• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atheists Don't Exist

Peter King said:
No, you falsely claim it is a fad, that is total BS.

Because you do know that a fad is an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze.

1. atheism is not an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something

2. it is not short lived

3. it is not a craze

The word Atheism is from the 5th BC, so it clearly is not short lived.

If you think atheism is the "in thing" you should go out more because it clearly is not. And all your focus on what you call new atheism is also bogus as atheism is much older than that.
Click to expand...
Well, now that you googled it, you know that a fad is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What you still apparently don't know is that New Atheism is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What nobody seems to know or understand is that atheists really don't exist. What we have, really, is just a lot of people active on the internet, caught up in the silliness promoted by Dawkins, Hitchens and the rest of the Four Horse's-Asses of Atheism.
 
Angel said:
Well, now that you googled it, you know that a fad is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What you still apparently don't know is that New Atheism is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What nobody seems to know or understand is that atheists really don't exist. What we have, really, is just a lot of people active on the internet, caught up in the silliness promoted by Dawkins, Hitchens and the rest of the Four Horse's-Asses of Atheism.
Click to expand...

Bogus as always, you have no clue whether "new atheism" is a fad or long lasting. Atheism is atheism. What we have is millions upon millions of people who are just good old fashioned atheists.
 
Peter King said:
Bogus as always, you have no clue whether "new atheism" is a fad or long lasting. Atheism is atheism. What we have is millions upon millions of people who are just good old fashioned atheists.
Click to expand...
Your faith in atheism is noted, and unlike Internet Skeptics like yourself we shall not mock your faith. Respect.
 
Angel said:
Internet Skepticism demanding proof of the unprovable. The same in both cases.
Click to expand...

No one demanded proof that people believe in gods. There are no examples of this at all.
 
Angel said:
Well, now that you googled it, you know that a fad is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What you still apparently don't know is that New Atheism is "an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze."
What nobody seems to know or understand is that atheists really don't exist. What we have, really, is just a lot of people active on the internet, caught up in the silliness promoted by Dawkins, Hitchens and the rest of the Four Horse's-Asses of Atheism.
Click to expand...

So, IOW, by posting that, you openly and conclusively admit that atheists do, in fac, exist.

Thanks for finally copping to that.
 
Angel said:
In both cases the demand is for proof of the unprovable.
Click to expand...

No one is demanding proof that people believe in god. It is not happening. There are no examples of it.
 
devildavid said:
No one is demanding proof that people believe in god. It is not happening. There are no examples of it.
Click to expand...
Oy! This constant need for remediation that your posts demand is tiresome.
The demand for proof of the existence of God, which comes from Internet Skeptics like yourself, is comparable to the demand for proof of the existence of atheists, which I am demanding of Internet Skeptics in the spirit of Internet Skepticism.
 
Angel said:
Oy! This constant need for remediation that your posts demand is tiresome.
The demand for proof of the existence of God, which comes from Internet Skeptics like yourself, is comparable to the demand for proof of the existence of atheists, which I am demanding of Internet Skeptics in the spirit of Internet Skepticism.
Click to expand...

Atheists are not analogous to god, using the generic definition for both. What would be analogous is skeptics demanding proof that theists exist. Skeptics do not do this.
 
Angel said:
Your faith in atheism is noted, and unlike Internet Skeptics like yourself we shall not mock your faith. Respect.
Click to expand...

I am not an internet skeptic, that you have no idea what an internet skeptic is was totally obvious from the get go. And I do not have a faith, it seems you also clearly do not understand the nature of atheism.
 
Peter King said:
I am not an internet skeptic, that you have no idea what an internet skeptic is was totally obvious from the get go. And I do not have a faith, it seems you also clearly do not understand the nature of atheism.
Click to expand...
Your posts make you out as an IS, and I know an IS when I read one after fifteen years of experience and exasperation, and there is very little to understand about Internet Atheism beyond its provenance in New Atheism.
 
devildavid said:
Atheists are not analogous to god, using the generic definition for both. What would be analogous is skeptics demanding proof that theists exist. Skeptics do not do this.
Click to expand...
The point of analogy is the demand for proof of the unprovable. What words in that last sentence do you not understand?
 
Angel said:
The point of analogy is the demand for proof of the unprovable. What words in that last sentence do you not understand?
Click to expand...

No skeptic ever has asked for proof that people can believe in gods.
 
Angel said:
Your posts make you out as an IS, and I know an IS when I read one after fifteen years of experience and exasperation, and there is very little to understand about Internet Atheism beyond its provenance in New Atheism.
Click to expand...

And again, you are wrong. And you clearly do not know what an IS is because of your definition of an IS and you comments about IS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom