Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[Admin Khan]

RevolutionThroughReason has been banned for crossing the line. There is a fine line between discussion, and flat-out insults. Anyone else who imitates his approach will have a similar fate.

Continue the discussion.

-Ozy, my question remains unanswered.

[کیش]

Here is your response, once again:

I am agnostic. Your question makes no sense. I will not give you any further answer to this question than that. Since I do not personally believe that the non-existence of god, or gods is possible, it is stupid to ask me to do so.

Can I make that any more clear?



You don't have to hate a god to see there is no evidence that one exists.

Yea that's answers that your good at running away from questions too hard to answer because of your limited knowledge.

Your atheist because it's the cool thing to do. If your real Atheist/Agnostic whatever the hell you wanna call yourself you would gladly answer that question with your own experiences and writing.

Being agnostic doesn't make you smart or cool in any shape or form. No matter how smart you think you are by saying existence of God isn't possible without clearly staying evidence or experiments of that.

[ozymandias]

RevolutionThroughReason has been banned for crossing the line. There is a fine line between discussion, and flat-out insults.

Thank you. It's difficult to maintain a civil conversation with that going on.

Anyone else who imitates his approach will have a similar fate.

Continue the discussion.

-Ozy, my question remains unanswered.

I thought I did a decent job answering this here:

~snip~

Could you expand upon what you feel was missing from my answer?

I addressed:
1) The shape of the Earth was known in vague terms prior to the authoring of the Koran (and parts of the Old Testament)
2) The use of the egg as a comparison is not surprising, as it is likely the most common spherical (or near spherical) item known to that region. Not many objects are consistently round -- and many of those that are, are oceanic in origin. The egg is a well know, everyday object.
3) The Earth is *not* actually egg shaped. It is the opposite of egg shaped -- wider at the equatorial circumference than the polar circumference, while eggs are wider at the polar than the equatorial.
4) Only relatively modern translations use the term 'egg shaped' at all. Prior to that, it was translated as 'expanded' or 'spread'.
5) Many scholars agree that it is inaccurate to translate the word as 'egg shaped' at all.
6) I addressed that this verse does not constitute a prediction, at all, due to the above, and the use of allegory and flowery language used making it equally likely that it was never intended to be taken literally. You can equally easily cherry pick verses claiming the Earth is flat -- and alternative translations of *this* verse does not disagree with those verses, meaning this verse can be used to 'predict' both a flat and a round Earth, making it no prediction at all.

Finally, I even stated:

Of the two choices, though (since I seem to get accused of avoiding answering questions a lot...) Timsort is by far the better choice. It's slowest speed, with worst-case data is equal to the best-case speed of quicksort.

*grin*

[کیش]

RevolutionThroughReason has been banned for crossing the line. There is a fine line between discussion, and flat-out insults. Anyone else who imitates his approach will have a similar fate.

Continue the discussion.

-Ozy, my question remains unanswered.

He can't answer our question I have told you before, what do you expect him to say? Provide you with lateral insight? He's a trend follower, not a critical thinker. It's not a insult but the truth.

[ozymandias]

Yea that's answers that your good at running away from questions too hard to answer because of your limited knowledge.

Since you don't seem to get it:
Please provide evidence that Mohammad was the most evil sinner, liar, and tool of the Devil to ever live.

I don't believe that, nor do I think you believe it -- but you keep asking me to prove something *I DON"T BELIEVE*.

Your atheist because it's the cool thing to do.

Nope. I'm atheist because I don't see any convincing evidence that theism is true. You are theist because you have been convinced by what ever evidence you have seen -- and refuse to look at that evidence critically.

If your real Atheist/Agnostic whatever the hell you wanna call yourself you would gladly answer that question with your own experiences and writing.

I am atheist because I see no evidence of a god or gods. Thus I don't believe in them.

I am agnostic, because I understand that the supernatural exists outside of science, and thus cannot be proven *NOR DISPROVEN* by science.

You are asking me to provide evidence *FOR SOMETHING I DO NOT BELIEVE*. I will not do that. Just as I do not see evidence for the existence of a god, or gods, I do *NOT* see evidence for their non-existence, so stop asking me to provide it.

Being agnostic doesn't make you smart or cool in any shape or form.

Good thing that's not why I am agnostic, then, isn't it?

No matter how smart you think you are by saying existence of God isn't possible without clearly staying evidence or experiments of that.

Good thing that's not what I am saying, then, isn't it? I am not, nor ever do, say that. I simply say that do not see any evidence that a god, or gods exist. I never stated I can prove they do not exist, nor that I believe that they do not exist. I simply *do not hold they belief that they do*.

I do not state evidence or experiments to support the claim that the existence of a god is impossible *BECAUSE SUCH EVIDENCE IS IMPOSSIBLE*. You cannot prove no god exists, because there is no scientifically falsifiable definition of 'god'. In order to prove something does not exist, you need to have a definition that can be proven true or false. Period. You cannot disprove the claim 'god exists' because no one has *ever* described god in scientific terms.

Get it? I'm tired of repeatedly telling you this. You need to read my replies and stop pretending I have not made them.

I'm going to start asking you to prove Mohammad was the most evil person to ever live every time you ask me to prove god does not exist -- not to be offensive, but to point out the absurdity of your claim.

(A note to all readers: I do *NOT* think Mohammad was the most evil person to ever live. He did some things that I do not agree with, but he was not evil, and some of the things he did, I respect. I am asking that question to make an example of how stupid asking me to disprove god is.


AGAIN: I DO NOT MEAN ANY DISRESPECT TO MOHAMMAD)

P.S. I already pointed this post out to the moderators. I mentioned 'Mohammad', and I am aware that I get reported for doing so. Edits will be made if Admin Khan thinks they are needed.

[ozymandias]

He can't answer our question

I can't? Strange, because *I DID*.

I have told you before, what do you expect him to say? Provide you with lateral insight? He's a trend follower, not a critical thinker. It's not a insult but the truth.

Lies are not the truth, and never can be. I can believe that Admin Khan missed my post -- because that is the first time he has done so, but you are making a habit of ignoring my posts, and then lying and saying I never made them. It *IS* an insult, when you deliberately lie about another person.

[Afghanistan2010]

I haven't seen any scientific knowledge revealed her,while its one of his claims that he is a scientist.

[ozymandias]

I haven't seen any scientific knowledge revealed her,while its one of his claims that he is a scientist.

Selective reading is an interesting thing. We have been discussing science - mostly what is, and is not 'science', since we need to lay that groundwork before we can move on.

How can we discuss science, and logic, when half the people in the conversation don't even know what science is, and are demanding science do something outside the realm of science, or trying to use the fact that science changes to fit new evidence as 'proof' science cannot be correct?

[Afghanistan2010]

Wrong,there is science,which is the knowledge of some matters and science which you follow as a dogma,and anyone disagreeing on your stance you call those who does not understand.

Maybe you are the one who does not understand the whole issue,cause you just utter and do not understand the questioners.

[ozymandias]

Wrong,there is science,which is the knowledge of some matters and science which you follow as a dogma,

Who are you talking about when you say 'you'? I have not seen anyone being dogmatic about science around here.

and anyone disagreeing on your stance you call those who does not understand.

Again, who is this 'you'? The only ones I have said did not understand science are the ones either demanding science prove (or disprove) something outside science, or those that think that science involves blindly following the works, and beliefs of others.

Maybe you are the one who does not understand the whole issue,cause you just utter and do not understand the questioners.

I admit to not understanding the questioners, as their questions often ask something impossible and outside the scope of science.

[faye]

ozy darling, stop your weepin' and amoanin'. did you not feel the heightening of consciousness?
do you not feel joyous and more enlightened now?
i have good news for you. with my new awareness i have learned that consciousness creates matter. isn't that fantastic? i just LOOOOOOOVVVVEEEE it.

[ozymandias]

ozy darling, stop your weepin' and amoanin'. did you not feel the heightening of consciousness?
do you not feel joyous and more enlightened now?
i have good news for you. with my new awareness i have learned that consciousness creates matter. isn't that fantastic? i just LOOOOOOOVVVVEEEE it.

[faye]

Haha, no.
To verify that they have the truth.
You know what? I'm going to ask that you stop using the terms 'open minded' and 'closed minded', as you clearly have no clue what they mean. Of all the people here, the only ones not willing to look at, and discuss the evidence would be you and کیش . You both walked in with your foregone conclusions, and are rejecting anything that does not line up with them. You resort to fallacies and name calling to avoid even considering our side of the issue -- and then call us close minded because you can't be bothered to present any evidence to back up your claims.

I'm close minded (according to you) because I don't believe waves are intelligent. Why should I believe they are intelligent? Because you claimed they are. Why did you claim they are? Because everything is part of the mind of the creator, and share in it's intelligence... Do you not see how none of that is anything other than you making absurd, unfounded claims?

It's not close minded to reject your baseless claims.

so who is going to verify if i have the truth? i can verify that for myself dear. i don't need someone, who already has their own idea of what they think reality is about, to tell me what truth is. perhaps you do.
do you have your own experiences, dreams, feelings, thoughts? do you need them to be verified by someone other than yourself?
if so, you must feel very insecure. i don't.

and YOU didn't 'walk in', lol, with your own forgone conclusions? PERLEEEAAASEEEE.

do you still not realise i am having fun with your pathetic ego? just because YOU take yourself seriously, does not mean i have to take you seriously. no rule for that here, boy.
you said you were considering ignoring me, but you can't, because the need to prove me wrong and yourself right is ruling you.

i still have not made a definite claim that waves are intelligent, although i consider it a possibilty. so stop with the false claims, maestro.

[faye]

prove that a citation is needed. citation from whom, what? you have FAITH that only citations can prove things? oh man.

don't tell me you missed the experince of your consciousness rising.
never mind it will have affected your inner self anyway, it is just that your conscious ego mind, is closed, for now.
keep working on expanding your mental and spiritual horizons, dear. eventually, you will wake up from your sleepwalking.

[faye]

I'm not sure why this even matters -- it's off topic. Short of screenshots of the PMs inviting me, what would you want, anyway?
Feel free to believe that. It's not an extraordinary claim, so no need for extraordinary evidence. If I felt it was worth the effort, I could provide evidence, but I fail to see the relevance.
Your own words and posts. Either you don't understand it, or pretend to not understand it. Either way...
And your own article validated that claim. Your problem is the assumption that everything has a *single*, *simple* explanation. Waves *are* one of the sources of sand. Period.
Pretty much. You claim that since 'wind' does not completely explain the existence of all sand, 'wind' is not an explanation for sand. Clearly you don't understand science, if you think that makes sense.

lol, please stop these false claims. you keep making claims that i ahve made claims, that i have not made.
where did i claim that wind does not completely explain the existence of sand? it doesn't but i never claimed that before.
you are stepping into the' purple dude in your garage realm', again.

are you really so damned desparate that you have to start lying? seriously man. and you CLAIM to be a scientist.
i guess that is a lie too.