agnostic Humor 274 agnostic Humor 273 agnostic Humor 272 agnostic Humor 271 agnostic Humor 270 agnostic Humor 269 agnostic Humor 268 agnostic Humor 267 agnostic Humor 266 agnostic Humor 265 agnostic Humor 264 agnostic Humor 263 agnostic Humor 262 agnostic Humor 260 agnostic Humor 259 agnostic Humor 258 agnostic Humor 257 agnostic Humor 256 agnostic Humor 255 agnostic Humor 254 agnostic Humor 253 agnostic Humor 252 agnostic Humor 251 agnostic Humor 250 agnostic Humor 249 agnostic Humor 248 agnostic Humor 247 agnostic Humor 246 Agnostic humor 245 Agnostic humor 411


Locical Fallacy 2


th (202)

Atheism is non-belief which leaves no place for doubt, it is not a non-belief;

It is a superstition by definition: a non-belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.

What theories have been proven true and absolute?

Silly Question even an atheist knows no theory can be proven true. (Like evolution)

So with no proof a theory is true. Does that mean it’s false? No of course not a theory stands as fact until falsified despite lack of proof.

Theo-ries = a set of ideas that have never been proven false after many many experiments

Would not the following equation be equally true?

Theo-logy = a set of ideas that have never been proven false after many many experiments.

Not being falsified they stand as fact. Is that not the scientific method? An idea stands until falsified and never proven by means of evidence.

Does god exist, is he real? I for one do not pretend not to know, what many atheists are sure they don’t believe in.

What god is, is an unfalsified fact. Just like the theory of evolution the big band and the spaghetti monster and pink unicorns are any of them real? Probably not but the fact remains. Evidence just supports a theory and raises probability that’s all nothing more it proves nothing.

Why is it so hard for atheists to admit the truth?

Just admit you don’t know is that so hard?

I became agnostic when I was praying one day and realized I was talking to myself. I stayed away from atheism because they demanded proof of this fact… That and the fact atheists have no holidays. Who doesn’t like turkey and Easter eggs? Do atheist fundies really not celebrate Christmas Easter and thanksgiving? DO they not celebrate the birth of the one nation under god on the 4th of July who in god they trust? Really? REALLY? Do they close their eyes and plug their ears and phone the police when the fireworks go off? The atheist fundie un-religion must really suck on those days. What do you think? And who do they talk to when they are having an orgasm?

Come on you must be getting bored talking to Christians who will never believe a word your saying. Think agnostic and you can argue with twice as many people. Come back to your roots. You know you don’t know just use the un-force just say it the truth will set you lose.

Perhaps atheists have belief and claim confused?

If I say I choose to believe in god that is not a claim it’s called a belief. A belief may or not be rational but it certainly does not have to be proven or evidence given to be fact. If I believe red is my favorite color does it require proof? No but it is a fact. How many people say there is or is not a god not knowing the implications or caring. Only the ignorant would presume to ask for proof of a belief, justification maybe proof no.

God is a fact that requires no proof get over it.

Fact: something believed to be true or real.

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored

Anyone who uses science to prove or disprove any type of higher power, quite frankly, doesn’t understand science. Anybody who has taken a basic physics course in college would understand between the obvious differences between science and religion and why you don’t mix them

Is god a fact a belief or both?

If I say god is a fact. Or I choose to believe in god. Or god is real. Did I make a claim needing proof or is it a statement of fact?

Claim: To state to be true

 Fact: Something believed to be true or real

If I claimed my favourite color was red, would it require evidence to be accepted as truth?

If I stated that my favourite color is red is a fact. Would I need to prove it or give evidence to support my belief?

If an atheist said all Christians believe red is their favourite color and for them to prove it. Would it make sense?

If an atheist claimed all Christians believe in god and then asked for proof would it make sense?

Or reworded the question to say Christians say they believe in god they made the claim they need to prove it? Does that make sense?

This is called the fallacy of many questions or loaded question. A logical fallacy.

So I can say god is a fact you don’t need to believe it but a Christian does not need to prove it. Just like unicorns, the big bang theory, and evolution.

Belief is not a claim.

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be understood by atheists. And an atheist will never see the difference.

You can’t convince an atheist of anything; for their non-belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep-seated need to not to believe. Supported by a presupposition that god exists, which they deny. Sound logic or a logical fallacy?

Circular reasoning is a formal logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises. For example:

“God does not exist. The fact that Christians can’t prove there is a god is proof of this.”

OR “god cannot be proven, because you cannot prove a negative.”

Such an argument is fallacious, because it relies upon its own proposition — “God does not exist” or “God cannot be proven” — in order to support its central premise. Essentially, the argument assumes that its central point is already proven, and uses this in support of itself.

Clearly, atheism is not a rational worldview. It is self-refuting because the atheist must first assume the opposite of what he is trying to prove in order to be able to prove anything. Much like a-theism presupposes theism. Laws of logic require the existence of God.

You can’t convince an atheist of anything; for their non-belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep-seated need to not to believe. Supported by a presupposition that god exists, which they deny. Sound logic or a logical fallacy? A non-belief based on Circular reasoning.

Circular reasoning always presupposes guilt instead of assuming innocence “I say your guilty of murder prove your innocent or you are guilty.” This type of Logic is called a Kangaroo Court or in medieval times an Inquisition. Seems ironic Atheists having to resort to inquisition to support their non-belief. A practice Christians left behind centuries ago.

And remember don’t use Merry Christmas … Happy Holidays gets on them thar Theists nerves.. Happy Holy Day….

One last tidbit:

I wonder when the flat earth theory was accepted as truth did it fall from acceptance because one atheist kept nattering for the powers that be provide him with proof HE was prepaired to accept OR when did it change when one Agnostic got up off his ass and said  I really don’t know lets have a look and see? And the world changed forever.

Truthfully I’m sure if you arrived at an atheists home with a man on a donkey speaking aramaic with 12 followers the would call a cop 🙂