Mr A believes that there is a living and existing GOD.
Mr B believes in the nihilance/non-existence of GOD.

Both Mr A and B must be able to analyse and define their beliefs, within the concepts of scientific knowledge, intelectualism and rationality.

To the advocates of Mr B's postulation, I ask: what is the scientific evidence for the non-existence of GOD?

what is the intellectual evidence for the non-existence of GOD?

For fairness, why don't you also challenge Mr A to justify his position of belief in the existence of a God?

huxley2:

For fairness, why don't you also challenge Mr A to justify his position of belief in the existence of a God?

perhaps because Mr. A has done that so very many times, is tired and wants Mr. B to justify his own inane point of view.

davidylan:

perhaps because Mr. A has done that so very many times, is tired and wants Mr. B to justify his own inane point of view.

OK, Mr B needs to justify his positions just as you need to justify your belief in Santa Claus, Fairies and Sussicorn. How's that?

huxley2:

OK, Mr B needs to justify his positions just as you need to justify your belief in Santa Claus, Fairies and Sussicorn. How's that?

we've had to do that one too many times, how about you have a go this time?

huxley2:

OK, Mr B needs to justify his positions just as you need to justify your belief in Santa Claus, Fairies and Sussicorn. How's that?

why does Mr B have a problem stating his case?

C-NOETIC:

why does Mr B have a problem stating his case?

No. He has no problem. To him the word GOD is ontologically meaningless as the word TEQATA, FAIRIES, SUSSICORN. Can you convince him that these other words represent non-existent entities?

huxley2:

No.  He has no problem. To him the word GOD is ontologically meaningless as the word  TEQATA, FAIRIES, SUSSICORN.  Can you convince him that these other words represent non-existent entities?

To ontologically define an "entity", u must have an appreciative knowledge of that "entity".
so the ontological definition of GOD is not in any way linked the Mr B's belief. For Mr B to believe in the non-existence of GOD, it is safe to assume that he has an understanding of GOD. That "understanding" is what this thread intends to probe scientifically and intellectually.

He simply believes God does not exist, he should scientifically and intellectually tell us why (evidences).

C-NOETIC:

To ontologically define an "entity", u must have an appreciative knowledge of that "entity".
so the ontological definition of GOD is not in any way linked the Mr B's belief. For Mr B to believe in the non-existence of GOD, it is safe to assume that he has an understanding of GOD. That "understanding" is what this thread intends to probe scientifically and intellectually.

He simply believes God does not exist, he should scientifically and intellectually tell us why (evidences).

OK, let us replace GOD with TEQATA. Do you believe TEQATA exists.

huxley2:

OK, let us replace GOD with TEQATA. Do you believe TEQATA exists.

I have no appreciative "knowledge" of TEQATA, as such to "believe/disbelieve" in TEQATA is impossible.

But Mr B clearly "believes" in the non-existence of GOD, why does he have a problem when his "belief" is placed under the microscope of scientific knowledge?

C-NOETIC:

I have no appreciative "knowledge" of TEQATA, as such to "believe/disbelieve" in TEQATA is impossible.

But Mr B clearly "believes" in the non-existence of GOD, why does he have a problem when his "belief" is placed under the microscope of scientific knowledge?

Au contraire - Mr B has been given some information about GOD which are clearly contradictory and the best position for him to take is to suspend belief in GOD. So in effect Mr B has no substantive information about GOD. The info he has so far amounts to saying that 4 = 9, which is illogical and make no sense.

huxley2:

Au contraire - Mr B has been given some information about GOD which are clearly contradictory and the best position for him to take is to suspend belief in GOD. So in effect Mr B has no substantive information about GOD. The info he has so far amounts to saying that 4 = 9, which is illogical and make no sense.

in other words Mr B cannot scientifically or intellectually analyse his belief.
can Mr B define his belief? can he scientifically explain them? can he express them intellectually? can he defend his beliefs?

To base ur belief on presumed "contradictions" (4 = 9) is neither scientific or intellectual. what then is the basis of such belief?

Mr A begins by saying that he believes in the existence of an all knowing god and when asked to provide his evidence he begins by saying that 12*12 = 5  and asserting that as the evidence for his beliefs in an all knowing god that created the universe.
Mr B only believes in the non existence of the god Mr A is asserting. He doesn't have to prove his non existence since he knows that 12*12 is not = 5

huxley2:

Au contraire - Mr B has been given some information about GOD which are clearly contradictory and the best position for him to take is to suspend belief in GOD. So in effect Mr B has no substantive information about GOD. The info he has so far amounts to saying that 4 = 9, which is illogical and make no sense.

why is Mr B's belief dependent on Mr A's?
why cant Mr B explicitly explain . . . . .the very essence and origin of life? . . . . .The scientific or intellectual capacity to belief in "anything"?

why is Mr B always refusing to defend his postulations/beliefs?

D burden of proof lies with mr who says wat does not exist does.

Riff-Raff:

D burden of proof lies with mr who says wat does not exist does.

do u know the meaning of a "belief"? I doubt u do.

C-NOETIC:

why is Mr B's belief dependent on Mr A's?
why cant Mr B explicitly explain . . . . .the very essence and origin of life? . . . . .The scientific or intellectual capacity to belief in "anything"?

why is Mr B always refusing to defend his postulations/beliefs?

Mr B doesn't have to, Mr B has never really said that he knows the origin of the universe. On the other hand Mr A says he KNOWS for sure how the universe came into being and when asked for the eveidence to support his assertions he presents the very erronoues arithemetics that 12*12= 5. Mr B knows for sure that Mr A is lying since he knows that 12*12 is not = 5. Mr B does not have to prove that the god Mr A is talking about does not exist because he knows that 12*12 is not= 5.

Riff-Raff:

D burden of proof lies with mr who says wat does not exist does.

that's nonsense . . . an excuse to shirk your own moral responsibility. The burden of proof also lies with he who says what another man beliefs is fairy tales.

davidylan:

that's nonsense . . . an excuse to shirk your own moral responsibility. The burden of proof also lies with he who says what another man beliefs is fairy tales.

You believe that rainbows began to appear after the Noah's flood as a covenant between Noah's god and man, That is not true rainbows have been existing long before Noah. A rainbow is an optical and meteorological phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere as a result of refraction. It is now up to you to prove to us and provide evidence to show that water droplets do not refract when they come in contact to water droplets in the earth's atmosphere prior to Noah's flood. You can also explain to us how the sun moves from place to place.

toneyb:

You believe that rainbows began to appear after the Noah's flood as a covenant between Noah's god and man, That is not true rainbows have been existing long before Noah. A rainbow is an optical and meteorological phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere as a result of refraction. It is now up to you to prove to us and provide evidence to show that water droplets do not refract when they come in contact to water droplets in the earth's atmosphere prior to Noah's flood. You can also explain to us how the sun moves from place to place.

Simple question - Can you prove how the sun came into existence? thank you.

davidylan:

Simple question - Can you prove how the sun came into existence? thank you.

You just keep embarassing yourself, I do not claim to know where or how the sun came into existence, your bible claims to know. It also claims to know how the sun operates by saying that it moves from place to place.

toneyb:

You just keep embarassing yourself, I do not claim to know where or how the sun came into existence, your bible claims to know. It also claims to know how the sun operates by saying that it moves from place to place.

Again more dishonest dodging tactics. the bible made a simple claim - the Lord created the sun - period. now you disagree and call it absurd . . . BUT WHY? How do you know the bible is wrong if YOU DONT KNOW AN ALTERNATIVE TO HOW THE SUN WAS CREATED?

That is the simple problem with many of you blowhards . . . bible this bible that . . . state your own case and you start whinning about Jonah.

davidylan:

Again more dishonest dodging tactics. the bible made a simple claim - the Lord created the sun - period. now you disagree and call it absurd . . . BUT WHY? How do you know the bible is wrong if YOU DONT KNOW AN ALTERNATIVE TO HOW THE SUN WAS CREATED?

That is the simple problem with many of you blowhards . . . bible this bible that . . . state your own case and you start whinning about Jonah.

The bible claims that the bible god created the sun, the bible then goes ahead and assert that the sun moves from place to place. I do not need to have an alternative explanation since I know that the sun does not move from place to place. A god that creates the sun should know that it does not move from place to place and should not inspire people to write that it does.

toneyb:

The bible claims that the bible god created the sun, the bible then goes ahead and assert that the sun moves from place to place. I do not need to have an alternative explanation since I know that the sun does not move from place to place. A god that creates the sun should know that it does not move from place to place and should not inspire people to write that it does.

For the upteenth time FORGET WHAT THE BIBLE HAS TO SAY. Surely you're not too dumb as to be so hung up on what the bible has to say but have ABSOLUTELY no idea of an alternative to what the bible has to say no?

Lets for once agree that the bible is wrong - WHAT IS THE TRUTH? WHAT SHOULD WE BELIEVE?

davidylan:

For the upteenth time FORGET WHAT THE BIBLE HAS TO SAY. Surely you're not too dumb as to be so hung up on what the bible has to say but have ABSOLUTELY no idea of an alternative to what the bible has to say no?

Lets for once agree that the bible is wrong - WHAT IS THE TRUTH? WHAT SHOULD WE BELIEVE?

There are a lot of things out there to believe, if belief is all you want to do, you can believe in evolution, big bang. I am more interested in showing you high headed Christians who believe that you ALONE know the truth that you don't since you can't even prove it.

toneyb:

There are a lot of things out there to believe, if belief is all you want to do, you can believe in evolution, big bang. I am more interested in showing you high headed Christians who believe that you ALONE know the truth that you don't since you can't  even prove it.

Crap dude, absolute crap. You cant be more interested in showing us we dont have the truth when YOU cant show us an alternative truth. So say i throw my bible away this minute . . . how can you convince me 100% that there is an alternative to the creation story?

What is more absurd about your claims is that you say the bible isnt truth "since i cant prove it" . . . but what have YOU been able to prove? Its impossible to label something false when you dont even know what is genuine.

Darn . . . sometimes these blowhards stretch the limits of incredulity. What brains do these fools have?

davidylan:

Crap dude, absolute crap. You cant be more interested in showing us we dont have the truth when YOU cant show us an alternative truth. So say i throw my bible away this minute . . . how can you convince me 100% that there is an alternative to the creation story?

Do I have to convince you 100% that there is an alternative to the creation story? There are other alternatives out there to which evolution is one. You claim to know the "only truth" that your god created the universe in which we live in. I chose to come here and ask you to prove it which you can't. Aren't you guys happy to quote your bible at us and tell us that "a fool says in his heart that there is no god"? When you ask we "fools" ask you for the evidence of your god whom you claim created the universe you start blabbing all the place or refering us to a book that says the sun moves from place to place when we know that is not the case.

toneyb:

Do I have to convince you 100% that there is an alternative to the creation story? There are other alternatives out there to which evolution is one. You claim to know the "only truth" that your god created the universe in which we live in. I chose to come here and ask you to prove it which you can't. Aren't you guys happy to quote your bible at us and tell us that "a fool says in his heart that there is no god"? When you ask we "fools" ask you for the evidence of your god whom you claim created the universe you start blabbing all the place or refering us to a book that says the sun moves from place to place when we know that is not the case.

Basically more stupid posturing. If you think the bible is wrong . . . where is THE TRUTH? Surely for you to be so sure there must be something you believe no? There are SEVERAL OTHER ALTERNATIVES but you have no idea which one is correct and you ignorantly come here chirping about the bible? How insane.

Dont ask me to prove anything if YOU cant prove your own side of the story. Have you ever seen a coin with only one side? Yeah i'm happy to quote the bible . . . what do YOU believe in . . . are you merely a blank slate who simply comes here wailing about Jonah?

common . . . you fools can do better than recycle the same old argument time and time and time again. you all claim to be "intelligent".

I have agreed with you over an hr ago - ok the bible is crap, i wont ever read it again.

Now YOU toneyb . . . what is the alternative? Do you have absolutely NOTHING TO OFFER but incredulous whinning?

davidylan:


What is more absurd about your claims is that you say the bible isnt truth "since i cant prove it" . . . but what have YOU been able to prove? Its impossible to label something false when you dont even know what is genuine.

Darn . . . sometimes these blowhards stretch the limits of incredulity. What brains do these fools have?

I haven't been able to prove anything but other have been able to prove the bible wrong. We now know that the sun does not move from place to place as the bible says it does, rainbows are not a covenant between any man and any god but a refraction of sunlight on water droplets in the earths atmosphere. Can you use the brain you have to show us how the sun  moves from place to place or prove to us that light does not refract on water droplets prior to Noah's flood? You claim that you alone has the brain to reason so please use your brain and provide the answer or don't you believe in the bible again?

toneyb:

Do I have to convince you 100% that there is an alternative to the creation story? There are other alternatives out there to which evolution is one. You claim to know the "only truth" that your god created the universe in which we live in. I chose to come here and ask you to prove it which you can't. Aren't you guys happy to quote your bible at us and tell us that "a fool says in his heart that there is no god"? When you ask we "fools" ask you for the evidence of your god whom you claim created the universe you start blabbing all the place or refering us to a book that says the sun moves from place to place when we know that is not the case.

Same ol' same ol' . . . yeah ok the Lord didnt create the universe . . . well WHO CREATED IT? DO YOU KNOW?

davidylan:

I have agreed with you over an hr ago - ok the bible is crap, i wont ever read it again.

Now YOU toneyb . . . what is the alternative? Do you have absolutely NOTHING TO OFFER but incredulous whinning?

You can start with evolution and the big bang.