Topic: Atheism does not exist - page 3. (Read 11729 times)
Noting the prefix uni (one) and the definition "totality of existence," can we also agree that the universe means everything?
I agree with organ regarding meanings, but for the sake of the forum I think I'm going to bite the bullet and answer danks questions the way he wants, after all he has said himself 14 pages have gone by without him being able to set off his scripted nonsense bomb.
Ahem.
Yes dank I am part of everything.
Ahem.
Yes dank I am part of everything.
Well, I've been trying to get you all to understand that statement for 14 pages and so I thought I'd mix it up with a therefor.
Now that we came to an agreement that everything is everything, I ask, you are part of everything, right?
Now that we came to an agreement that everything is everything, I ask, you are part of everything, right?
You're mixing up words and meanings again.
The letters in the word "everything" are equal to the letters in the word "everything", just like the book I am holding is equal to the book I am holding. You could even stretch a point and say that the meaning of everything is equal to the meaning of everything.
However, what you can't do is say that the categories referenced by the word "everything" are equal to all the other categories referenced by the word "everything". That would be like saying language is language and then expecting everyone to understand swahili.
Well, I've been trying to get you all to understand that statement for 14 pages and so I thought I'd mix it up with a therefor.
Now that we came to an agreement that everything is everything, I ask, you are part of everything, right?
Now that we came to an agreement that everything is everything, I ask, you are part of everything, right?
Take the word therefore out of it.
Nothing is nothing
Everything is everything
Speaking shit is speaking shit
Red is red therefore
A fridge is a fridge
The word therefore creates some sort of reliance on the previous nonsense statement like a fridge couldn't be a fridge if the color red did not exist. While both statements on there own are obviously true, connected, they just make the person speaking them sound like a brain cripple.
Nothing is nothing
Everything is everything
Speaking shit is speaking shit
Red is red therefore
A fridge is a fridge
The word therefore creates some sort of reliance on the previous nonsense statement like a fridge couldn't be a fridge if the color red did not exist. While both statements on there own are obviously true, connected, they just make the person speaking them sound like a brain cripple.
No, the difference between Atheism and Agnostic is not your concern. It is a difference in interpretation of the question, not the outcome of answer.
Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.
So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.
You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.
Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.
So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.
You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.
The difference between the three doesn't really matter here. What I'm conveying is proof through simple logic that god exists.
Nothing is nothing, therefor, everything is everything. Can we agree on that?
Atheism isn't a believe in the non-existence of god, it is saying "I don't believe you when you claim that god exists, because you don't have any evidence."
That's all.
That's all.
True.. most of people believe in what they need ir see(hear smell and so on) if you need someone to tell your secrest you go to priest.. well kinda same as talking to god
you can believe or no.. i dont rly give a shit
No, the difference between Atheism and Agnostic is not your concern. It is a difference in interpretation of the question, not the outcome of answer.
Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.
So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.
You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.
Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.
So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.
You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.
It looks like this is going nowhere...
Extreme -
Atheist - There is no such thing as god. You can prove it to me be beyond a reasonable doubt; I will refuse to acknowledge your proof and I would rather kill you than believe in god.
* Everything in between
Middle -
Agnostic - I was born an inquisitive being; I learn things using a scientific process. I would believe in god if you could prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that god existed; likewise, I would accept that god might not exist. If I die and go to heaven; great. If I die and just cease to exist; then that's just how it is...
* Everything in between
Extreme -
Religious - God is absolutely real. I don't have to prove it because I believe it and I want to force you to believe it in order to "save your soul." I will die if I must in order to force you to believe in god.
From the perspective of existence the OP is correct; existence is eternal. However; only that which existed before the big bang is infinite. Eternity will eventually end and this eternal plane will no longer exist.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed from within our Universe. This indicates a lack of equilibrium and hints that an inverse of energy must exist for existence to be possible. Equilibrium is infinite until acted upon by an external force. Recent tests at the Hadron Particle Accelerator reveal that when an atomic particle is "smashed," the pieces can no longer exist and form a black hole. The creation of a black hole at such low energies is indicative of an alternate plane containing the inverse of energy and mass. Black holes are the equilibrium of energy.
http://www.livescience.com/27811-creating-mini-black-holes.html
http://www.livescience.com/27888-newfound-particle-is-higgs.html
Extreme -
Atheist - There is no such thing as god. You can prove it to me be beyond a reasonable doubt; I will refuse to acknowledge your proof and I would rather kill you than believe in god.
* Everything in between
Middle -
Agnostic - I was born an inquisitive being; I learn things using a scientific process. I would believe in god if you could prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that god existed; likewise, I would accept that god might not exist. If I die and go to heaven; great. If I die and just cease to exist; then that's just how it is...
* Everything in between
Extreme -
Religious - God is absolutely real. I don't have to prove it because I believe it and I want to force you to believe it in order to "save your soul." I will die if I must in order to force you to believe in god.
From the perspective of existence the OP is correct; existence is eternal. However; only that which existed before the big bang is infinite. Eternity will eventually end and this eternal plane will no longer exist.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed from within our Universe. This indicates a lack of equilibrium and hints that an inverse of energy must exist for existence to be possible. Equilibrium is infinite until acted upon by an external force. Recent tests at the Hadron Particle Accelerator reveal that when an atomic particle is "smashed," the pieces can no longer exist and form a black hole. The creation of a black hole at such low energies is indicative of an alternate plane containing the inverse of energy and mass. Black holes are the equilibrium of energy.
http://www.livescience.com/27811-creating-mini-black-holes.html
http://www.livescience.com/27888-newfound-particle-is-higgs.html
Your atheist definition is wrong many levels, firstly nobody has proven any religion beyond a responsible doubt. The very definition of faith is belief without evidence. If you wish to use the legal term of beyond reasonable doubt, you will require a great deal of irrefutable evidence, which religion provides none. Religion doesn't even come close to the balance of probabilities threshold.
Atheism merely means not convinced. The extreme version would be, extremely not convinced.
Your definition may be more suited to an anti-theist. Somebody that "KNOWS" there is no God
People have had evidence through supernatural encounters, I wouldn't have believed in god to the extent I do if I had not experience something impossible.
Wouldn't agnostic mean you're not convinced? The root of atheism (A) signifies a negative, that it is the same as anti-theism.
Its bad to see OP banned.BTW I liked this discussion and I support religion so does over 95% of my fellow humans.I'm muslim BTW.
Still here bro.
Congratulations on supporting religion.
This thread was not started as a religion support thread, it was a put down for atheism thread.
This thread was not started as a religion support thread, it was a put down for atheism thread.
It was neither, it was a thread to push those who read it to become conscious of their ego (negative side) and let go of it to think and live using their soul (positive side) more. This thread was more intended to point out the fallacious nature of negatives, for negatives create false statements.
My goal is not to put anyone down, rather to lift everyone up.
Congratulations on supporting religion.
This thread was not started as a religion support thread, it was a put down for atheism thread.
This thread was not started as a religion support thread, it was a put down for atheism thread.
Its bad to see OP banned.BTW I liked this discussion and I support religion so does over 95% of my fellow humans.I'm muslim BTW.
Why do you think dank has been banned?
Its bad to see OP banned.BTW I liked this discussion and I support religion so does over 95% of my fellow humans.I'm muslim BTW.
It looks like this is going nowhere...
Extreme -
Atheist - There is no such thing as god. You can prove it to me be beyond a reasonable doubt; I will refuse to acknowledge your proof and I would rather kill you than believe in god.
* Everything in between
Middle -
Agnostic - I was born an inquisitive being; I learn things using a scientific process. I would believe in god if you could prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that god existed; likewise, I would accept that god might not exist. If I die and go to heaven; great. If I die and just cease to exist; then that's just how it is...
* Everything in between
Extreme -
Religious - God is absolutely real. I don't have to prove it because I believe it and I want to force you to believe it in order to "save your soul." I will die if I must in order to force you to believe in god.
From the perspective of existence the OP is correct; existence is eternal. However; only that which existed before the big bang is infinite. Eternity will eventually end and this eternal plane will no longer exist.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed from within our Universe. This indicates a lack of equilibrium and hints that an inverse of energy must exist for existence to be possible. Equilibrium is infinite until acted upon by an external force. Recent tests at the Hadron Particle Accelerator reveal that when an atomic particle is "smashed," the pieces can no longer exist and form a black hole. The creation of a black hole at such low energies is indicative of an alternate plane containing the inverse of energy and mass. Black holes are the equilibrium of energy.
http://www.livescience.com/27811-creating-mini-black-holes.html
http://www.livescience.com/27888-newfound-particle-is-higgs.html
Extreme -
Atheist - There is no such thing as god. You can prove it to me be beyond a reasonable doubt; I will refuse to acknowledge your proof and I would rather kill you than believe in god.
* Everything in between
Middle -
Agnostic - I was born an inquisitive being; I learn things using a scientific process. I would believe in god if you could prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that god existed; likewise, I would accept that god might not exist. If I die and go to heaven; great. If I die and just cease to exist; then that's just how it is...
* Everything in between
Extreme -
Religious - God is absolutely real. I don't have to prove it because I believe it and I want to force you to believe it in order to "save your soul." I will die if I must in order to force you to believe in god.
From the perspective of existence the OP is correct; existence is eternal. However; only that which existed before the big bang is infinite. Eternity will eventually end and this eternal plane will no longer exist.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed from within our Universe. This indicates a lack of equilibrium and hints that an inverse of energy must exist for existence to be possible. Equilibrium is infinite until acted upon by an external force. Recent tests at the Hadron Particle Accelerator reveal that when an atomic particle is "smashed," the pieces can no longer exist and form a black hole. The creation of a black hole at such low energies is indicative of an alternate plane containing the inverse of energy and mass. Black holes are the equilibrium of energy.
http://www.livescience.com/27811-creating-mini-black-holes.html
http://www.livescience.com/27888-newfound-particle-is-higgs.html
Your atheist definition is wrong many levels, firstly nobody has proven any religion beyond a responsible doubt. The very definition of faith is belief without evidence. If you wish to use the legal term of beyond reasonable doubt, you will require a great deal of irrefutable evidence, which religion provides none. Religion doesn't even come close to the balance of probabilities threshold.
Atheism merely means not convinced. The extreme version would be, extremely not convinced.
Your definition may be more suited to an anti-theist. Somebody that "KNOWS" there is no God
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
No such thing as an OOBE (that's actually "out of body experience"). No one that has reported such an experience has ever been able to show knowledge of something that couldn't be known another way. Therefore, the OOBE is no different to imagining something. It's not proof that you can experience something without a brain.
If you think you can show knowledge through an OOBE of something that would have been unknown, you can earn yourself an easy million dollars.
How are you going to tell me there's no such thing when I have literally gone to other dimensions through astral travel?
I do not doubt that you have imagined something of the sort. But there's nothing to indicate that you are experiencing anything other than a fevered imagining.
And I can say the exact same thing about life.
Feel free to astral travel over to my place. I just wrote a message just for you and put it on the fridge. Report it back here and I'll admit an OOBE might be valid.
10 coins if you get it right.
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
No such thing as an OOBE (that's actually "out of body experience"). No one that has reported such an experience has ever been able to show knowledge of something that couldn't be known another way. Therefore, the OOBE is no different to imagining something. It's not proof that you can experience something without a brain.
If you think you can show knowledge through an OOBE of something that would have been unknown, you can earn yourself an easy million dollars.
How are you going to tell me there's no such thing when I have literally gone to other dimensions through astral travel?
I do not doubt that you have imagined something of the sort. But there's nothing to indicate that you are experiencing anything other than a fevered imagining.
And I can say the exact same thing about life.
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
No such thing as an OOBE (that's actually "out of body experience"). No one that has reported such an experience has ever been able to show knowledge of something that couldn't be known another way. Therefore, the OOBE is no different to imagining something. It's not proof that you can experience something without a brain.
If you think you can show knowledge through an OOBE of something that would have been unknown, you can earn yourself an easy million dollars.
How are you going to tell me there's no such thing when I have literally gone to other dimensions through astral travel?
I do not doubt that you have imagined something of the sort. But there's nothing to indicate that you are experiencing anything other than a fevered imagining.
Otherwise, feel free to astral travel over to my place. I just wrote a message just for you and put it on the fridge. Report it back here and I'll admit an OOBE might be valid.
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
No such thing as an OOBE (that's actually "out of body experience"). No one that has reported such an experience has ever been able to show knowledge of something that couldn't be known another way. Therefore, the OOBE is no different to imagining something. It's not proof that you can experience something without a brain.
If you think you can show knowledge through an OOBE of something that would have been unknown, you can earn yourself an easy million dollars.
How are you going to tell me there's no such thing when I have literally gone to other dimensions through astral travel?
Life is a dream created by your imagination. Don't get fooled by how real it seems, sure it's real, but it's also an illusion created by our consciousness. Everything is energy, light waves, sound waves etc., you mind manifests it to be as it is. And you control your mind as much as you believe.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed from within our Universe. This indicates a lack of equilibrium and hints that an inverse of energy must exist for existence to be possible.
And it does! Even before the hadron Collider experiments, we figured out that there are equal parts matter and antimatter in our universe. You put everything together, and it will all cancel each other out. Hadron Collider experiments substantiated that by showing that mini big bangs happen on a quantum level, which also have both matter and antimatter.
That's the new question...
There must be equal parts of matter and antimatter; this is true. However, the absence of observable antimatter within our Universe has lead to the theory of multiple Universes. The key that I'm referring to is not the creation of black holes in small particles; it's the creation of a black hole with an energy density 1 quadrillion times less than was originally thought to be possible based on General Relativity. It's just very interesting...
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
No such thing as an OOBE (that's actually "out of body experience"). No one that has reported such an experience has ever been able to show knowledge of something that couldn't be known another way. Therefore, the OOBE is no different to imagining something. It's not proof that you can experience something without a brain.
If you think you can show knowledge through an OOBE of something that would have been unknown, you can earn yourself an easy million dollars.
Your brain is but a tool that connects your true self (consciousness) to the world.
There is as much proof that an non-physical spirit exists as a god-like being exists.
You clearly have never had an OBE (outer body experience).
Rassah, if you want to believe the universe is nothing, that's fine. From my experience there is much more peace to be felt by believing in something rather than nothing.
Regarding perceiving nothing, if you were to somehow perceive nothing, you would be unaware you perceived nothing, thus, it would never have happened, for, for you to perceive nothing, your perception would have to cease completely and you would have no recollection of perceiving nothing. I sorta have this feeling that you're just pulling strings to defend your perspective, but I'll take your word.
Jump to: