http://www.tektonics.org/guest/300proof.html these are a joke right? i mean am i missing something here? they're wrong from the first one going down Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!:m:
Looks to me like this is a parody of arguments religious people use to prove that their gods exist. Funny stuff.
It's a retort to the oft linked lists of "Proofs of God's Existence"... And specifically, I think, this one. Unfortunately, while the "Proof of Existence" list in some cases actually seems to bear some semblance to arguments I have heard made, I have never heard (m)any atheists use the mirror arguments posted in that Tektonics link. So while they are humorous due to absurdity, the other list I find funnier due to actually being closer to real arguments I have heard.
Aww, splendid!! Thanks. Actually, they are a parody of typical atheist arguments. Although some of them aren't even parodies thereof; they are precisely the arguments that some atheists put forth.
Well I can think of at least one common theistic argument parodied by what's written there. Can you cite an example of a common atheistic argument that it tries to parody?
While I don't know what motivated somebody to post them, the context (tektonics is a fundamentalist Christian website) along with the 'disproofs' obvious lameness leads me to guess that is they are intended as anti-atheist sarcasm. Actually, some of these 'disproofs' probably could be worked up into interesting arguments.
Well I was asking if you could cite some examples, meaning provide some sources for where you're finding these arguments being made. You'll find atheists making all kinds of silly arguments to justify their believes just as theists do, but the most prominent intellectuals in the field would generally balk at and criticize the kinds of arguments you just posted and attributed to atheists. Science just fills the gap insofar as asking the typical atheist, "if you don't believe in God, do you believe in anything at all?" Insofar as disproving religion, all it can prove is whether "God" is trying to mislead his own followers by planting absurd quantities of false evidence to contradict the "true" story. No reasonable person should expect science to ever have the answers to the most fundamental mysteries of the universe (e.g. why the universe and physical laws exist), and most atheists would tell you that no reasonable person should ever expect anyone to have all the answers regardless of the discipline, philosophy or religion they pursue.
Somebody has spent a long time doing something pointless. The person writing it is talentless. Try these instead. Arguments for the existence of God. Some of them are amusing. http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm eg. ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPLETE DEVASTATION (1) A plane crashed killing 143 passengers and crew. (2) But one child survived with only third-degree burns. (3) Therefore, God exists. heh heh Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It made me do a double take since they're so much worse than the anti-religious ones that preceded them. I agree. Two rational people from opposite camps with the discipline to stick to strict logic should easily converge to the conclusion that God does not exist. The problem is finding a rational religious person. They're out there; they probably just avoid the debate altogether.
