We evolved from a great ape, now what?

[silverblk mystix]

Atheism is neither here nor there. I would take issue with this coward's behavior no matter what we were talking about.

STFU asshole - cowardice is what you do all day - hide behind your troll buddies and try to attack posters who didn't do to you.

Xmas was man enough to speak to you with respect when you absolutely didn't deserve it.

[xmas1997]

Sorry guys, been busy preparing a birthday party and jam session.
Unlike some on here, who will undoubtedly complain and make idiotic accusations as to why I have been gone so long, I do have a much greater life outside of this tiny forum.

First, in no way did I ever claim that your definition of "atheism" was wrong, Woo. You will see shortly, again, what Indid say.

But before going through this, some guidelines need to be followed in order to do this correctly, and that is Parliamentary Procedure on the Rules of Debating:
"The 'burden of proof' in a debate relies not on who is 'Pro' (or 'Con'), but on the 'Instigator.'"
(Debate.org)

With that in mind, after a 4 week pause, 2 days ago the debate flared up again when CN made the newest post, with also Mouse, Spurraider, Rob, SBM, Blake, and you, Woo.


Your post below was in response to a post by SBM:

Yeah, because it probably wouldn't make any sense as a sentence. In regards to religious and spiritual beliefs, you are completely wrong. There either is a god(s) or there isn't. The numerous religions that man created throughout our history can't all be right, but they can definitely all be wrong.

So as you can see above in bold, you brought up the "God" issue first, and the underlined section is your "claim" that makes you the "Instigator" who the "burden of proof" falls upon.
Then my first post in 4 weeks in defense of the "mystery" issue follows below:

There are good and bad personalities on both sides of this debate.
But the ONLY truth that both agree on is that neither side can prove or disprove the other.
So, yes, he is correct, in this day and age it is a mystery, and that is WHY it is still called a mystery.

All of the people above had things to say, but your post followed below:

If nobody knows the truth, the reasonable thing would be to not believe until the truth comes out, right? Oh wait, "god is unknown and unknowable." Therefore, we should all just not believe, right?

In bold is where I state the obvious, but this is also where the "burden of proof" issue first surfaces:

Because you fail to understand simple logic does not give your argument any more validity or basis in reality.
Not trying to persuade you of anything. That is for you to do. And the only thing you will ultimately "believe" as being truth will be your own personal subjective experience. So sorry to inform you, but the theist has no more burden of proof than the atheist does.

More of the same about burden of proof, but nothing yet about the any definitions of "atheism":

In regards to the god claim, yes they absolutely do. The one making the claim provides the proof. It's that simple.

Still more, but since you made the claim first, you are still the "instigator" who is required to show the burden of proof regardless of semantics, pro or con:

Theists are no more putting forth the claim that there "is" a God, than atheists are claiming that there "isn't" one.
So the real truth is they neither have the burden of proof, or if you prefer, disproof.
Just because you say they do does not make it so. And the same is true that just because they may say it does, equally does not make it so.

More defining of burden of proof below, and that you are the "Instigator".
The "if" in bold makes the sentence a "supposition" and not a statement:

Burden of proof is the obligation on a party in an epistemically dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.
(Dictionary definition) (literary definition)

No where is it obligatory that either side has the burden of proof.
The only one claiming it is obligatory is "you".
And neither is it obligatory because one may have come about before the other. That too is solely because "you" say it is, and again because "you" say it does does not make it so.
And lastly, it is so the definition of atheism, and not because I say it is so, but rather that is the definition: "the doctrine or belief that there is no God." (Dictionary)

Thus for the position of the atheist there is the belief that there is no God, whereas the position of the theist is that there is.
Neither has the burden of proof nor disproof.

Now if you choose to go against textbook definitions, that is your prerogative, and the province of your own personal experience, and then of course you enter the gray area that I spoke of that you also choose not to believe.

CN with the obvious mistaken assumption below:

Sorry, but theists are the ones putting forth the claim, therefore, theists have the burden of proof....

In between all of these were dictionary definitions of "atheism" that I gave you so that all of us would better understand what we all were also talking about, and because you kept quibbling over the semantics of the definition, besides "burden of proof".
The "if" in bold makes the sentence a "supposition" and not a statement:

I just gave you textbook definition, and two of them to boot, yet you still go against normal textbook authority?
In that case you are establishing yourself as authority rather than accepted definition. Look it up if you don't believe me, I did.
I quoted it verbatim.
If you want to do it that way then your definition has no more validity than opinion, or as I said before, your own personal subjective experience.

Then you make an "implication" in bold of the definition of atheism. That is an implied or suggested "statement", but then you go on to negate it with another statement to the contrary:

1.) Words tend to be defined differently from source to source.
2.) A basic definition often doesn't capture the intricacies and baggage that comes with some terms. There are far better sources for the definition of atheism than dictionary.com.
I didn't establish myself as a source. Look at the second definition from your source. That is the definition I provided.

So there it all is in black and white, and if you need more proof, then you can go back this time and dig up the posts yourself.
Show us all where any of us accused you of defining atheism.
You did this yourself.
And accused me of it.
All I did was say "if" you go against recognized authorities on definitions, "then" you are making yourself the authority.
If I have to respond to this post I will get to it when I have time. The next two days, time is at a premium for me.
Have fun, and remember to laugh a lot.

[silverblk mystix]

STFU asshole - cowardice is what you do all day - hide behind your troll buddies and try to attack posters who didn't do to you.

Xmas was man enough to speak to you with respect when you absolutely didn't deserve it.

xmas - woo isn't worth all this time and effort on your part - IMO -

the above quote - is ^ accurate for that little piece of ^

[xmas1997]

xmas - woo isn't worth all this time and effort on your part - IMO -

the above quote - is ^ accurate for that little piece of ^

Thanks to you, and everyone else who patiently waited until I could squeeze in the time to make this rebuttal.
I actually wanted to do it in order to show Woo the difference between truth and baseless falsehood, he seems to have issues with both.
And the rest of you?
You know what you can do, ....... let's see, something about where the sun don't shine?
Keep laughing!

[silverblk mystix]

Thanks to you, and everyone else who patiently waited until I could squeeze in the time to make this rebuttal.
I actually wanted to do it in order to show Woo the difference between truth and baseless falsehood, he seems to have issues with both.
And the rest of you?
You know what you can do, ....... let's see, something about where the sun don't shine?
Keep laughing!

[SA210]

xmas comes in with the goods per the usual..which will cause more troll ass pain

[silverblk mystix]

Woo is a little coward and will not ever admit he was hosed by the gentleman!

[SA210]

Woo is a little coward and will not ever admit he was hosed by the gentleman!

Is that what they fear..anything resembling a gentleman? Must suck to be them having no life

[silverblk mystix]

Is that what they fear..anything resembling a gentleman? Must suck to be them having no life

Well, they all tried to corner xmas - by using dishonest means - applying something false and attributing it to xmas - then the other trolls confirmed it by circle jerking around this false premise -

but xmas still made them look stupid.

They gonna be butthurt again!

[xmas1997]

Well, they all tried to corner xmas - by using dishonest means - applying something false and attributing it to xmas - then the other trolls confirmed it by circle jerking around this false premise -

but xmas still made them look stupid.

They gonna be butthurt again!

They may be even scrounging around Pages 6 & 7 as we speak where all this came from searching for any tidbit of "dirt" they can find.
The atheism posts are on those pages too, but they weren't worth quoting since none made any accusations.
The irony is the major atheist accusation was made by Woo himself, and that one I quoted.
And nowhere do any of us profess a belief in God either.
So all goes well that ends well.
Laugh a bunch on me.
It still remains for Woo to give everyone the "burden of proof" since he is the "Instigator"
I bet he deflects.

[SA210]

They may be even scrounging around Pages 6 & 7 as we speak where all this came from searching for any tidbit of "dirt" they can find.
The atheism posts are on those pages too, but they weren't worth quoting since none made any accusations.
The irony is the major atheist accusation was made by Woo himself, and that one I quoted.
And nowhere do any of us profess a belief in God either.
So all goes well that ends well.
Laugh a bunch on me.

A troll is a troll is a troll. They are only interested in doing troll hoodrat things.

[xmas1997]

A troll is a troll is a troll. They are only interested in doing troll hoodrat things.

Woo, you are the "Instigator", so where is your burden of proof?

[silverblk mystix]

Where is that pussy woo - he called you out for pages and now the little is afraid to come and face the music like a man -

then he will deny he was wrong....tap dance...deny...tap dance...insult....tap dance...

[SA210]

Where is that pussy woo - he called you out for pages and now the little is afraid to come and face the music like a man -

then he will deny he was wrong....tap dance...deny...tap dance...insult....tap dance...

This tbh, but this covers all the trolls lol

[Woo Bum-kon]

Look at xmas's cheerleaders go!

Anyway,

All I did was say "if" you go against recognized authorities on definitions, "then" you are making yourself the authority.

Here's part of that quote again:

I just gave you textbook definition, and two of them to boot, yet you still go against normal textbook authority?
In that case you are establishing yourself as authority rather than accepted definition. Look it up if you don't believe me, I did..

Did I go against textbook authority (lol at dictionary.com being an established authority on what atheism is), or did I not? If I didn't, why even bring up me making myself an authority if I did nothing of the sort?

Your backtracking is not making any sense. "I didn't say you DID! I only said if you did!"

[Woo Bum-kon]

Where is that pussy woo - he called you out for pages and now the little is afraid to come and face the music like a man -

Oh, so it's okay for him to still reply without addressing my posts for half the day, but it's not okay for me to be away for SpursTalk for an hour?

then he will deny he was wrong

How was I wrong, cheerleader?

[xmas1997]

Look at xmas's cheerleaders go!

Anyway,



Here's part of that quote again:



Did I go against textbook authority (lol at dictionary.com being an established authority on what atheism is), or did I not? If I didn't, why even bring up me making myself an authority if I did nothing of the sort?

Your backtracking is not making any sense. "I didn't say you DID! I only said if you did!"

That won't fly.
Take all the time you want, you'll need it.
The "IF" and "THEN" is still there, it's a common debate strategy, used all the time if you've ever been in any debates.
Apparently you've never been in any debates back in grade school.
That is your problem.
My guess is since you are the Instigator, you will not show anyone the proof, since the burden is on you, as it has always been since Page 6.
Good luck, and keep on laughing.

[Woo Bum-kon]

The "IF" and "THEN" is still there, it's a common debate strategy, used all the time if you've ever been in any debates.

Did I go against textbook authority or did I not? If I didn't, why did you ask me if I was going against textbook authority? Why did you bring up textbook authority in the first place if what I posted didn't contradict it?

[silverblk mystix]

That won't fly.
Take all the time you want, you'll need it.
The "IF" and "THEN" is still there, it's a common debate strategy, used all the time if you've ever been in any debates.
Apparently you've never been in any debates back in grade school.
That is your problem.
My guess is since you are the Instigator, you will not show anyone the proof, since the burden is on you, as it has always been since Page 6.
Good luck, and keep on laughing.

Well, there it is - troll.

[mouse]

silverblk mystix, SA210, and xmas1997 seem to be always pulling out the smack bat on Woo,Blake and RandomLie in epic fashion lately.

My question who is the conductor of this TRoll train and what is the preferred name for your posse?

[leemajors]

You'd think a person who has engaged in debates since elementary school could write a coherent sentence.

[silverblk mystix]

silverblk mystix, SA210, and xmas1997 seem to be always pulling out the smack bat on Woo,Blake and RandomLie in epic fashion lately.

My question who is the conductor of this TRoll train and what is the preferred name for your posse?

lol


just bringing back a little bit of parity to this place - like there used to be -

for awhile the trolls heavily ran and it just became an asshole-fest -against outnumbered decent posters -

throwing it back in their face has been fun!

[xmas1997]

silverblk mystix, SA210, and xmas1997 seem to be always pulling out the smack bat on Woo,Blake and RandomLie in epic fashion lately.

My question who is the conductor of this TRoll train and what is the preferred name for your posse?

Not me. I'm just after a little info, and some laughter, and posting a little.

[Woo Bum-kon]

Well, there it is - troll.

There's what? His explanation makes no sense. I post a definition of atheism that doesn't "go against textbook authority," according to that "textbook authority." If I didn't go against "textbook authority," why did he ask me if I was going against it? He's backpedaling.

[silverblk mystix]

rofl troll train-

I recognize a few of those!!!!!