Favourite Atheist arguments

[McBell]

If something was factual you'd be one of the last to know.

Especially if we are waiting on you to present it.....

 

[Skeezy]

We don't define after the evidence, we define before the evidence, so we know what we're talking about and what we're looking for and what evidence supports it (or not).

All these videos that you present are simply videos of unexplained things. You attach an explanation to them, but you don't demonstrate that the explanation you've attached to it is the correct one. In fact, all you do is insert another mystery (ghosts, demons, etc.) into the equation without defining or demonstrating those either. How can you possibly declare something is caused by something, when you've never even defined that something in the first place? I'd really love an answer to this.


You need to stop calling your claims evidence. They aren't evidence; they are claims.



Debating what? Something you refuse to define? How do we get anywhere when we don't even know what we're talking about??
I still don't know what a ghost is, or that anyone has demonstrated their existence. This is nuts.



The only preconceived notions I bring to this discussion are 1) that the scientific method is the btest tool human beings have come up with to help us understand the world around us which is demonstrated by its highly accurate representation of the reality we live in, and 2) that the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. Time and time again, these two notions have helped us produce an accurate representation of the reality we live in.
That's it.

You, on the other hand, start with the assertions that God(s) exist, that demons exist and that ghosts exist and are responsible for things that we can't necessarily explain immediately. You find unexplained phenomena, and declare it to be the work of ghosts, poltergeists, demons, gods, etc. without demonstrating it. You also start with the preconceived notion that you can attach characteristics and traits to all of these things which you have never demonstrated to exist.
That doesn't get us to an accurate representation of reality. rather, it gets us to whatever we want to believe in the first place.

1st there is no burden of proof. It either is or isn't. Formally we both stand at unknown. There is just as much burden both ways.

2ndly as stated, spirits and ufo's cannot be cannot be deduced using scientific methods because no control literally in more way than one. You wanting this is irrelevant because its an obvious impossibility even if the subject matter is factual.

3rdly its doesnt matter if you believe or not to me or the rest of the world, but if you want to debate any subject you need to first look at all the evidence presented before demanding more.

These things take investigating and logical deduction much like most things in life. Science does not have an answer and there is no way for it to generate one either way. So you can stop hiding behind it as it proves no point.

This does not discount investigating and resolving answers from deduction which is how humans have always figured things out. Science has actually figured out very little because the scientific method is so limited as you need multiple conteoled set pieces to do a scientific method.


However any idiot can see that paranormal things exist when they frequently have occurred/existed throughout all of mans records and time in almost every civilization. Science is still baffled at marvels which were supposedly created by spirits and cannot explain them because there is no control.

Without a control science cant do much to confirm or deny so you can either

A.. keep asking for what is impossible due to factually having no control to use a scientific method.

Or

B. Use your powers of reason and deduction to form a valid conclusion.


Also in some of the videos they use scientific methods to deduce but I know you want the impossible, published findings. Its a form of unreasonable denial that sounds nice. I say unreasonable because its obviously impossible even if spirits/ufo's are real. Its just a way to hide.

I wouldn't be bothered by it but you have much to say about your firm stance with no proof of your own. That they don't exist. There is more proof that they do than dont. Don't comes from standard non informed denial

 

[Skeezy]

To put it more clearly.

Tim: Hey jake!. We saw something and everyone present caught it their phone. The dog saw it the baby saw it the cop saw it and everyone in the neighborhood present confirmed it. Not only that but we found several people in various countries have also had the same thing happen.
Here look at the dozens of videos of it including ours.

Jake: no thanks ima need you to take that to a scientist with credentials. Have him do the scientific method and let me read his findings.

Tim: how the heck is a scientist going to run tests on what is impossible to capture?

Jake: i dont know but I want it in order for me to know its true.

Tim: at least take a look im telling you no one could fake this.

Jake: nah its fake I know already

Tim:.... wth its literally impossible for someone to fake this on this grand a scale.

jake: every documentary on it that I've seen before turned out to be fake or gave no answers so I'm sure what you have is fake.

Tim: the government, millions of people and several countries just confirmed its real. With technology abroad people are recording their experiences with it.

Jake: nah man I need to read the findings.

Tim: wtf do you mean read the findings? What findings no ones gunna be able to catch it let alone run tests. Trust me man look at it and lemme know what you think.

Jake: nope don't need to see it. Its not real till its been tested in a lab no matter how well validated/confirmed abroad/video documented it is.

Tim: so your going to just deny and not look at any plausible evidence?..... until someone somehow catches it, runs several tests and publishes findings ... you know what nvm Jake.



Ya get it?

 

[Skeezy]

If you picked an instance of something then we could define it. We are dealing with complicated things that man has never been able to accurately define but... somehow... you want me to define it without observing what the evidence presents because you refuse to look at evidence presented.

However many of these things fit into our broad conceptions of a spirit or multiple spirits.

I haven't confirmed or denied anything only stated possibilities and what is and scenarios because someone refuses to go over evidence. So we are broadly talking about hundreds of instances because again you refuse to look at evidence.. pick one and then I can say I believe that is a ufo or etc.

Then we could go over similar occurrences and debate what it is or isn't and possibilities.

I said look at at the show it has a major collection of the most evidence of everything paranormal that the world has presented.

You say you saw an episode. But failed to pinpoint anything from what you supposedly saw. Details like, which episode or any of the videos on it etc etc.


Im not here to prove to you anything. Im saying go look at the overwhelming abundance of evidence of many things supernatural/paranormal and it may change your stance on what you do and don't know. Until you do I can't prove anything because you won't observe the only evidence that can possibly be provided on any subject we could debate

How am I going to prove anything when you refuse to accept basic facts in favor of refusing to view documentation? Refusing documented evidence grants you plausible deniability. Its a safety thing

 

[SkepticThinker]

Its defined as paranormal. If you want to see what paranormal is then look at the evidence.



Dear God man. As we have been conversations the news all over the U.S., the miltary and recentl6 the pentagon has declared that much of the footage of U.F.O.s are real. Meaning much of the footage I've described has been declared as real by semi legit sources.


Watch the evidence man, instead of debating from hyper narcissistic ignorance. As more people become aware that things unexplainable things have been video documented some in multiple instances by different sources.

Once you view the evidence then we can single out a specific instance and see what it is or isn't. We can define it, then debate it.


What do you want to do spirits? Ufo? or other?.
Wethere we were pre defining or not its still required for you to have actually seen the evidence.


The more you talk the more narcisstic your stance becomes. To the point of head in sand. If something was factual you'd be one of the last to know.

Basically im saying that if things are common and broad enough to the point that they are overwhelmingly obviously factual, you might want to re-think your understanding of what is and isnt.

Watch the footage instead of thinking you know what the footage is.

You can watch any season even the new one as there are enough real videos in the new season as well. Most are from the past 3-5 years

You are not reading my posts. That is clear.

When you decide to actually do so, please let me know.



P.S. The arrogance comes from the side that claims to know answers they can't know or demonstrate. That would be your side in this conversation.

 

[SkepticThinker]

1st there is no burden of proof. It either is or isn't. Formally we both stand at unknown. There is just as much burden both ways.

Of course there is a burden of proof. That's just Logic and Reasoning 101. Or do you just believe every single thing you hear unless your or someone else can disprove it?

I am the one standing at "unknown." You are standing at "known" when nothing has been demonstrated.

2ndly as stated, spirits and ufo's cannot be cannot be deduced using scientific methods because no control literally in more way than one. You wanting this is irrelevant because its an obvious impossibility even if the subject matter is factual.

Great, then how did you deduce that spirits exist?

And if it's impossible to demonstrate either way, then you can't logically assert that spirits exist.

3rdly its doesnt matter if you believe or not to me or the rest of the world, but if you want to debate any subject you need to first look at all the evidence presented before demanding more.

No, it doesn't.

What matters is the evidence. What matters is some sort of demonstration of the thing you're claiming to exist, which would include a definition.

These things take investigating and logical deduction much like most things in life. Science does not have an answer and there is no way for it to generate one either way. So you can stop hiding behind it as it proves no point.

The scientific method is just a tool we use to observe and measure what is going on around us. The scientific method has given us all the answers we currently hold about the world we live in. Speculation, wish-thinking and assertions without demonstrations don't get us there.

This does not discount investigating and resolving answers from deduction which is how humans have always figured things out. Science has actually figured out very little because the scientific method is so limited as you need multiple conteoled set pieces to do a scientific method.

The latter is an absurd and false statement.

Science doesn't just make stuff up, as you are doing. Maybe that's your issue with it.

However any idiot can see that paranormal things exist when they frequently have occurred/existed throughout all of mans records and time in almost every civilization. Science is still baffled at marvels which were supposedly created by spirits and cannot explain them because there is no control.

Hmm, but apparently "any idiot" cannot get anywhere close to demonstrating the existence of paranormal things. That seems like a problem.

I have no idea what your second sentence is supposed to mean.

Without a control science cant do much to confirm or deny so you can either

A.. keep asking for what is impossible due to factually having no control to use a scientific method.

I've never asked or asserted anything about anything being "impossible."
What I have asked for are definitions and demonstrations. You have provided neither. What you have provided are your unsubstantiated assertions that unexplained things can be attributable to other unexplained things. Which again, gives us no actual information about anything.

Or

B. Use your powers of reason and deduction to form a valid conclusion.

That's what I am trying to do. But you are trying to convince me that logic and reason don't matter when it comes to "paranormal" things. I just have to believe they are there until someone proves that they aren't. Again, that's not how logic and reasoning works.

Also in some of the videos they use scientific methods to deduce but I know you want the impossible, published findings. Its a form of unreasonable denial that sounds nice. I say unreasonable because its obviously impossible even if spirits/ufo's are real. Its just a way to hide.

To deduce what? That the things happening in the videos are results of spirits interacting with someone or something? When did anyone demonstrate that spirits exist and measure and observe their characteristics?

So you think that spirits exist, and that they interact with the natural world, but also that these interactions cannot be observed and measured in any kind of tangible way?
Can you explain how that makes sense?

What is it that you think UFOs are and what do you think has been demonstrated about them? Do you think they contain aliens?

I wouldn't be bothered by it but you have much to say about your firm stance with no proof of your own. That they don't exist. There is more proof that they do than dont. Don't comes from standard non informed denial

My "firm stance" is nothing more than, "Where is the evidence for your claims?" I don't need proof of anything to ask you such a question. If you think that is too much to ask, I don't know what to tell you.


Question: If I tell you there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage, are you obligated to believe me unless you can prove there isn't?

 

[Skeezy]

Of course there is a burden of proof. That's just Logic and Reasoning 101. Or do you just believe every single thing you hear unless your or someone else can disprove it?

I am the one standing at "unknown." You are standing at "known" when nothing has been demonstrated.



Great, then how did you deduce that spirits exist?

And if it's impossible to demonstrate either way, then you can't logically assert that spirits exist.



No, it doesn't.

What matters is the evidence. What matters is some sort of demonstration of the thing you're claiming to exist, which would include a definition.


The scientific method is just a tool we use to observe and measure what is going on around us. The scientific method has given us all the answers we currently hold about the world we live in. Speculation, wish-thinking and assertions without demonstrations don't get us there.


The latter is an absurd and false statement.

Science doesn't just make stuff up, as you are doing. Maybe that's your issue with it.


Hmm, but apparently "any idiot" cannot get anywhere close to demonstrating the existence of paranormal things. That seems like a problem.

I have no idea what your second sentence is supposed to mean.



I've never asked or asserted anything about anything being "impossible."
What I have asked for are definitions and demonstrations. You have provided neither. What you have provided are your unsubstantiated assertions that unexplained things can be attributable to other unexplained things. Which again, gives us no actual information about anything.


That's what I am trying to do. But you are trying to convince me that logic and reason don't matter when it comes to "paranormal" things. I just have to believe they are there until someone proves that they aren't. Again, that's not how logic and reasoning works.


To deduce what? That the things happening in the videos are results of spirits interacting with someone or something? When did anyone demonstrate that spirits exist and measure and observe their characteristics?

So you think that spirits exist, and that they interact with the natural world, but also that these interactions cannot be observed and measured in any kind of tangible way?
Can you explain how that makes sense?

What is it that you think UFOs are and what do you think has been demonstrated about them? Do you think they contain aliens?


My "firm stance" is nothing more than, "Where is the evidence for your claims?" I don't need proof of anything to ask you such a question. If you think that is too much to ask, I don't know what to tell you.


Question: If I tell you there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage, are you obligated to believe me unless you can prove there isn't?

All of that was a matter of biased opinion.

1. view the evidence.
2. Logically debate

Ask for 2 steps and met with that incredible load of BS

You cant even follow the simplest of reasonable debates due to biased opinion.

You assume there's a pink elephant. When its more like theres a stapler in the house and you refuse to check to see if its there

Meanwhile part of the footage as evidence has already been confirmed as real by a vast majority of legit sources even publicly stated as real. I already knew it was because it logically can't be faked to that degree. 5 months later all sources including governement confirm its real.

Meanwhile you push internet debate jargon which doesn't apply. Because the stance is unknown. So you can't act like it doesn't exist. because you can't prove it doesnt, meanwhile its being confirmed as real, while you never look at evidence and continue a needless self entitled no merit counter argument with no evidence

You already know where my evidence is. You have 0. Only your diluted view on the subject which again holds no merit. No one, including me. cares that you dont believe. I am just a lil surprised at how unreasonable you are with evidence. Meanwhile many others are not.


Even if there are publish findings on any one of these subjects in these videos. You wouldn't know because you dont even know whats going on, because you never looked in the 1st place.

As more evidence comes many of these cryptids, energies, abnormalities and objects will be confirmed and then maybe in 30+ or so years you can have your published findings. Until then, you have 0 logic about anything and be lost in your assumptions.

 

[Skeezy]

To give a better analogy.

Me: I saw through the window The gas is on in your house.

You: no its not


(Explosion)

Told ya

 

[SkepticThinker]

All of that was a matter of biased opinion.

1. view the evidence.
2. Logically debate

Ask for 2 steps and met with that incredible load of BS

You cant even follow the simplest of reasonable debates due to biased opinion.

You assume there's a pink elephant. When its more like theres a stapler in the house and you refuse to check to see if its there

Meanwhile part of the footage as evidence has already been confirmed as real by a vast majority of legit sources even publicly stated as real. I already knew it was because it logically can't be faked to that degree. 5 months later all sources including governement confirm its real.

Meanwhile you push internet debate jargon which doesn't apply. Because the stance is unknown. So you can't act like it doesn't exist. because you can't prove it doesnt, meanwhile its being confirmed as real, while you never look at evidence and continue a needless self entitled no merit counter argument with no evidence

You already know where my evidence is. You have 0. Only your diluted view on the subject which again holds no merit. No one, including me. cares that you dont believe. I am just a lil surprised at how unreasonable you are with evidence. Meanwhile many others are not.


Even if there are publish findings on any one of these subjects in these videos. You wouldn't know because you dont even know whats going on, because you never looked in the 1st place.

As more evidence comes many of these cryptids, energies, abnormalities and objects will be confirmed and then maybe in 30+ or so years you can have your published findings. Until then, you have 0 logic about anything and be lost in your assumptions.

You are either not reading my posts or not understanding them. I've explained the same thing about ten different ways from Sunday but you still don't seem to understand what I am saying, how logic works, what evidence is, or how to demonstrate the veracity of a claim.

I just don't know where to go from here, when it's clear you're not taking in what I am trying to say. You want to believe what you want to believe. So go ahead. Have fun with that.

When you can define what a spirit is (or the whole host of other things you are asserting exist) and demonstrate its existence, please let me know. Until then, I imagine you will just assert their existence anyway as you've been doing all along.

 

[SkepticThinker]

To give a better analogy.

Me: I saw through the window The gas is on in your house.

You: no its not


(Explosion)

Told ya

This analogy doesn't really work.

A better one would be that you tell me my house is on fire and that the fire was started by a poltergeist.

 

[night912]

For example even though i explained the meteortie video in detail, twice, you missed the whole premise that it was blown apart by something not man made saving hundreds of thousands of lives and entire populations witnessed this.

This has already been scientifically confirmed to be an air burst.

 

[night912]

Dear God man. As we have been conversations the news all over the U.S., the miltary and recentl6 the pentagon has declared that much of the footage of U.F.O.s are real. Meaning much of the footage I've described has been declared as real by semi legit sources.

Yes, the US government has declared it to be an Unidentified Flying Object, no more no less.

 

[Skeezy]

Yes, the US government has declared it to be an Unidentified Flying Object, no more no less.

True but ,the videos are real. Dude is doubting the credibility of the videos of all things paranormal and thats just having blinders on.

Mind you we have been debating his refusal to observe evidence since before the videos were confirmed

The goal is to get someone to actually observe the evidence and watch he show so we can debate all things paranormal


Edit:

My points is there are obviously videos of things which are unknown but obviously real. This includes a multitude of subjects from UFO's to ghosts to cryptids and anomalies.

There is a false assumption that all videos are tampered with/faked and or doctored. This assumption while not meritless warrants observing said footage to truly decide.

If you dont view the evidence your stance is one of ignorance. Many things can confirm wether a video is real or not and every category has real videos.

Once one observes the vast majority of evidence a clearer picture begins to form of what is real. In my opinion man has passed many things down which factually exist and now are caught regularly to a point which they are factual

 

[Mock Turtle]

If you dont view the evidence your stance is one of ignorance.

Excuse me for butting in, but you are no different when you accept what is presented to you and where you form a conclusion not based on what the facts might be - that is, deception going on, or any other phenomena that hasn't an explanation currently, or whatever else. You are merely displaying your confirmation bias.

 

[SkepticThinker]

True but ,the videos are real. Dude is doubting the credibility of the videos of all things paranormal and thats just having blinders on.

Mind you we have been debating his refusal to observe evidence since before the videos were confirmed

The goal is to get someone to actually observe the evidence and watch he show so we can debate all things paranormal


Edit:

My points is there are obviously videos of things which are unknown but obviously real. This includes a multitude of subjects from UFO's to ghosts to cryptids and anomalies.

There is a false assumption that all videos are tampered with/faked and or doctored. This assumption while not meritless warrants observing said footage to truly decide.

If you dont view the evidence your stance is one of ignorance. Many things can confirm wether a video is real or not and every category has real videos.

Once one observes the vast majority of evidence a clearer picture begins to form of what is real. In my opinion man has passed many things down which factually exist and now are caught regularly to a point which they are factual

No, "dude" is not doing that at all.

I've specifically pointed out several times that you are presenting videos with unexplained phenomena in them and then attributing causes to them such as poltergeists, ghosts, etc. without first defining what those things are, and secondly demonstrating that they are in fact, the things you claim they are.

I haven't said a thing about the videos being doctored or faked or anything.

Are you sure you're actually reading my posts, because you've completely misconstrued things I've repeatedly said. It's getting pretty baffling at this point.

Please try reading my posts for what they say and not what you want them to say. You'll understand my position better that way.

 

[Skeezy]

This has already been scientifically confirmed to be an air burst.

Wait explain this to me.. an air burst? Air?.. air took a shape and Blew apart a large meteorite at the exact necessary moment to save lives beyond human control?.... news to me

 

[Skeezy]

No, "dude" is not doing that at all.

I've specifically pointed out several times that you are presenting videos with unexplained phenomena in them and then attributing causes to them such as poltergeists, ghosts, etc. without first defining what those things are, and secondly demonstrating that they are in fact, the things you claim they are.

I haven't said a thing about the videos being doctored or faked or anything.

Are you sure you're actually reading my posts, because you've completely misconstrued things I've repeatedly said. It's getting pretty baffling at this point.

Please try reading my posts for what they say and not what you want them to say. You'll understand my position better that way.

.
I dont get what you dont get. I understand you just fine.

I say look at the proof.

You said no.

Thats it. You keep commenting at me. I keep replying. You say I make statements about things you haven't seen.

Wth dude. If your not going to look at what I'm talking about. Thats where we are....

Im not confused about what your saying at all im saying your view is that of the blind. You want perfect evidence that doesnt exist. But we do have evidence but you won't look. So you choose to stay unknowledgable about any evidence there is.... what did I miss?

 

[night912]

Wait explain this to me.. an air burst? Air?.. air took a shape and Blew apart a large meteorite at the exact necessary moment to save lives beyond human control?.... news to me

No, air didn't take a shape and blew apart the meteorite.

Air burst

Fireball

And no, it didn't explode at the exact necessary moment to save human lives. It just happened to explode when it did because of the phenomenon and coincidently, didn't cause a lot of damage. It's actually higher in altitude than what it looks. And coincidence does not mean it exploded purposely and/or necessary at the exact moment to save human lives.

It might be news to you, but not for scientists who are experts in such phenomenon. That's why this incident isn't anything mysterious to them to declare it as an "unknown" event.

So what's more rational, accepting a scientific explanation or an unknown explanation but then claimed it to be a particular thing?

It aligns with the phenomenon in the links i provided. There's evidence supporting this. If you have evidence suggesting that it wasn't, then feel free to present them.

 

[night912]

I think the problem here lies with determining qwhat the videos are evidence for. For example, the video of the meteorite. The video itself is only evidence that there was a meteorite that entered into the earth's atmosphere and exploded in midair, no more no less. Then once a claim has been made for the explanation for how/why it exploded, that's when there's the need for evidence to support that claim/explanation.

This goes for any and all videos. They're all evidence for the particular event/incident that is captured on video. They're all videos of lights and/or objects in the sky, a thing behind some bushes, a creature walking across a valley, objects flying across the room etc. Once someone suggest that the video is evidence for a particular claim that they're making, the video now becomes a claim itself and must now be analyzed to see whether or not it can be considered as evidence for the initial claim.

Take for example a video of a person shooting another person in the head with a gun. If the video is being used as evidence that the accused suspect murdered the victim, the video has now become a claim. Now it must be analyze to make sure that the video actually shows the accused suspect killing victim. If it shows that the shooter is another person, the one who got shot was not the identified victim or is inconclusive, then it's not evidence for the claim that the accused suspect did indeed shoot the identified victim. The video cannot be evidence for both murder case A and murder case B, two different and separate murder cases. But keep in mind, when it's been confirmed as being evidence for case A, it can either be evidence for or against the suspect, but not both. Evidence leads to only one conclusion, but cannot lead to two opposing conclusions.

 

[SkepticThinker]

.
I dont get what you dont get. I understand you just fine.

I say look at the proof.

You said no.

Thats it. You keep commenting at me. I keep replying. You say I make statements about things you haven't seen.

Wth dude. If your not going to look at what I'm talking about. Thats where we are....

Im not confused about what your saying at all im saying your view is that of the blind. You want perfect evidence that doesnt exist. But we do have evidence but you won't look. So you choose to stay unknowledgable about any evidence there is.... what did I miss?

Nope.

You said, Look at the proof.

I said, Proof of what?

You said, Proof of poltergeists, aliens, spirits, gods.

I said, Can you define what a poltergeist/spirit/god is?

You said, Residual energy.

I said, What's that?

You said, I don't have to define things in order to assert they exist and are the causes of these phenomena you can see in these videos I posted.

I said, Can you demonstrate that the phenomena in these videos are caused by poltergeists/spirits/gods?

You said, Why are you ignoring evidence?

I said, What evidence? You are trying to explain unexplained phenomena with other unexplained things like poltergeists/spirits/gods. In other words, you are explaining a mystery with another mystery, which gets us no where and actually explains nothing.

You said, "Dude is doubting the credibility of the videos of all things paranormal and thats just having blinders on. Mind you we have been debating his refusal to observe evidence since before the videos were confirmed."



Do you see the problem yet?