Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 Religion; easily disprovable, yet widely believed to be true. I hate religious debaters who think atheists are the ones who need to make the counter-point. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" is my motto.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" is my motto. And easily stated the other way around. So a.k.a. this topic is irrelevant. Thanks for admitting to spam. +1 Post
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 And easily stated the other way around. So a.k.a. this topic is irrelevant. Thanks for admitting to spam. +1 Post I don't think you quite understand what I'm saying. If I enter a debate and state that unicorns are real, people are going to be asking me for proof supporting my claim, not the other way around. Why should religion be any different?
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 If I say there is a God, you can't prove me wrong because you have no evidence of it's absence. If you say there is no God, I can't prove you wrong because I have no evidence of it not being absent. It goes both ways. Do you see any relevance in debating over a topic in which neither side has proof?
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 If I say there is a God, you can't prove me wrong because you have no evidence of it's absence. If you say there is no God, I can't prove you wrong because I have no evidence of it not being absent. It goes both ways. Do you see any relevance in debating over a topic in which neither side has proof? Again, I don't think you quite understand what I'm saying. I am not debating religion. If you read my original claim carefully: I hate religious debaters who think atheists are the ones who need to make the counter-point. I am not the one who has to disprove religion. You're the one who has to prove it to me. Thus resulting in: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." This means that when someone presents little to no argumentative evidence to their claims concerning religion, I have no obligation to disprove them. Learn how to read.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 You have your beliefs, and I have mine. Trying to change your opinions on that is pointless. Once again, no one can prove to you god exists. But at the same time, YOU CANNOT prove he doesn't. Or whatever religion you want to talk about. You're asking people to try and prove something exists when there is no proof. This is an irrelevant topic. what are you getting at that isn't there?
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 You have your beliefs, and I have mine. Trying to change your opinions on that is pointless. Once again, no one can prove to you god exists. But at the same time, YOU CANNOT prove he doesn't. Or whatever religion you want to talk about. You're asking people to try and prove something exists when there is no proof. This is an irrelevant topic. what are you getting at that isn't there? I'm not asking anyone to prove anything. I'm ranting about: I hate religious debaters who think atheists are the ones who need to make the counter-point. This, sir, is why you fail.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 Okay, so you're ranting about how something is pointless to argue because there's nothing to argue because to argue about it is pointless. Excuse me, for not speaking as though I were to a younger generation. So by all means, rant about something that's as pointless as talking about it.
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 Okay, so you're ranting about how something is pointless to argue because there's nothing to argue because to argue about it is pointless. Actually, I'm ranting about people who enter debates and ask the opposing person to disprove their claims that have no proof. Again, learn how to read or get the fuck out of my topic.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 Actually, I'm ranting about people who enter debates and ask the opposing person to disprove their claims that have no proof. Again, learn how to read or get the fuck out of my topic. And i'm disproving that it's impossible for the other person to disprove the one trying to prove that person wrong. What are you talking about? Off topic? Lol, i'm not sure who's not reading who. *Edit* don't flame, it's not smart. ;O also, I'm as on topic as you or anyone else posting in here.
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 And i'm disproving that it's impossible for the other person to disprove the one trying to prove that person wrong. What are you talking about? Off topic? Lol, i'm not sure who's not reading who. You're not proving or disproving anything. This is a rant, not a debate. Person A: Hello! I am entering a debate! Religion is TRUE! God exists! Prove me wrong, atheists! Person B: Hello! You have not backed up your claims by any factual evidence! Therefore, debating with you is of no worth! Good bye! It's as simple. As That.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 Scenerio One Person One: God exists Person Two: YOU CANT PROVE THAT Person One: Oh...Q_Q Scenerio Two Person One: God's Not Real Person Two: Prove it Person One: Oh...Q_Q Scenerio? Pointless. Rant about how pointless it is? Isn't ranting about something that's pointless also pointless? QQ MOAR PLS
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 Scenerio One Person One: God exists Person Two: YOU CANT PROVE THAT Person One: Oh...Q_Q Scenerio Two Person One: God's Not Real Person Two: Prove it Person One: Oh...Q_Q Scenerio? Pointless. Rant about how pointless it is? Isn't ranting about something that's pointless also pointless? I'm not ranting about the pointlessness of debating religion. It is not pointless. Proof can be provided for both sides of the issue. I'm ranting about how stupid person A is.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 PERSON A IS BOTH PEOPLE ITS THE SAME SCENERIO BOTH WAYS P.S. CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 You're not proving or disproving anything. This is a rant, not a debate. Person A: Hello! I am entering a debate! Religion is TRUE! God exists! Prove me wrong, atheists! Person B: Hello! You have not backed up your claims by any factual evidence! Therefore, debating with you is of no worth! Good bye! It's as simple. As That. Get. The. Fuck. Out.
Ryoji Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 Then you're totally neglecting the other half of a statement. You're only ranting, because you're leaving the other half out. So you're right. You're not being pointless because of the topic. You're pointless because you're only doing half the topic. Lol. QQ Sum Moar. Ty~!
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 ForsakenRO's average I.Q. is now officially 40.
Terroryst Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 I didn't use this as an argument against religion, Nitemare92.
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 oh men!!! If you want to start a debate about religion, go for it. I'm just ranting about people who make claims without anything to back it up. "Prove to me that God exists" is by no mean an argument to disprove God. _______________________________________________________________________________ Edit: This topic has pretty much gone too far. If a GM wants to close it, be my guest.
Zeitgeist Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 But then again, people who debate whether the existance of a God (any religion applies) is true or false are dumb to begin with. Religion is about belief, not about facts. Besides of all that, people should be following Jesus, the idea, not Jesus the person (an example, works for all religions).
Syntax Posted September 17, 2008 Report Posted September 17, 2008 IMO, people turns to religion for hope, faith, and protection. In the end like Zeit said, its just up to one's beliefs.
Jer Flip Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Posted September 17, 2008 But then again, people who debate whether the existance of a God (any religion applies) is true or false are dumb to begin with. Religion is about belief, not about facts. Besides of all that, people should be following Jesus, the idea, not Jesus the person (an example, works for all religions). People who debate the existence of a God are not dumb. On the contrary, some of them are regarded as the highest intellectuals alive. It is quite the subject, as it involves how the universe began, how the planet Earth came about, etc.
