[muscogee]

Originally Posted by brokenprism

If I'm not mistaken, the Latin equivalent of the Greek agnostic, is ignoramus. It just means "Don't know." But it's cheating. An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of conviction.

You're mistaken.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by ksg0245

...



Now you're taking the Cavalry Doc tactic of telling others what they actually think. Why do you presume I would hate your deity?


...

Ahh, another staccato rebuttal and redirection at the same time.

Sorry, didn't want to spend any time on your other points.

I'm not saying that YOU believe that no deity has ever existed.

I'm saying, that according to definition, an ATHEIST believes no deity has ever existed.

You might believe something entirely differently. So I am not telling you what you believe, I'm just pointing out that if you don't believe that no deity has ever existed, you may not really be a real atheist.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Geko45

King, I have found you to be a refreshing example of intellectual honesty in this forum. Don't ruin it by parroting CavDoc's failed logic.

.

Failed, that's funny. You have your opinion, that you wholeheartedly believe in.

You just don't have the cojones to post that here.

Be honest, or run from it, doesn't matter. You believe that there has never been a deity.

You hide behind the skirt and claim that you only lack evidence to believe otherwise, but it is clearly evidenced in your arguments that you hold beliefs that you do not feel strongly enough to declare.

No sweat, I've met many cowards. You don't owe me anything. You can continue to avoid admitting the truth as long as you want to.

[Geko45]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Failed, that's funny. You have your opinion, that you wholeheartedly believe in.

You just don't have the cojones to post that here.

Be honest, or run from it, doesn't matter. You believe that there has never been a deity.

You hide behind the skirt and claim that you only lack evidence to believe otherwise, but it is clearly evidenced in your arguments that you hold beliefs that you do not feel strongly enough to declare.

No sweat, I've met many cowards. You don't owe me anything. You can continue to avoid admitting the truth as long as you want to.

Ad hom nonsense.

I was a theist for the first 38 years of my life. I read the bible cover to cover and found it lacking. I then began following the evidence and realized it was just us here and nothing else. Not sure what you think I'm supposedly afraid to declare. I'm an atheist. If anything then I've been more certain on that point then most here.



Chill out man. Have a beer. I know it can be frustrating to engage in a battle of wits and come up wanting. Next time you feel the need to be intellectually dominated just drop me a line.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Geko45

Ad hom nonsense.

I was a theist for the first 38 years of my life. I read the bible cover to cover and found it lacking. I then began following the evidence and realized it was just us here and nothing else. Not sure what you think I'm supposedly afraid to declare. I'm an atheist. If anything then I've been more certain on that point then most here.



Chill out man. Have a beer. I know it can be frustrating to engage in a battle of wits and come up wanting. Next time you feel the need to be intellectually dominated just drop me a line.

Gek,

You have been all ad hom all the time. You are simply frustrated that I'm right, and you cannot admit it. Your arguments for atheism being the only correct choice are way to strong to come from a passive lack of belief.

You have a mightily high opinion of your own intellect, and that is obvious too.

But you cannot accept that there are other valid opinions than your own.

I find that humorous.


Don't you have a test you should be studying for?

[Geko45]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Your arguments for atheism being the only correct choice are way to strong to come from a passive lack of belief.

All this time and you still don't even know what my argument is. I never claimed a passive lack of belief. I claimed a belief supported by inductive reasoning, not faith.

But you cannot accept that there are other valid opinions than your own.

When it comes to defining what I believe for myself, you're damn right your opinion is irrelevant. This has got to be one of the most hypocritical things I have ever read here. You've spent over a hundred pages in various threads trying to shove your opinion of what atheism is down the throats of atheists themselves and you think you are entitled to the moral high ground? Please... You're the one that can't accept an opinion other than your own.

Don't you have a test you should be studying for?

4.0 and holding.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by Geko45

All this time and you still don't even know what my argument is. I never claimed a passive lack of belief. I claimed a belief supported by inductive reasoning, not faith.



When it comes to defining what I believe for myself, you're damn right your opinion is irrelevant. This has got to be one of the most hypocritical things I have ever read here. You've spent over a hundred pages in various threads trying to shove your opinion of what atheism is down the throats of atheists themselves and you think you are entitled to the moral high ground? Please... You're the one that can't accept an opinion other than your own.



4.0 and holding.

Doing better than I did back in the day. I always held a 3.9 average.

[Lone Wolf8634]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Failed, that's funny. You have your opinion, that you wholeheartedly believe in.

You just don't have the cojones to post that here.

Be honest, or run from it, doesn't matter. You believe that there has never been a deity.

You hide behind the skirt and claim that you only lack evidence to believe otherwise, but it is clearly evidenced in your arguments that you hold beliefs that you do not feel strongly enough to declare.

No sweat, I've met many cowards. You don't owe me anything. You can continue to avoid admitting the truth as long as you want to.

After several hundred posts, you still can't get it right and you still insist on informing others of what they believe.

Ah well, Gecko schooled you well enough, and I am glad to see you fell of that high horse you've been clinging to.

Now that yer down here in the dirt with the rest of us, would ya like to vent some (more) frustration since no Atheist has accepted your failed logic? Maybe call a few more names?

[ksg0245]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Ahh, another staccato rebuttal and redirection at the same time.

Sorry, didn't want to spend any time on your other points.

I'm not saying that YOU believe that no deity has ever existed.

I'm saying, that according to definition, an ATHEIST believes no deity has ever existed.

You might believe something entirely differently. So I am not telling you what you believe, I'm just pointing out that if you don't believe that no deity has ever existed, you may not really be a real atheist.

I've told you what I believe (or actually don't) and why I'm an atheist; in this very post you're telling me I'm wrong about myself and don't know what I believe while claiming to not be telling me that, all based on your irrational need for atheism to be something other than what it is.

[Geko45]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

Doing better than I did back in the day. I always held a 3.9 average.

Yeah, my undergrad was a 3.93. Never got a B, but got an A- in two classes. grrr!

[Norske]

Originally Posted by brokenprism

If I'm not mistaken, the Latin equivalent of the Greek agnostic, is ignoramus. It just means "Don't know." But it's cheating. An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of conviction.

In my book, a theist believes in the existence of God with no proof thereof.

An atheist belives in the non-existence of God with no proof thereof.

Both are going too far.

I see myself as an agnostic; one who sees no proof of God one way or the other but admits the possibility that one of the other is fact.

And waiting for unmistakeable proof that God does exist.

And in the meantime, not allowing Theists to dictate my life based on their non-provable rants about how "God" wants us to think and what "God" wants us to do with our lives.

When as often as not, it is really some man trying to control our minds and lives for his own benefit while only claiming to act on behalf of "God".

[High-Gear]

Originally Posted by Norske

In my book, a theist believes in the existence of God with no proof thereof.

An atheist belives in the non-existence of God with no proof thereof.

Both are going too far.

I see myself as an agnostic; one who sees no proof of God one way or the other but admits the possibility that one of the other is fact.

And waiting for unmistakeable proof that God does exist.

And in the meantime, not allowing Theists to dictate my life based on their non-provable rants about how "God" wants us to think and what "God" wants us to do with our lives.

When as often as not, it is really some man trying to control our minds and lives for his own benefit while only claiming to act on behalf of "God".

Are you equally agnostic about the existance of Dragons, Unicorns, Pixies, Trolls, and Banshees? I must assume so according to your logic? I admit there is no evidence for them, but you can't disprove them.

I however think they are tales made up to entertain, or frighten children and dullards...much like religion.

Does it go too far not to believe in these unproveable beings as well? I think not.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Geko45

All this time and you still don't even know what my argument is. I never claimed a passive lack of belief. I claimed a belief supported by inductive reasoning, not faith.



When it comes to defining what I believe for myself, you're damn right your opinion is irrelevant. This has got to be one of the most hypocritical things I have ever read here. You've spent over a hundred pages in various threads trying to shove your opinion of what atheism is down the throats of atheists themselves and you think you are entitled to the moral high ground? Please... You're the one that can't accept an opinion other than your own.



4.0 and holding.

And you still don't see the faith required by coming to your conclusion through inductive reasoning. You have no examined all possibilities, and based on the limited direct knowledge you have, and what others have told you, you have chosen to believe something.

There's faith involved there, whether you can see it or not.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by ksg0245

I've told you what I believe (or actually don't) and why I'm an atheist; in this very post you're telling me I'm wrong about myself and don't know what I believe while claiming to not be telling me that, all based on your irrational need for atheism to be something other than what it is.

I'm telling you that you may be using an incorrect label.

Self examination is important in personal growth.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Norske

In my book, a theist believes in the existence of God with no proof thereof.

An atheist belives in the non-existence of God with no proof thereof.

Both are going too far.

I see myself as an agnostic; one who sees no proof of God one way or the other but admits the possibility that one of the other is fact.

And waiting for unmistakeable proof that God does exist.

And in the meantime, not allowing Theists to dictate my life based on their non-provable rants about how "God" wants us to think and what "God" wants us to do with our lives.

When as often as not, it is really some man trying to control our minds and lives for his own benefit while only claiming to act on behalf of "God".

Uh oh, you've gone too far now.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by High-Gear

Are you equally agnostic about the existance of Dragons, Unicorns, Pixies, Trolls, and Banshees? I must assume so according to your logic? I admit there is no evidence for them, but you can't disprove them.

I however think they are tales made up to entertain, or frighten children and dullards...much like religion.

Does it go too far not to believe in these unproveable beings as well? I think not.

You still cannot grasp that none of those probable myths have anything at all to do with the profound question of how we all came to be here.

Science may not have all the answers yet, recently the big bang theory received a major overhaul, and might soon be known as the big chill.

we are here, how? Heck if I know how or why. But we are still here. Theists and Atheists believe they know details about the how and why, and that is simply a matter of faith.

[High-Gear]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

You still cannot grasp that none of those probable myths have anything at all to do with the profound question of how we all came to be here.

Science may not have all the answers yet, recently the big bang theory received a major overhaul, and might soon be known as the big chill.

we are here, how? Heck if I know how or why. But we are still here. Theists and Atheists believe they know details about the how and why, and that is simply a matter of faith.

I understand they do not answer the question you pose, but I hold them in equal regard. Just because one fairy tale has to do with how we got here, does not make less absurd, it is still a fairy tale.

Religion use to answer many of life's questions. That was when we were in our infancy of understanding the natural world. Over the years it has explained less and less as our knowledge of the world has grown. One day we will understand the physical reason we are here, rendering the metaphysical story moot.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by Geko45

Yeah, my undergrad was a 3.93. Never got a B, but got an A- in two classes. grrr!

I got one B in graduate school. Apparently, I wasn't made out to be an archivist. Oh, well. It was a pointless course anyway, the professor was never there.

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

You still cannot grasp that none of those probable myths have anything at all to do with the profound question of how we all came to be here.

Show us your proof that unicorns did NOT create the universe and humanity.

Hoisted on your own petard.

Randy

[Altaris]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

I'm telling you that you may be using an incorrect label.

Self examination is important in personal growth.

Why are you so stuck on labels?

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Altaris

Why are you so stuck on labels?

Try passing an anatomy class without them.

[ksg0245]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

I'm telling you that you may be using an incorrect label.

I've clearly explained to you many times why atheist applies. You keep telling me I'm wrong. You've done that with virtually every atheist here.

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Self examination is important in personal growth.

Self-examination and understanding the definitions is how I determined I was an atheist, and I suspect that's also true of most other atheists. It wasn't a spontaneous, frivolous, random event.

But you'll continue to tell atheists you know better what they think than they do. You're obsessed.

[Kingarthurhk]

[quote=ksg0245;19349757]I've clearly explained to you many times why atheist applies. You keep telling me I'm wrong. You've done that with virtually every atheist here.[/quoute]

So, you are postulating that Atheists can do that, but no one should dare tell an Atheist they are wrong? Sounds rather dogmatic to me, on order of fanaticism.

But you'll continue to tell atheists you know better what they think than they do. You're obsessed.

Again, Atheists regularly tell people they are wrong in GTRI, but can't handle it in return? Where is the intellectual honest in that?

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

So, you are postulating that Atheists can do that, but no one should dare tell an Atheist they are wrong? Sounds rather dogmatic to me, on order of fanaticism.



Again, Atheists regularly tell people they are wrong in GTRI, but can't handle it in return? Where is the intellectual honest in that?

Apples and oranges. Atheists are telling believers their beliefs are wrong, as believers tell atheists they are wrong.

Atheists are not telling believers that they are wrong in what they think they believe.

Randy

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by steveksux

Apples and oranges. Atheists are telling believers their beliefs are wrong, as believers tell atheists they are wrong.

Atheists are not telling believers that they are wrong in what they think they believe.

Randy

It happens pretty often here, actually.