One Simple Question I Have For Atheists

52 posts / 0 new
Last post
LogicFTW's picture
@reedemption

@reedemption

There was a time the earth was thought to be flat, it took the circumnavigation of the earth to debunk such error.

This is not true. People figured out the earth was not flat long before circumnavigation of the earth occurred. (And some of them to this day still deny it!)

Theists never had to justify why or how God until Atheists like you came around screaming "we have seen no scientific and empirical proof of god!"

Yes they did. They had to justify it against other religions or "atheist" at the time. Look up the word, definition and history of the word "atheist" there was a time when atheist simply meant "did not believe in our god" even if they did believe in other gods.

Hence, onus is on you to act like Christopher Columbus and prove otherwise.

Christopher Columbus did not prove the world was round. Read the real history on christopher columbus, not the crap they taught you in grade school 20 years ago.

Otherwise, your ranting is like telling flat-earthers to prove that the earth is flat.

So... you would not demand flat earthers to prove their position? You would just accept them as being right? Do you believe the earth is flat? Serious question.

cranky47's picture
"This is not true. People

"This is not true. People figured out the earth was not flat long before circumnavigation of the earth occurred. (And some of them to this day still deny it!)"

Quite right. The ancient Greeks had even worked out the circumference of the earth.*

OF COURSE Christopher Columbus know the earth was round. This was common knowledge at that time .He underestimated the circumference of the earth**.

9(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9))))))))))))))))))))))()))))))))))))))))))))))))))9((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

*Eratosphenes, fifth century BCE. He also invented geography.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

**Columbus was aware of Eratosthenes' calculations, but disagreed. He thought the earth was much smaller, and that getting toAsia from Europe was feasible

Sheldon's picture
reedemption "There was a

reedemption "There was a time the earth was thought to be flat, it took the circumnavigation of the earth to debunk such error. Theists never had to justify why or how God until Atheists like you came around screaming "we have seen no scientific and empirical proof of god!" Hence, onus is on you to act like Christopher Columbus and prove otherwise. Otherwise, your ranting is like telling flat-earthers to prove that the earth is flat. So you see the "sillyness" of your position!"

This is the most moronic post you've written, but hilarious nonetheless. You have just directly compared your superstitious beliefs to belief in a flat earth, and missed the irony what's more. The idea Christopher Columbus proved the earth wasn't flat is priceless, it is a long enduring myth taught to children, along with religions. Many humans have known the earth was round for thousands of years. Of course religions have always fought and retarded human knowledge, in favour of superstitious dogma, but fuck me your post is both edifying and hilarious in equal measure.

Oh dear oh dear....

Cognostic's picture
@reedemption: It took the

@reedemption: It took the circumnavigation of the earth to debunk such error.

No. It didn't. It took circumnavigation to prove the known theory to be true. Pythagoras: It has actually been known that the Earth was round since the time of the ancient Greeks. I believe that it was Pythagoras who first proposed that the Earth was round sometime around 500 B.C. he showed the Moon must be round by observing the shape of the terminator (the line between the part of the Moon in light and the part of the Moon in the dark) as it moved through its orbital cycle. Pythagoras reasoned that if the Moon was round, then the Earth must be round as well. After that, sometime between 500 B.C. and 430 B.C., a fellow called Anaxagoras determined the true cause of solar and lunar eclipses - and then the shape of the Earth's shadow on the Moon during a lunar eclipse was also used as evidence that the Earth was round."

YOU HAVE NO WORKING THEORY ON WHICH WE WOULD VENTURE INTO THE UNKNOWN. NONE! You are merely spouting inane assertions. It is not the job of anyone else to knock down your inane bullshit. It is a straw-man. Atheism does not have to disprove god or gods we merely point to the flaws in the bullshit you post and opt not to believe it.

reedemption's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens
And your point is....?

David Killens's picture
Historical accuracy.

Historical accuracy.

Or else anyone can spout whatever bullshit they desire.

Talyyn's picture
@reedemption

@reedemption

I think, although I could be wrong, that you are coming here as a theist, and the revealed religion as an awful record on scientific facts so...
This maybe the point of Mr Killens.

David Killens's picture
This applies to all, be it

This applies to all, be it theist or atheist. If you get your facts wrong, you should be challenged.

But yes Talyyn, I was motivated by religion's propensity to distort the facts in order to sway the argument.

Talyyn's picture
Of course. That said, how

Of course. That said, how many times have we said here that a first cause argument doesn't demonstrate a god?

David Killens's picture
Geez, I don't know if I can

Geez, I don't know if I can count that high.

Randomhero1982's picture
Probably that you're a thick

@David Killens
And your point is....?

Probably that you're a thick fucking bell-end!

Sheldon's picture
@Randomhero1982

@Randomhero1982

I concur, have an agree.

reedemption's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

Atheists disbelieve in God just like flat-earthers disbelieve in a round earth despite the wealth of evidence.

Whenever an assertion has been proven, the burden of proof then rests on the challengers of the status quo. Even in the law court, the burden of proof rests on the accuser.

Sheldon's picture
reedemption "Atheists

reedemption "Atheists disbelieve in God just like flat-earthers disbelieve in a round earth despite the wealth of evidence."

Is that why you've not offered any evidence, and gone with the woeful idiocy of the KCA? Never mind, please list the three best pieces of objective evidence you think demonstrate a deity exists, and please do include objective evidence it's the deity form your particular superstition, as opposed to Ganesha or Zeus.

reedemption "Whenever an assertion has been proven, the burden of proof then rests on the challengers.......in the law court, the burden of proof rests on the accuser."

Hahahahahahhahahahahah, uh, oh no....Irony overload!

How exactly is innocence proved a priori, since the whole point of the presumption of innocence is that it does not need to be proved at all?... dear oh dear.

Christ but you're dumb....

LogicFTW's picture
@reedemption

@reedemption

Atheists disbelieve in God just like flat-earthers disbelieve in a round earth despite the wealth of evidence.

You really think "the wealth of evidence" supports your particular god notion? What definition of evidence are you working with? Presumably your own that works for your own narrative/biases.

Whenever an assertion has been proven, the burden of proof then rests on the challengers of the status quo

Who determines what status quo is? Popular vote? Better be ready to convert to islam pretty soon!

Cognostic's picture
@reedemption: i HAVE ONE

@reedemption: i HAVE ONE SIMPLE QUESTION FOR "REDEMPTION." SERIOUSLY, HOW IN THE FUCK DO YOU COME INTO AN ATHEIST CHAT ROOM, STATE YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR ATHEISTS, AND THEN BEGIN YOUR QUESTION WITH "COSMOLOGISTS PROPOSE THAT THE UNIVERSE WAS......." WHERE IN THE FUCK ARE YOU? DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE WORD "ATHEIST" MEANS? THIS IS THE STUPIDEST QUESTION OF THE YEAR!

ATHEIST: A person who does not believe in the existence of GOD or gods. What in the fuck does your question have to do with atheism?

Simon Moon's picture
@ Redempion

@ Redempion

First of all, the phrase 'before the big bang' may not even be a coherent idea. TIme and space began when the singularity began expanding.

Second, as others have said, why not ask cosmologists this question?

Third, since we are (currently) blocked to anything beyond the Planck Time, the current best answer is probably. "we don't know yet". Sorry, I understand that the answer, "we don't know" causes problems, but sometimes it is the most honest answer. Sure beats making crap up.

And forth, whatever the answer is, existed eternally, or did not, neither of those answers gets us any closer to "a god did". "God did it" is something that has to be demonstrated and supported by EVIDENCE.

But I'm pretty sure, you'll just 'logic' your god into existence.

Cognostic's picture
@Simon Moon: Thank you Mr.

@Simon Moon: Thank you Mr. Moon. That makes about 29 times we have told him the exact same shit! You would think, even though common sense isn't that common, it would be a bit more common than it appears to be.

Simon Moon's picture
@redemption

@redemption

"Atheists disbelieve in God just like flat-earthers disbelieve in a round earth despite the wealth of evidence.

Whenever an assertion has been proven, the burden of proof then rests on the challengers of the status quo. Even in the law court, the burden of proof rests on the accuser."

Please....

If theists could show us a vanishingly small fraction of the evidence, for the existence of their god, as is available for the oblate spheroid earth, then let us have it. But it seems the best you guys can do, is 'logic' your god into existence.

So, are you saying, in your second paragraph, that because the belief in existence of gods has been the status quo for so long, atheists are the ones making a claim? If so, you aren't too smart, are you?

First of all, that is an appeal to tradition fallacy, and an appeal to popularity fallacy. 1 sentance, 2 fallacies. I'll bet you can do better than that.

Just to make it clearer, no matter how long the claim that gods exist has been around, it is still a claim, that has with it....wait for it....the burden of proof.

So, you also tried to dishonestly, pass the burden of proof.

cranky47's picture
Dishonestly?

Dishonestly?

Be fair; I've seen no evidence to suggest the fool has the wit to be intellectually dishonest.

Randomhero1982's picture
The singularity is only

The singularity is only proposed under general relativity.

It's not required under quantum mechanics.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.