My friend does not believe in Atheists. He is an Aatheist!

[epidemic]

The bullet is absolutely true.  My backstop was an old 36 inch tree that we had cut and stacked.  around the core of the tree was approximately 10 inches of punky wood I would say the bullet probably ended up traveling through about 10 inches of punky wood hit the core and then traveled back about 10 inches through punky wood lofted high in the air toward me I saw it and managed to catch the hard little piece of deformed lead.  It is an unsubstantiated claim for certain but it is absolutely true.  The odds of reproducing it are exceedingly small.  it was a fluke.  You can either believe it or not.  I admitt the evidence is only my word a faceless person on the internet.  the obligation is on me to prove it but I only have my word.  That does not of course change the nature of it being fact or not.

Lack of evidence does not equal false.  As such I have to concede that god is possible.  people claimed it, they have written it down and I know about these claims.  I can not prove them false and they can not prove them true.  Which leaves me to determine whether I believe them or not.   Isn't that a belief? 

[jaimehlers]

I could see that being a highly unlikely fluke; it's certainly possible.  It doesn't require superpowers or a violation of physical laws to accomplish, anyway.

Note, however, that you did have evidence of this having happened.  You had the bullet itself, and you also had the entry and exit holes on the wood.  For example, you could have taken pictures of them to show other people.  You could also have preserved them as the physical evidence to help substantiate your claim.  Since you didn't, there's no way to be sure - thus I neither believe[1] nor disbelieve[2] your claim.

Thus, my earlier statement about the proper skeptical attitude.

1.	since you do not have any evidence you can produce
2.	since you don't have a reputation for making stuff up, and it is at least possible

[Graybeard]

The bullet is absolutely true.  ...I would say the bullet probably ended up traveling through about 10 inches of punky wood hit the core and then traveled back about 10 inches through punky wood lofted high in the air toward me I saw it and managed to catch the hard little piece of deformed lead.

I don't see why it should not be true. However, the thing is that you have given an explanation that seems in line with what we know about ballistics, bullets hitting hard objects and the human ability to catch things.

I think you have shown that what appear to be "miracles" etc., all have logical causes, and only those who fail to think chant out the explanation, "My god did it." and in doing so, expose their own ignorance.

[epidemic]

from this thread I have come to believe that there are indeed practical atheists.  They may not be absolute atheists because as stated almost nothing can be proven or disproven absolutely. 

Yes OJ simpson could have been cloned and his clone comitted the murder.  but it is pretty unlikely.

I will also seed that from a practical standpoint atheists don't believe in god.

[One Above All]

They may not be absolute atheists because as stated almost nothing can be proven or disproven absolutely. 

How many times do I have to state that I, and others like me, exist? I actively deny the existence of any and all deities, by my definition of the term.

I will also seed that from a practical standpoint atheists don't believe in god.

I think you meant "(con)cede".
Anyway, that's the definition of "atheist". An atheist lacks belief in all deities.

[jaimehlers]

from this thread I have come to believe that there are indeed practical atheists.  They may not be absolute atheists because as stated almost nothing can be proven or disproven absolutely.

Not exactly.  As OAA said, there are people who use logic to rule out the existence of gods.  He could tell you more about that than I could, but it works something like this:

1.  By definition, there is no outside to the universe, because it comprises all of existence.
2.  Therefore, the existence of an 'outside' to the universe can logically be ruled out.  It would require something to be outside of existence, yet still existing, a major logical contradiction.

That doesn't mean that there can't be an outside to what we currently understand is the universe.  That just means that the universe is bigger than we thought it was.

So, too, it goes with gods.  There could indeed be powerful, god-like beings, but they would not be actual gods, because by his definition, gods cannot exist.

[ParkingPlaces]

They may not be absolute atheists because as stated almost nothing can be proven or disproven absolutely. 

There are no gods. Every god suggested, proposed, claimed, suspected and or/hoped for has been the product of human imagination. I don't have to disprove them. None of them are real. Until someone can show me, and I mean show me as in right in front of my fucking face, a god, I will continue to say that there are none, without any shadow of a doubt.

Yes, I may be wrong. But I don't think so for even a second, so hence none of my energy is spent on doubt.

You can play all the games you want with semantics, epidemic, but until believers have something to show for a god besides their words, they have nothing to show me.

If only one god, throughout all of history, had been proposed and remained invisible, if only one god had been proposed and nobody had ever modified said deity for selfish purposes, then I might take a little more time to listen. If there was only that one story, world-wide, and it had no variation, the concept might get a little of my attention. Even without proof.

But that is not the case. In any sense of the word. Hence it is all bull, and I don't have to turn on the part of my brain that I use to believe things to accept or reject it. I reject it outright.

I can prove that there are absolute idiots, which account for all god stories. I don't have to play any games. There are no gods. No proof required. Because not one shred of evidence that there is a god or are multiple gods has ever been put forth. That is why I can tell people who insist otherwise to shove off.

[epidemic]

They may not be absolute atheists because as stated almost nothing can be proven or disproven absolutely. 

How many times do I have to state that I, and others like me, exist? I actively deny the existence of any and all deities, by my definition of the term.

I will also seed that from a practical standpoint atheists don't believe in god.

I think you meant "(con)cede".
Anyway, that's the definition of "atheist". An atheist lacks belief in all deities.

I meant cede not seed.

[Nam]

I think the first step is getting those who believe in a "god", to answer, what is "god"? Each individual theist who believes in a "god" has their own definition. Perhaps a group(s) of theists hold the same definition but if you get right down to it I bet each individual in said group(s) is different in some way to the others in their group.

But then is every theist who believe in a god sure if their god exists?

I doubt it.

So one could conclude "there are no theists[1] in foxholes".

-Nam

1.	who believe in a god

Oh you are right there.  I think theists in the strictest sense are few and far between when push comes to shove they question the existence of god.  My friend wants to use on atheists strictest definition to mean not a shread of doubt or room for doubt, if that standard applied to theists 99.9999999% of them probably fall into agnostic camp as well.

You keep talking about your "friend", I don't care about your friends thought, I doubt many do here. We care about your thoughts: your reference to your friend makes, not just me I am sure, that when you say "my friend" you're actually speaking about yourself.

You are here. We want to know your thoughts, not some imaginary[2] friend's thoughts.

Until then, for me, you come off as a delusional idiot.

-Nam

2.	in the sense they aren't here

[DVZ3]

Tell your friend that not only do I believe he doesn't exist, I don't believe in "theists" either. 

[Betelnut]

Another 100% atheist here.  I don't have any doubt that this universe is a natural phenomena and no "super"natural entity exists.  A non-corporeal entity is an oxymoron of epic proportions.

So, yes, "real" atheists exist.

But, for the record, being 99.99999% sure is pretty much the same as being 100% sure.

Why quibble?

[epidemic]

Another 100% atheist here.  I don't have any doubt that this universe is a natural phenomena and no "super"natural entity exists.  A non-corporeal entity is an oxymoron of epic proportions.

So, yes, "real" atheists exist.

But, for the record, being 99.99999% sure is pretty much the same as being 100% sure.

Why quibble?

You believe infinitely less than a 100% atheist if you are only 99.999999999999999% sure  

But seriously I now believe that there are atheists.  The metric of 99.9999999999999% sure is as sure as anything possible.  Virtually no honest person can be 100% sure of anything so to use that as an excuse to claim someone is not an atheist is an unreasonable metric. 

As for my friend he does indeed exist.  I use him as an example because he says such interesing things and I am constantly doing battle with him on facebook.


nam,  I do put my thoughts beliefs on this forum, in most of my posts even where I am using my third party battles.

[LoriPinkAngel]

I have lots of friends in my head.  Most have become about 90% non-believers.  One is considering Pastafarianism and when we get an EBT card will be looking for a pink pasta strainer.

[Nam]

"Atheism is about belief."

Belief in what?

-Nam

Actually it is not belief in nothing.  It is belief that the people who contend god is real are wrong.  Once presented with the argument that god is real, and you can not disprove it, then it is a belief that these people and their sources are wrong.

Wrong.

If they make a claim, cannot back up that claim, then their claim is nonsensical. Whether wrong or right is irrelevant.

Like if I make the claim that Biblegod  doesn't exist without evidence to support my position then I have no standing.

It's not about who's right or who's wrong. It's about the evidence. And 10 out of 10 times: they don't have any evidence.

Now if you see that as us saying "you're wrong", then that's your problem not ours.

We ask for reputable evidence, they provide none.

The only "evidence" they seem to have are their faith, their holy book(s), or their belief that they are always right because of those things.

That's not evidence but of their uselessness and delusional state-of-mind in concern to those things.

-Nam

[epidemic]

"Atheism is about belief."

Belief in what?

-Nam

Actually it is not belief in nothing.  It is belief that the people who contend god is real are wrong.  Once presented with the argument that god is real, and you can not disprove it, then it is a belief that these people and their sources are wrong.

Wrong.

If they make a claim, cannot back up that claim, then their claim is nonsensical. Whether wrong or right is irrelevant.

Like if I make the claim that Biblegod  doesn't exist without evidence to support my position then I have no standing.

It's not about who's right or who's wrong. It's about the evidence. And 10 out of 10 times: they don't have any evidence.

Now if you see that as us saying "you're wrong", then that's your problem not ours.

We ask for reputable evidence, they provide none.

The only "evidence" they seem to have are their faith, their holy book(s), or their belief that they are always right because of those things.

That's not evidence but of their uselessness and delusional state-of-mind in concern to those things.

-Nam

This guy has conned my sister out of 120,000 dollars, he borrowed my truck at a cost of 270 dollars to me before my sister let on that she figured out the guy was a leech, For a year he claimed most every day to be coming by to make payments, I did not believe he was coming, all evidence and logic dictated that the asshole would not give me 1 red cent,  12 months and hundreds of meetings and promised phone calls all said he was not coming. 

Then one day he said he was coming,  and he didn't show:)

The very next week after 5 or 10 more proposed visits he was going to meet to me to pay me he showed up with my 270.  My sister has been somewhat more lucky she has started receiving payments.

Sometimes even when all the evidence leads you down one path you can be wrong.  I thought I knew he would not pay one red cent but in the end apparently I believed wrong and my faith in my ability to inerpret facts was shaken:)


PS I still think he is going to stiff us in the end but I guess we will see.  Right now I am glad for myself and my sister that I was wrong.  I was right in the hundreds of other interactions in believing he would not show up  So even with 100 fails in 100 attempts there is always attempt 101.

I don't know if the bible people saw jesus walk on water, raise the dead, or really saw talking flaming bushes.  Based upon past experience and logic I conclude probably not.  But I can't say for absolute sure that these are not historical facts.

[Nam]

epi,

You're either mind-numbingly stupid or mind-numbingly ignorant of anything that goes against what you say is true or not true based on your minuscule opinion of things that you see as factual.

Which is it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

-Nam