Why do the God-haters persist?

[Boss]

Present for us an example of something you have no faith or belief in that you consider to be factual scientific knowledge?

Your hammer example doesn't qualify as you've already expressed your faith and belief in the principles of gravity, etc. Again.... we need an example of something you have no faith in and do not believe, which you also consider to be factual scientific knowledge.

.....Waiting........

 

[Montrovant]

The OP is based on that precise point. God-haters can't be Atheists. You're lying. If you were truly an Atheist, you wouldn't be bothered enough to hurl insults and denigration in thread after thread after thread. You can't hate what you don't believe in. This is what distinguishes "God-haters" from "Atheists" and what the OP is pointing out.

God-haters persist because they believe in God and hate Him. This prompts the mean and nasty comments, the surly and snarky retorts, the continued incessant ridicule. You can't help it, you HATE God. As clever as you think you are with your smart-ass remarks an insulting names like "sky daddy" and "spaghetti monsters," you are demonstrating that you believe in God and hate Him.

There is a difference between hating believers or hating the belief and actually hating god.

Being an atheist in no way means being quiet about religion or not having any feelings about the beliefs of others. I'm not sure why you feel all atheists are going to act the same way toward people of religious faith.

A true Atheist cannot hate what he doesn't believe in. That's why.

Now, there are lots and lots of people who CLAIM to be Atheists. That's a fact. And perhaps you are assuming they are telling the truth about that, and you figure they are simply behaving differently than other Athiests, I don't know. What I do know is, an Atheist can't hate what he doesn't believe in.

The fact that an atheist doesn't believe a god exists in no way means they cannot care about the fact that many others do hold such beliefs. Nor does it mean they cannot or will not argue against religious belief, or hate religious beliefs, or hate believers.

You are operating under the assumption that not believing in god means not caring if others do, and that is a completely false assumption with no logical basis.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Present for us an example of something you have no faith or belief in that you consider to be factual scientific knowledge?

Your hammer example doesn't qualify as you've already expressed your faith and belief in the principles of gravity, etc. Again.... we need an example of something you have no faith in and do not believe, which you also consider to be factual scientific knowledge.

.....Waiting........

Thanks for admitting that you cannot refute the scientific facts and have no other recourse but to lie!

 

[Boss]

All of this is scientifically measurable and repeatable and will give the same results each and every time the experiment is perfromed.

Not true. I've already proven it false. If the experiment is done on the moon, the results are different. If you are standing in a vat of jello, the results are different. The experiment simply doesn't give the same results every time it is tried, it fully depends on the conditions and variables of the environment. You believe and have faith that forces of gravity will react predictably as they have before. If you are standing on Earth and not in jello, under normal conditions, you believe and have faith that gravity will do what gravity has done before. Granted, you do have very good reason to believe and have faith because you've observed the phenomenon before and it has been repeatedly tested. Still, you must have faith and believe it will happen again. This is tough to overcome because it is logic.

Now.... can you present any example of something you absolutely do not believe or have faith in, that you consider to be "factual scientific knowledge?"

 

[HUGGY]

Why do the God-haters persist?

Why do the god myth apologists persist?

 

[Derideo_Te]

All of this is scientifically measurable and repeatable and will give the same results each and every time the experiment is perfromed.

Not true. I've already proven it false. If the experiment is done on the moon, the results are different. If you are standing in a vat of jello, the results are different. The experiment simply doesn't give the same results every time it is tried, it fully depends on the conditions and variables of the environment. You believe and have faith that forces of gravity will react predictably as they have before. If you are standing on Earth and not in jello, under normal conditions, you believe and have faith that gravity will do what gravity has done before. Granted, you do have very good reason to believe and have faith because you've observed the phenomenon before and it has been repeatedly tested. Still, you must have faith and believe it will happen again. This is tough to overcome because it is logic.

Now.... can you present any example of something you absolutely do not believe or have faith in, that you consider to be "factual scientific knowledge?"

Your ignorance of science is always so glaringly obvious. Changing the conditions means that you are not repeating the exact same experiment. Perform the experiment under the identical conditions and it will always yield the same results.

It is illogical to change the conditions and then dishonestly allege that this equates to "proof" of belief and faith. You must have been home schooled to be this ignorant and illogical.

 

[Boss]

There is a difference between hating believers or hating the belief and actually hating god.

Being an atheist in no way means being quiet about religion or not having any feelings about the beliefs of others. I'm not sure why you feel all atheists are going to act the same way toward people of religious faith.

A true Atheist cannot hate what he doesn't believe in. That's why.

Now, there are lots and lots of people who CLAIM to be Atheists. That's a fact. And perhaps you are assuming they are telling the truth about that, and you figure they are simply behaving differently than other Athiests, I don't know. What I do know is, an Atheist can't hate what he doesn't believe in.

The fact that an atheist doesn't believe a god exists in no way means they cannot care about the fact that many others do hold such beliefs. Nor does it mean they cannot or will not argue against religious belief, or hate religious beliefs, or hate believers.

You are operating under the assumption that not believing in god means not caring if others do, and that is a completely false assumption with no logical basis.

I don't operate under assumptions. People lie about things all the time. They even lie to themselves sometimes. In fact, some people lie to themselve to the point they convince themselves of the lie. You cannot hate what you do not believe exists, it's impossible.

When I come here and see thread after thread from supposed "atheists" who are chortling insults left and right, using perjoratives like "magic sky daddy" and "flying spaghetti monster" and "imaginary friend" ....that is sheer raw hate. These are people who are lying about their beliefs, perhaps even lying to themselves to the point they believe it. Living in pure denial of the fact that they DO believe in God and hate Him.

 

[Derideo_Te]

A true Atheist cannot hate what he doesn't believe in. That's why.

Now, there are lots and lots of people who CLAIM to be Atheists. That's a fact. And perhaps you are assuming they are telling the truth about that, and you figure they are simply behaving differently than other Athiests, I don't know. What I do know is, an Atheist can't hate what he doesn't believe in.

The fact that an atheist doesn't believe a god exists in no way means they cannot care about the fact that many others do hold such beliefs. Nor does it mean they cannot or will not argue against religious belief, or hate religious beliefs, or hate believers.

You are operating under the assumption that not believing in god means not caring if others do, and that is a completely false assumption with no logical basis.

I don't operate under assumptions. People lie about things all the time. They even lie to themselves sometimes. In fact, some people lie to themselve to the point they convince themselves of the lie. You cannot hate what you do not believe exists, it's impossible.

When I come here and see thread after thread from supposed "atheists" who are chortling insults left and right, using perjoratives like "magic sky daddy" and "flying spaghetti monster" and "imaginary friend" ....that is sheer raw hate. These are people who are lying about their beliefs, perhaps even lying to themselves to the point they believe it. Living in pure denial of the fact that they DO believe in God and hate Him.

Ironic!

 

[Boss]

Your ignorance of science is always so glaringly obvious. Changing the conditions means that you are not repeating the exact same experiment. Perform the experiment under the identical conditions and it will always yield the same results.

It is illogical to change the conditions and then dishonestly allege that this equates to "proof" of belief and faith. You must have been home schooled to be this ignorant and illogical.

And your ignorance of logic is glaringly obvious as well.

The exact same experiment is repeated, the conditions and parameters were changed but the experiment is the same.

Even if you perform the experiment under identical conditions, it requires faith and belief. You must have faith and belief the effects of gravity will be the same as they have been previously and you will get the same results. What if, the moment you drop the hammer, some unknown and unprecedented phenomenon happened in our universe which rendered gravity impotent? Would the results be the same? You see, you have faith and belief that such a thing is not going to happen, and you're probably right. Still... it requires faith and belief, as does everything you believe.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Your ignorance of science is always so glaringly obvious. Changing the conditions means that you are not repeating the exact same experiment. Perform the experiment under the identical conditions and it will always yield the same results.

It is illogical to change the conditions and then dishonestly allege that this equates to "proof" of belief and faith. You must have been home schooled to be this ignorant and illogical.

And your ignorance of logic is glaringly obvious as well.

The exact same experiment is repeated, the conditions and parameters were changed but the experiment is the same.

Even if you perform the experiment under identical conditions, it requires faith and belief. You must have faith and belief the effects of gravity will be the same as they have been previously and you will get the same results. What if, the moment you drop the hammer, some unknown and unprecedented phenomenon happened in our universe which rendered gravity impotent? Would the results be the same? You see, you have faith and belief that such a thing is not going to happen, and you're probably right. Still... it requires faith and belief, as does everything you believe.

The conditions would have changed therefore the experiment is not being performed under identical circumstances. Same conditions equal identical results. Change any of them and you will get different results. That doesn't require belief or faith either.

So far you have struck out every time!

 

[Boss]

The conditions would have changed therefore the experiment is not being performed under identical circumstances. Same conditions equal identical results. Change any of them and you will get different results. That doesn't require belief or faith either.

So far you have struck out every time!

Hey, you're the one who gave the hammer experiment as an example. I simply showed where it failed your test of logic. The experiment doesn't automatically produce the same results, it depends on the conditions and other intangibles. It might produce the same results, you may be relatively certain it will, but you still need faith and belief to be absolutely certain it will.

Everything you believe requires belief, and every belief requires faith. This is why you have ignored my challenge to present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge. Anything you can present, you have faith in and believe. Why is this so hard for you to accept? It's basic logic.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The conditions would have changed therefore the experiment is not being performed under identical circumstances. Same conditions equal identical results. Change any of them and you will get different results. That doesn't require belief or faith either.

So far you have struck out every time!

Hey, you're the one who gave the hammer experiment as an example. I simply showed where it failed your test of logic. The experiment doesn't automatically produce the same results, it depends on the conditions and other intangibles. It might produce the same results, you may be relatively certain it will, but you still need faith and belief to be absolutely certain it will.

Everything you believe requires belief, and every belief requires faith. This is why you have ignored my challenge to present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge. Anything you can present, you have faith in and believe. Why is this so hard for you to accept? It's basic logic.

Yet another strike out! You are utterly clueless as to how the scientific method works. Your home schooling didn't do you any favors. It left you unable to cope with the real world that you inhabit. You are stuck in some delusional fantasy bubble instead. But that is your problem. Have a nice day!

 

[Boss]

Present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge.

This should not be that difficult for you if what you've stated is true. All I need is one example.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge.

This should not be that difficult for you if what you've stated is true. All I need is one example.

You already have an example and you have repeatedly struck out trying to establish your fallacious position. You don't get a 2nd helping until you finish your first one.

Of course you can always admit that you are wrong!

But that would take honesty and integrity and we already know that a congenital liar like you has no integrity and is incapable of ever being honest.

 

[Boss]

Present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge.

This should not be that difficult for you if what you've stated is true. All I need is one example.

You already have an example and you have repeatedly struck out trying to establish your fallacious position. You don't get a 2nd helping until you finish your first one.

Of course you can always admit that you are wrong!

But that would take honesty and integrity and we already know that a congenital liar like you has no integrity and is incapable of ever being honest.

No, I don't have an example. You presented an example of an experiment using a hammer and gravity, but you certainly believe in gravity and have faith that gravity works, do you not?

Again.. present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge. OR, just admit that I made a valid point you can't refute with logic. Either way is cool.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge.

This should not be that difficult for you if what you've stated is true. All I need is one example.

You already have an example and you have repeatedly struck out trying to establish your fallacious position. You don't get a 2nd helping until you finish your first one.

Of course you can always admit that you are wrong!

But that would take honesty and integrity and we already know that a congenital liar like you has no integrity and is incapable of ever being honest.

No, I don't have an example. You presented an example of an experiment using a hammer and gravity, but you certainly believe in gravity and have faith that gravity works, do you not?

Again.. present an example of something you do not believe or have faith in, yet you consider it factual scientific knowledge. OR, just admit that I made a valid point you can't refute with logic. Either way is cool.

Strike 76!

 

[Boss]

Nadda, huh?

 

[daws101]

Well I am sorry, but yes it does.

to you maybe in reality not so much.
besides you have to say that or your already silly and ignorant argument will shatter.
any way the point here is not that god haters nonsense it's true propose is to showcase your hubris and total self involvement... the rest is window dressing.

No, in reality. You have to believe something is A.) Factual B.) Scientific and C.) Knowledge in order to believe it. If you don't have faith in that belief, you can't believe it. It doesn't matter if that thing is "gravity" or "God" it still requires faith and belief.

false you believe things that have none of those qualities...
1.
6 Interesting Facts About Religious Beliefs and Spirituality You Were Wrong About

Common Myths, Incorrect Information and More on Religion and Spirituality


Whether you're a member of a debate team, a hopeful game show contestant, or you like to argue for the sake of arguing to show off your knowledge of all material useful and useless alike (any sophists in the house?), this is the spot for you.
Many commonly held beliefs are misinterpreted or misunderstood. Many of those cocktail party conversation starters that you thought you were so special and brilliant for being able to spew out of your mouth, are untrue. Worse yet, much of the religious dogma and wisdom you cite as a measure of your faith and intelligence may be rooted in misconception, half-truths and factual incorrectness. Here, I'll look at the 6 most interesting things I found were untrue or misinterpreted about religious beliefs, spirituality and more.

1. 666 The Mark Of The... - ...Stuck key on your keyboard? Whatever it's the mark of, it is not the mark of the beast. That would be 616. At least that's what new translations of the earliest copies of the Book of Revelation reveal. It's not an entirely new movement either; Friedrich Engles found the number to be 616 and there were copies of the Bible in circulation with 616 as the number almost 2,000 years ago. The number is also said to not literally represent the devil but to actually represent either Caligula or Nero, oppressors of the early Christians.

2. The Voodoo Doll - The voodoo doll does not even exist. The majority of voodoo practices are focused on healing somebody, not harming somebody. While voodoo rituals did have a small wooden figure that would have twigs inserted into it, called a "bocheo", those twigs were said to channel healing energy. The figure that most closely resembles an actual voodoo doll is of European design and ancient Greek origins. Anything done to these poppet dolls were said to, with the help of the devil, happen to the subject. Early colonists and explorers assigned these more malicious practices to voodoo, which was then popularized in literature, theatre and lore, giving voodoo an undeserved evil and dark reputation.

3. The Twenty Wise Men - In the original Gospel of St. Mathew there were no three wise men. In fact there was no specific mention of how many wise men there were visiting Jesus at all. (Jesus is also said to be a young child and not a baby). The number varied from two to twenty and three wasn't chosen as the standard until the sixth century. In the last few years, sentiments have even included that it couldn't be ruled out that some or all of the visitors were actually women. While this may seem more unlikely, there is no specific mention of gender in the original doctrine either.

4. Save Some Money on Your Front Yard Manger - While St. Luke's Gospel states that Jesus was "laid in a manger" it is an assumption that Jesus was born in a stable. There is also no evidence of there being any animals, whatsoever. The familiar Nativity scene wasn't invented until the 13th century. That version included a baby Jesus, some hay, an ox and a donkey. Everything and everybody else was then added on as time went on and tradition spread.

5. Count Your Sheep - Make sure you get all of them, there was said to be at least seven sheep on Noah's Ark. While all unclean animals were taken aboard in a pairing of one male and one female, all clean animals were taken aboard with at least seven in total. Interpretations vary that this could mean seven males and seven females or seven altogether. Sheep, one of the clean animals, therefore came aboard in a group large enough for an automatic gratuity to already be added onto their bill.

6. Jesus and the Immaculate Conception - The problem with this is that the majority of people associate the birth of Jesus as the Immaculate Conception. The Immaculate Conception actually refers to the birth of Mary. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (which wasn't adopted by the Catholic Church until 1854, by the way) states that Mary was granted immunity from sin and suspicion of sin as soon as she was conceived. It is the doctrine of the Virgin Birth that refers to Jesus' birth. The virgin birth of Jesus was also said to be a late addition to the religion, which started incorporating a broader spectrum of pagan ideas (the virgin birth idea had been used in Greek, Egyptian and Persian religion and mythology; but never Jewish) to appeal to the masses. Don't worry though, Franco Harris and the Immaculate Reception remain bound in fact.

Sources: John Lloyd and John Mitchinson, The Book of General Ignorance. Harmony Books, 2006.
6 Interesting Facts About Religious Beliefs and Spirituality You Were Wrong About - Yahoo Voices - voices.yahoo.com

 

[Derideo_Te]

Nadda, huh?

Strike 77!

 

[daws101]

You are drowning in denial!

Then you should be able to demonstrate that.

he has, I have, everybody else has....your denial precludes you from seeing it..
both are fact and testable but you don't believe it....