A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

[chaz wyman]

Relevant , to what , we left the original topic long ago ,
so the topic I believe is , do Atheists have morals ,
and the answer is yes , BUT ,
we are each unique individuals ,and have our own morals ,
it would be nice for society , if they could pigeon hole us ,
put us all in one category/known quantity ,
but Atheisms not like that , nor is religion really ,
but because they have "the book" they can point to their morals .
Atheists are individuals , not a religion , a cult or gang ,
we don't have a book , or set of rules to follow ,
I have my own set of rules , morals ,
I think we all do , but most prefer the comfort ,
of being part of a group , security in numbers ,
So maybe , to be an Atheist as I am ,
requires courage , the courage to stand alone ,
and stand up for what you believe .

Even more irrelevant.

[Godfree]

Relevant , to what , we left the original topic long ago ,
so the topic I believe is , do Atheists have morals ,
and the answer is yes , BUT ,
we are each unique individuals ,and have our own morals ,
it would be nice for society , if they could pigeon hole us ,
put us all in one category/known quantity ,
but Atheisms not like that , nor is religion really ,
but because they have "the book" they can point to their morals .
Atheists are individuals , not a religion , a cult or gang ,
we don't have a book , or set of rules to follow ,
I have my own set of rules , morals ,
I think we all do , but most prefer the comfort ,
of being part of a group , security in numbers ,
So maybe , to be an Atheist as I am ,
requires courage , the courage to stand alone ,
and stand up for what you believe .

Even more irrelevant.

to what,,??

[chaz wyman]

Relevant , to what , we left the original topic long ago ,
so the topic I believe is , do Atheists have morals ,
and the answer is yes , BUT ,
we are each unique individuals ,and have our own morals ,
it would be nice for society , if they could pigeon hole us ,
put us all in one category/known quantity ,
but Atheisms not like that , nor is religion really ,
but because they have "the book" they can point to their morals .
Atheists are individuals , not a religion , a cult or gang ,
we don't have a book , or set of rules to follow ,
I have my own set of rules , morals ,
I think we all do , but most prefer the comfort ,
of being part of a group , security in numbers ,
So maybe , to be an Atheist as I am ,
requires courage , the courage to stand alone ,
and stand up for what you believe .

Even more irrelevant.

to what,,??

EXACTLY!

[Godfree]

,
so the topic I believe is , do Atheists have morals ,
and the answer is yes , BUT ,
we are each unique individuals ,and have our own morals ,
it would be nice for society , if they could pigeon hole us ,
put us all in one category/known quantity ,
but Atheisms not like that , nor is religion really ,
but because they have "the book" they can point to their morals .
Atheists are individuals , not a religion , a cult or gang ,
we don't have a book , or set of rules to follow ,
I have my own set of rules , morals ,
I think we all do , but most prefer the comfort ,
of being part of a group , security in numbers ,
So maybe , to be an Atheist as I am ,
requires courage , the courage to stand alone ,
and stand up for what you believe .[/quote]


Even more irrelevant.[/quote]
to what,,??[/quote]

EXACTLY![/quote]
I don't mind my posts being the only post , quoted over and over again ,
but I don't think it's good blogging tactics ,
surely a comment or two a paragraph or some sort of effort ,
would make for more interesting reading ,
So my belief system ,
I 'believe" I can prove god does not exist ,
but you take it on faith I presume as you don't imagine one can ,
prove god doesn't exist ,
so who's a religion relying on faith Chaz , not me , YOU,
you have faith there is no god , I can prove it ,
you don't consider my proof , proof ,
but a fundamentalist wouldn't see proof of evolution as proof either ,
so your full of shit calling me a religion ,
and it is YOU that relies on faith for your belief system ,,,!!!!

[chaz wyman]

,
I don't mind my posts being the only post , quoted over and over again ,
but I don't think it's good blogging tactics ,
surely a comment or two a paragraph or some sort of effort ,
would make for more interesting reading ,
So my belief system ,
I 'believe" I can prove god does not exist ,

Which is a circular problem. All Christians believe they can prove that god exists.
You cannot actually prove god does not exist, anymore than you can disprove there is a teapot orbiting Jupiter.
I have asked you to do this and you have been found wanting.


but you take it on faith I presume as you don't imagine one can ,
prove god doesn't exist ,
so who's a religion relying on faith Chaz , not me , YOU,
Idiotic
you have faith there is no god , I can prove it ,

Go on then DO IT!

you don't consider my proof , proof ,

That's because you don't have anything. All you gave us were assertions.
Your proof goes like this. I no not believe in god.
I believe that god does not exist; Therefor I have proved that god does not exist.

but a fundamentalist wouldn't see proof of evolution as proof either ,
so your full of shit calling me a religion ,
and it is YOU that relies on faith for your belief system ,,,!!!!

Tell me what my religion is based on!

[Godfree]

,
I don't mind my posts being the only post , quoted over and over again ,
but I don't think it's good blogging tactics ,
surely a comment or two a paragraph or some sort of effort ,
would make for more interesting reading ,
So my belief system ,
I 'believe" I can prove god does not exist ,

Which is a circular problem. All Christians believe they can prove that god exists.
You cannot actually prove god does not exist, anymore than you can disprove there is a teapot orbiting Jupiter.
I have asked you to do this and you have been found wanting.


but you take it on faith I presume as you don't imagine one can ,
prove god doesn't exist ,
so who's a religion relying on faith Chaz , not me , YOU,
Idiotic
you have faith there is no god , I can prove it ,

Go on then DO IT!

you don't consider my proof , proof ,

That's because you don't have anything. All you gave us were assertions.
Your proof goes like this. I no not believe in god.
I believe that god does not exist; Therefor I have proved that god does not exist.

but a fundamentalist wouldn't see proof of evolution as proof either ,
so your full of shit calling me a religion ,
and it is YOU that relies on faith for your belief system ,,,!!!!

Tell me what my religion is based on!

Seems like your saying you can't tell the difference between ,
god doesn't exist , or god does exist , like my claims are no more credible than a religious person claiming god ,
so it is your lack of knowledge and understanding thats holding you back ,
My belief system ,which is not based on believing but the facts the science and the logic ,can tell the difference , can prove there is no god ,
So before we go round in even more circles ,
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT SCIENCE HAS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF GOD ,
and if so why is this not proof enough , surely if science can't find any support for the silly notion , that would be enough for you Chaz ,
but is seems not , like you defend christian organizations and rubbish Atheists like me ,,????
with friends like you Chaz who needs enemy's

[chaz wyman]

Tell me what my religion is based on!
[/color]

Seems like your saying you can't tell the difference between ,
god doesn't exist , or god does exist , like my claims are no more credible than a religious person claiming god ,
so it is your lack of knowledge and understanding thats holding you back ,
My belief system ,which is not based on believing but the facts the science and the logic ,can tell the difference , can prove there is no god ,
So before we go round in even more circles ,
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT SCIENCE HAS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF GOD ,
Depends on what you mean by god doesn't it?
and if so why is this not proof enough , surely if science can't find any support for the silly notion , that would be enough for you Chaz ,

Negative evidence is not evidence. Negative evidence is not proof of anything. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

but is seems not , like you defend christian organizations and rubbish Atheists like me ,,????
with friends like you Chaz who needs enemy's

Why not answer the question?

You cannot prove the non existence of God.

I keep asking you to try and you always avoid the question.

[Godfree]

[
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT SCIENCE HAS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF GOD ,
Depends on what you mean by god doesn't it?
and if so why is this not proof enough , surely if science can't find any support for the silly notion , that would be enough for you Chaz ,

Negative evidence is not evidence. Negative evidence is not proof of anything. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

but is seems not , like you defend christian organizations and rubbish Atheists like me ,,????
with friends like you Chaz who needs enemy's[/quote]

Why not answer the question?

You cannot prove the non existence of God.

I keep asking you to try and you always avoid the question.[/quote]
So you have a god concept ,???what do you mean by god ,
what is god to you , and why would I need to refer to your concept of god ,
do you think you have a god that science can't disprove ,,???
Do you consider that science has proven Nessy does not exist ,,????
they havn't been able to find any evidence of such a thing ,
and it is completely illogical , there would have to be a whole family of them ,
So do you consider science has proven Nessy does not exist ,???
and if you can accept that as proof ,
then you should accept the same methodology proves god doesn't exist,
We can prove the non existence of god ,
not to everyone , there will always be those who refuse to see,
there has been very little the world can all agree on ,
So there will never be a concept that makes everyone happy,
Hippies were into peace and love ,
but the system saw them as rebels and spanners in the works ,
Atheism is an alternative to religion ,
but you would say no , Chaz
you would say stick with your religion ,
we havn't proved it wrong yet,,??????
you may claim to be an Atheist Chaz ,
but you behave like a christian ,,,!!!

[chaz wyman]

Negative evidence is not evidence. Negative evidence is not proof of anything. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

So you have a god concept ,???what do you mean by god ,
what is god to you , and why would I need to refer to your concept of god ,
do you think you have a god that science can't disprove ,,???

God is nothing to me that is why I do not need to disprove it.
DUH!!! That is the whole fucking point.
How can you be such a donkey?

Do you consider that science has proven Nessy does not exist ,,????
No

they havn't been able to find any evidence of such a thing ,
and it is completely illogical , there would have to be a whole family of them ,
So do you consider science has proven Nessy does not exist ,???

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What do you mean my Nessy?



and if you can accept that as proof ,
then you should accept the same methodology proves god doesn't exist,
We can prove the non existence of god ,

You keep saying that but you do not have the first idea of HOW to do it.
And who the fuck is "WE"?

not to everyone , there will always be those who refuse to see,
there has been very little the world can all agree on ,
So there will never be a concept that makes everyone happy,
Hippies were into peace and love ,
but the system saw them as rebels and spanners in the works ,
Atheism is an alternative to religion ,

Religion based on faith and belief is the problem.
You are part of the problem.

but you would say no , Chaz
you would say stick with your religion ,
we havn't proved it wrong yet,,??????
you may claim to be an Atheist Chaz ,
but you behave like a christian ,,,!!!

When are you going to disprove the existence of God?

[Godfree]

Negative evidence is not evidence. Negative evidence is not proof of anything. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

So you have a god concept ,???what do you mean by god ,
what is god to you , and why would I need to refer to your concept of god ,
do you think you have a god that science can't disprove ,,???

God is nothing to me that is why I do not need to disprove it.
DUH!!! That is the whole fucking point.
How can you be such a donkey?

Do you consider that science has proven Nessy does not exist ,,????
No

they havn't been able to find any evidence of such a thing ,
and it is completely illogical , there would have to be a whole family of them ,
So do you consider science has proven Nessy does not exist ,???

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What do you mean my Nessy?



and if you can accept that as proof ,
then you should accept the same methodology proves god doesn't exist,
We can prove the non existence of god ,

You keep saying that but you do not have the first idea of HOW to do it.
And who the fuck is "WE"?

not to everyone , there will always be those who refuse to see,
there has been very little the world can all agree on ,
So there will never be a concept that makes everyone happy,
Hippies were into peace and love ,
but the system saw them as rebels and spanners in the works ,
Atheism is an alternative to religion ,

Religion based on faith and belief is the problem.
You are part of the problem.

but you would say no , Chaz
you would say stick with your religion ,
we havn't proved it wrong yet,,??????
you may claim to be an Atheist Chaz ,
but you behave like a christian ,,,!!!

When are you going to disprove the existence of God?

Obviously I'm going over your head here Chaz ,Nessy , the Loch Ness monster,
the stories of Nessy go back a long time , lots of people still think it's possible,
but its not and we CAN PROVE IT ,
We can and have proven it impossible for there to be a dinosaur living in Loch Ness , but you say this is not proof ,,?????
you believe the Loch Ness monster is real ,????
absence of evidence is proof there is no evidence ,
if there is no evidence , on what are you basing the idea it could be real ,?
we don't need to look at the lake , we don't even need to go to Scotland ,
we can use our brains and see that it is impossible ,
the whole idea is soooo pathetic , I am amazed any adult could believe such nonsense ,
So I will ask you again Chaz , now that you know who Nessy is ,
do you consider that they/we have proven Nessy does not exist ,
and if so why is that methodology not equally relevant to the god question ,
god is simply not possible , PROVE ME WRONG ,,!!!!!

[chaz wyman]

Obviously I'm going over your head here Chaz ,Nessy , the Loch Ness monster,
the stories of Nessy go back a long time , lots of people still think it's possible,
but its not and we CAN PROVE IT ,
We can and have proven it impossible for there to be a dinosaur living in Loch Ness , but you say this is not proof ,,?????
you believe the Loch Ness monster is real ,????
absence of evidence is proof there is no evidence ,
if there is no evidence , on what are you basing the idea it could be real ,?
we don't need to look at the lake , we don't even need to go to Scotland ,
we can use our brains and see that it is impossible ,
the whole idea is soooo pathetic , I am amazed any adult could believe such nonsense ,
So I will ask you again Chaz , now that you know who Nessy is ,
do you consider that they/we have proven Nessy does not exist ,
What is "Nessy" if it does not exist? A thing that does not exist can have no value. SO saying that you have proved it, is self refuting.
and if so why is that methodology not equally relevant to the god question ,
god is simply not possible , PROVE ME WRONG ,,!!!!!

There is a difference between saying 'we can prove it' , and you actually doing it.
You can prove that a photo is a fake, that is true. But you cannot prove that god does not exist.

"absence of evidence is proof there is no evidence"

It is thought that there have been trillions of extinct species on planet earth, as compared to the thousands of fossil species that we have evidence of. Unfortunately there in NO EVIDENCE of these species. By your statement, you are saying that they did not exist. Try and get yourself a brain!
Now, Prove to me that god does not exist.
But your money where your mouth is!

[John]

We can and have proven it impossible for there to be a dinosaur living in Loch Ness , but you say this is not proof ,,????

We haven't actually proven that at at all. We're aware that there is no way to explain the presence of such a creature given our understanding of the loch's ecosystem and what sort of creature Nessie is claimed to be based on the different descriptions people have given. We also know that there are a number of known phenomena that offer reasonable explanations for the reported sightings, and we also know that some of the sightings have been fraudulent rather than mistaken, so it seems entirely reasonable to conclude that people are witnessing the explainable phenomena rather than a monster.

Do I believe Nessie exists? No. Can I prove it? No, but I can offer explanations that don't need it to exist.

[chaz wyman]

We can and have proven it impossible for there to be a dinosaur living in Loch Ness , but you say this is not proof ,,????

We haven't actually proven that at at all. We're aware that there is no way to explain the presence of such a creature given our understanding of the loch's ecosystem and what sort of creature Nessie is claimed to be based on the different descriptions people have given. We also know that there are a number of known phenomena that offer reasonable explanations for the reported sightings, and we also know that some of the sightings have been fraudulent rather than mistaken, so it seems entirely reasonable to conclude that people are witnessing the explainable phenomena rather than a monster.

Do I believe Nessie exists? No. Can I prove it? No, but I can offer explanations that don't need it to exist.

Well put!
I'd have done a better job myself but I have to admit i am losing patience with Godfree's unfounded assertions

[Godfree]

We can and have proven it impossible for there to be a dinosaur living in Loch Ness , but you say this is not proof ,,????

We haven't actually proven that at at all. We're aware that there is no way to explain the presence of such a creature given our understanding of the loch's ecosystem and what sort of creature Nessie is claimed to be based on the different descriptions people have given. We also know that there are a number of known phenomena that offer reasonable explanations for the reported sightings, and we also know that some of the sightings have been fraudulent rather than mistaken, so it seems entirely reasonable to conclude that people are witnessing the explainable phenomena rather than a monster.

Do I believe Nessie exists? No. Can I prove it? No, but I can offer explanations that don't need it to exist.

John ,,,there has been so much done to try and find this thing , this Nessy
that yes we can say we have proven it does not exist ,
they have used sonar to scan the whole lake ,
there is not enough fish in the Loch to support a large animal ,!!!
the last dinosaur was millions of years ago ,
if you can't accept that we have proven Nessy is not there ,
then there is no proof good enough for you ,
if that isn't sufficient proof for you , I would say your expectations are
unrealistic and beyond looking at the facts and more about
intellectual exercise , arguing about definition of terms ,
more than getting to know reality ,
I saw a woman who was biologist or similar ,
She could easlily say we have proven Nessy does not exist ,
and she didn't need sonar or eye witness accounts to draw her conclusions,
just the knowledge about dinosaurs was more than enough ,

[Godfree]

What is "Nessy" if it does not exist? A thing that does not exist can have no value. SO saying that you have proved it, is self refuting.[/color]
and if so why is that methodology not equally relevant to the god question ,
god is simply not possible , PROVE ME WRONG ,,!!!!![/quote]

There is a difference between saying 'we can prove it' , and you actually doing it.
You can prove that a photo is a fake, that is true. But you cannot prove that god does not exist.

"absence of evidence is proof there is no evidence"

It is thought that there have been trillions of extinct species on planet earth, as compared to the thousands of fossil species that we have evidence of. Unfortunately there in NO EVIDENCE of these species. By your statement, you are saying that they did not exist. Try and get yourself a brain!
Now, Prove to me that god does not exist.
But your money where your mouth is![/quote]
Chaz ,,,could you try that one again ,
and maybe quote my reference to this trillions of extinct species ,
I know the earths history very well ,
I have been interested in the evolution of species for most of my life
I'll give you a short version ,
Neuclaic acid , excuse the spelling ,
The first thing they believe could reproduce was neuclaic acid ,
an experiment they did in the fifties was able to reproduce the conditions of the early earth and make lots of this stuff ,
it's easy to make ,you just need the right gases and electricity,
from there life just slowly got more complicated with each mutation ,
we evolved from the earliest forms of life ,
there is an unbroken chain linking us with the first reptile to walk the land,
we evolved from a dinosaur , reptile or lizard ,
there were many mutations that were not favourable ,
and they did not survive ,
just take the number of toes ,
nearly every animal quadraped on this planet has five fingers and toes ,
or the remnants of them , ie horses and cattle still have the
evidence there that they to once had five fingers and toes,
even the whales and dolphins have the evidence of their fingers,
but there were other animals with up to 13 toes I believe on each foot ,
but it wasn't a very efficient model , so it lost the race to survive ,
extinct species , yes there will be many , maybe not trillions ,
but Chaz , you are way off the mark ,
and as usual making assumptions about me that are completely WRONG
and I will ask you again,
describe the proof that you seek !!!!
if you can't say what would constitute such proof ,
then you wouldn't recognize it if you saw it ,,!!!!!!!!!!