?

The reality is the universe being created from nothing scares you. It threatens you.

 

[ding]

You are literally arguing that the universe sat in a static state and then mysteriously began to expand.

Not really. That's not an accurate description, when talkong about imaginary time. And again, you are confining yourself with laws of physics that just dont apply.

Imaginary time is a gimmick used to get around the equations yielding infinities. That’s it. It doesn’t mean what you think it means. It doesn’t mean there wasn’t a beginning.

 

[ding]

You are accusing me of what you do.

False. You have regurgitated the first mover argument countless times.

Wrong. I don’t believe I have made a first mover argument at all.

What I have argued is that an infinite regression doesn’t make sense and that the only solution to an infinite regression is something which is eternal. And for it to be eternal it must be unchanging. And for it to be unchanging it can’t be matter and energy.