well we have had a few difficulties establishing a means how to do that amongst our atheistic intelligentsia here so maybe just so we have an established means of determining how something is evidenced, perhaps you could establish how, say, atoms are evidenced to me (then I can follow the exact same means to establish the evidence in relation to god)
not really the question is more simple than that suppose I don't know anything about atoms - well lets be specific and say electrons how would you propose to evidence to me that "electrons exist"
I would propose you evidence it to yourself and buy some books on it. Im not your teacher. Is this your way of avoiding to have to give your evidence of Gods existence ? Because i really dont care that much you know, do you WANT to prove him or not ?
at the moment we are just establishing how something is "evidenced" so far, you have suggested that one "buys a book about it" Do you want to elaborate a bit on that or do you think that its sufficient?
Sorry pal.. i should have realized before that its of no use talking to you.. Have a great day, oh and try not to be too stupid & arrogant today.
I would have thought that addressing the issue of how something is evidenced would be quite straight forward for a person making the claim that there is no evidence for god .... given that the notion of an electron came about in the 1890's and that people were switching lights on and off since the early 1800's, why is it that it took them a hundred years of such switching? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Its because i dont care if you believe in God or not. Too much trouble for me to explain everything to you while you are not even listening. Have a great day.
You have no idea what you're talking about, and neither do I. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I guess I had better mention this then Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! probably because it clearly indicates that there is more to evidencing electrons than turning on light switches Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Emnos thats alright fortunately we are not required to explain everything to make a coherent argument, only the foundations on which our argument rests - and I am all ears to hear how you determine that something is evidenced, since you are the one making the claim that there is no evidence for god
Hehe.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! No, you are making the claim that God exists, so the burden of evidence is on you. Im not about to do your job. So be a good Christian and try to convert me...
Not really, none of them incorporated light switches :bugeye: However, it's not important. What is important is the need to work out the difference between electrons and gods. I would suggest using something more along the same lines in order to have a more accurate example - so use vampires, or werewolves, or something of that nature.
slow down buddy you made the claim that I have no evidence for god I asked how do you propose to determine whether something is evidenced, using something that is relatively easily evidenced, an electron, as an example its not clear how the discussion can progress unless there is a clear idea how something is evidenced
I see, so there was something about the light switch design which bridged the gap - do tell .... since such a distinction rests on the understanding of the word 'evidence', I guess the first step in such a direction is to provide the general principles that evidence operates under if you can locate credible sources for such things (scientists, philosophers or great thinkers) that advocate direct perception, be my guest
Correction: YOU claim God exists. Therefore the burden of proof is on YOU. Since you refuse or are unable to present proof i conclude there is no proof. Well, thats your problem isnt it..
You tell me. Same to you with regards to gods - oh, other than self advocated philosophers and great thinkers - because any old idiot can do that. However: "Dom Augustine Calmet, a well-respected French theologian and scholar, put together a carefully thought out treatise in 1746, which was at least ambiguous concerning the existence of vampires, if not admitting it explicitly. He amassed reports of vampire incidents and numerous readers, including both a critical Voltaire and supportive demonologists, interpreted the treatise as claiming that vampires exist. In his Philosophical Dictionary, Voltaire wrote on the vampires" The guy was a scholar, a theologian, well respected and quite philosophical. That satisfies your requirements, so use vampires instead of electrons heh.. Of course it's even quite well documented amongst Indians/Hindus - for instance the vetala legends in the Baital Pachisi. Then there's the BrahmarākŞhasa and of course kali. Anyway, job done. What now?
ahahaha...typical atheistic argument...here it is "There's no proof God exists" "So what can be considered as proof?" "Oh, I don't know, that's your problem, case closed, see there's no proof"