come at me bro
usually its on the one making the claim to provide the evidence.
I am not making any claim tho, by stating this community as atheistic, and being a part of this community, your the one making the claim
The claim is they don’t believe in any gods. They don’t need to prove anything to you - not that you would know what a god is in the first place with that Haruhi shit.
I am sure rational and logical people like them base their beliefs on factual objective evidence and not how they feel or guesswork
this is why no one wants to play games with you
Damn, hit em’ where it hurts.
It’s that reliance on evidence that draws a person towards atheism, since there is no evidence to support the existence of a god, athiests don’t believe in god.
Much like you may not believe that I banged your mom, since you have no evidence that banged your mom.
Provide factual evidence for the existence of God then.
since I never said that a god does or doesnt exist and also didnt say that you made any claims; are you sure you replied to the correct comment?
Give me a solid, concrete, clearly defined God, and I will device an experiment to prove or disprove the existence of that god, until such a clearly define objective is given, this entire line of thought is pointless…
burden of proof fallacy. I asked a question and made no such claim otherwise so the burden of proof falls on you
That’s not a burden of proof fallacy, you just don’t know what the burden of proof is.
what is the objective evidence that god exists?
if that is your answer, that is called the
Burden of Proof Fallacy
Basically, that’s not an answer and is quite illogical to ask that
God doesnt exist. Proof: no “spiritual” influence has ever occurred on earth.
the bible is not a factual account.
that is Petitio Principii
if the proof is that no Spiritual influence has ever occurred on Earth we would need to give a natural explanation for each and every miracle and spiritual miracle that appeared in human history which would be next to impossible to do
you have replaced my question with a nearly impossible premise with your argument
we would need to give a natural explanation for each and every miracle and spiritual miracle that appeared in human history
No, you would first need to prove any of those things actually happened. The ones in the Bible are just made up stories with no evidence.
why would I? when you asserted they were naturalistic. I made no such assertions on the topic and merely asked a question. so the burden of proof falls on you
no point debating with someone who fundamentally misunderstands the principals. good luck with your endeavours.
Except that’s not how burden of proof works. To be atheist, is simply to reject the claim that there is a God or gods. You don’t require proof that something doesn’t exist, you have to prove when something does exist.
I can claim I banged your mom last night, but as the ancient philosophers say, pics or it didn’t happen.
yeaaa but I didnt make the Claim god exist, I ask why is the proof he doesnt exist. and he try to throw the burden of proof at me and treated it as a answer. So that’s a logical fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
“the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies”
Atheists deny God’s existence. You say God exists. Yes, the burden of proof does indeed rest with you and not they. Get over it.
when did I say god exists??? I merely ask what evidence is there that he didnt??? wtf you mean???
Damn bro, you got em. Atheist is now illegal. Please let the pope know it.
You begin with the assumption that a God to be disproved exists. That’s where you went wrong. You decided to believe the God claim without evidence to back it up in the first place.
when did i state that god exist?
That’s a complete misunderstanding of how burden of proof works.
Why do you believe I didn’t bang your mom?
Asking to prove a negative is also a fallacy. But to answer the question, there isn’t proof of there not being any of the gods proposes throughout human history. To use the reasoning you’re trying to force us into, they must all be true. Except that’s ridiculous.
You might chime in with “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”, and that is correct. So we can’t say for sure (prove) that any of these gods exist. We await the presentation of evidence of existence that will get us out of this impasse you’ve put the argument in. It shouldn’t be difficult, if any of them exist.
you theoretically can prove a negative and is not considered a logical fallacy, and I am sure a reasonable and rational being can prove their objective claims with better objective evidence rather than give me nothing
Prove there isn’t a teapot orbiting around Jupiter right now.
that is theoretically possible, you just have to look around the orbit area of Jupiter and where the teapot will orbit given its mass and weight
She told me she doesn’t exist. Quod erat demonstrandum.
did you record this conversation??? how do I take your word for it?
Ask her yourself.
Did you have evidence he didn’t have a nice conversation with God?
Burden of proof fallacy, I asked the question and him just throwing the question back at me is not a answer
I banged your mom
Yet you don’t recognize the obvious logical fallacy with your original question?
The fact that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun between Mars and Earth.
Atheism is not a declaration that there are no Gods, it is a lack of belief in the existence of any of the many various proposed ones. Sorry of this isn’t very satisfying for debate. Feel free to let us know details of the God(s) you may believe in, and we can possibly have commentary from there.
It’s impossible to prove a negative so your question is inherently dishonest.
The burden of proof is on the person making the positive assertion.
I didnt make any assertion, i asked a question??? so the burden of proof falls to you
also
-
The Michelson-Morley Experiment (1887)
-
Francesco Redi and Spontaneous Generation (1668)
-
John Snow and the Broad Street Cholera Outbreak (1854)
Off the top of my head were experiments made to prove a negative
How in the world did you think any of those were trying to prove a negative? They all were looking for evidence of something. And you got anything in maybe the last century?
No they were not? they all were meant to prove a negative
and also the logical fallacy of Appeal to Novelty
-
an attempt to find evidence of the aether
-
the first person to challenge the theory of spontaneous generation by demonstrating that maggots come from eggs of flies (i.e. uses evidence and the scientific process)
-
So much to cite from Snow’s work, but Snow theorised that this unknown germ was transmitted from person to person by individuals ingesting water, and found various correlating evidence
None of these were attempts to prove the absence of something, they showed the existing ideas were wrong by replacing it with something that could be tested repeatedly.
Now if you want to use their routes and put any ideas of a god doing this or that with modern science understanding, that’s reasonable. But none of this is claiming something doesn’t exist from the start, they’re finding better explanations of things and thus ruling out the previous.
-
he proved the aether does not exist
-
he proved that maggots didnt sponetaenously generate from meat
-
he proved that cholera wasnt a air borne disease
they have proven negative claims, so why cant you?
They disproved those things by revealing the lack of evidence in their favor. Which has been done countless times in this thread.
their entire experimentation and documentation was a bit more than nothing pal
-
-
-
What is the objective evidence I didn’t bang your mom?
Notice how @op didn’t respond to this one’s, that’s because I banged OPs mom
What is the objective evidence that we are not in a computer simulation? What is the objective proof unicorns aren’t real?
because if unicorns do exist than that means virgin maidens can summon them in the forests as that is a aspect of them
so to test that we would need to put a bunch of virgin maidens in the forest and see if they can summon unicorns, if they cant than that means an aspect of unicorns are missing therefore evidence that they do not exist
Unanswered prayer is evidence that God doesn’t exist. You heard it here first folks. Athiesm is now legal again. Please inform the Pope
So if a single aspect of gods description does not exist, god does not exist?
God has been described as the sole reason for the tides, that has been proven to be the effect of gravity therefore god does not exist.
how do you know a sentient being didnt create the mechanisms for why all the tides exists including gravity
Because the mechanisms were explicitly not given credit. It was an act of god, by gods will. Expanding the goalpost to include any phenomenon not in gods lore is the same as me saying “the unicorns sense the ill intent of the maidens and deems them not pure.”
I didnt expand any goalpost, you tied your own aspect to god and created your own goalpost wdym?
and the unicorn statement you have said is not keenly known for unicorns to do so
It is not keenly known that god created gravity. There is no description of it in the bible, there are no records of gravity having not existed, meaning it pre-dates god.
The Invisible Pink Unicorn did all that. Prove she didn’t. You can’t.
Nope. I quoted it earlier, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It’s why you can’t prove a negative - because anyone can just say we just haven’t seen signs of it yet.
You can’t have definite proof that something does not exist, there are however several studies that have tried to find proof of the existence of God, they failed to do that, as such it reinforces our belief that God does not exist. Again, that is not definitive proof, but no serious atheist says there is definitive proof of the inexistence of anything, including a god
Which one?
“Clearly THE god”, said by the followers of some 3000+ different religions.
Obviously THEIR god is real and all others are ludicrous fiction, and OH LOOK “their god” is always the popular one for their geographic region? WHAT A COINCIDENCE!
idk like anyone of them. like any sentient being that created everything ever. Any proof against that
You created this thread and you’re not God of it.
give me evidence I am not
Oh, you need me to do that? You can’t just imagine it into being?
No sane God would have given me this monster hog I use to fuck your mom. He would have saved some of that dick for a better cause.
The bible says heaven is above Earth but all that’s up there is just space and more stars and planets and shit. No heaven.
Uhm, define God? Old man with a white beard who sent Muhammad as his messenger? Never seen that guy… Or do you mean Vishnu? Zeus??
i’ll take any god, any sentient being that created everything
I think our current best understanding of how everything was created, is the Big Bang theory. And since we have observational evidence… Well… it kinda rules out the other theories. You can have a multitude of Gods who didn’t create everything?
I mean come on. All the theories with the 6 days of creation, some giants and whatever we had is pretty contradictory to what the world is.
