₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
Let us assume I neither believe = blue
nor disbelieve = red
I don't believe = purple
According to you blue+red is not purple.
LMFAO!

Another analogy since you like them. You are like someone saying I neither have sugar nor salt is not the same as I don't have sugar or salt.

Your semantic gymnastics is h8ghly amusing. Bwahahahahaha!

Let me help you get it again. I am ready for it.

It's like you have 3 rats, one is inside the house, one is outiside and the other is in the wall. You ignore the aspect that the one in the wall is neither inside or outside the house and then you want him to tell you what's inside the house?

Does that make any sense? 😂

I am the rat inside the wall, I don't know anything about what's inside or outside the house.

Weak Agnosticism composes of 2 parts: it doesn't make conclusion from believes or disbelieve. It relies solely on evidence.

So when you tell me to talk about disbelieve, it's ridiculous and surprising that some of your calibre can reason in that manner 😂😂

Workch:
It's you that is showing it.
You have met someone who won't fall for your cherrypicking gimmicks.

You think you are having conversation with a theist? 😂

I don't believe or disbelieve god. Stop cherrypicking the disbelieve part of it only

Quote where I mentioned disbelieve. This is like the 3rd time now I have asked this question you are yet to provide an answer, when will you own up to your mistakes? You are so ungracious to being corrected it's laughable.

LordReed:
Quote where I mentioned disbelieve. This is like the 3rd time now I have asked this question you are yet to provide an answer, when will you own up to your mistakes? You are so ungracious to being corrected it's laughable.

Bros, it's not my problem if you have short memories.

You can go back to our conversation. Stop asking me to prove my disbelieve, I'm not an atheist.

Workch:
Let me help you get it again. I am ready for it.

It's like you have 3 rats, one is inside the house, one is outiside and the other is in the wall. You ignore the aspect that the one in the wall is neither inside or outside the house and then you want him to tell you what's inside the house?

Does that make any sense? 😂

I am the rat inside the wall, I don't know anything about what's inside or outside the house.

Weak Agnosticism composes of 2 parts: it doesn't make conclusion from believes or disbelieve. It relies solely on evidence.

So when you tell me to talk about disbelieve, it's ridiculous and surprising that some of your calibre can reason in that manner 😂😂

LoLz! You are the one not making sense with your semantic gymnastics. Is the rat the rat inside the house? No it is not inside the house. Simple. The response is not stating the exact location of the rat, simply saying where it isn't.

Keep dribbling your own shadow. Bwahahahahaha! Chai!

Workch:
Bros, it's not my problem if you have short memories.

You can go back to our conversation. Stop asking me to prove my disbelieve, I'm not an atheist.

Bwahahahahaha! You can't because I didn't but you can't admit it. This is turning sad, really.

Who gives a flying rat's arse if you are not an atheist? Are they giving prizes for what you choose to call yourself? Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:
LoLz! You are the one not making sense with your semantic gymnastics. Is the rat the rat inside the house? No it is not inside the house. Simple. The response is not stating the exact location of the rat, simply saying where it isn't.

Keep dribbling your own shadow. Bwahahahahaha! Chai!

So you are going to ignore that the rat is not also out side of the house.

Is that not cherrypicking fallacy? 😅

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence, is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position


How come when you meet a superior argument, you succumb to fallacies? 😂

LordReed:
Bwahahahahaha! You can't because I didn't but you can't admit it. This is turning sad, really.

I won't, I swear. Just stop asking me to do your atheist job for you 😂

If you disbelieve, then be ready to bring evidence 🤣 simple.

Agnosticism doesn't work with beliefs and disbeliefs

Workch:
So you are going to ignore that the rat is not also out side of the house.

Is that not cherrypicking fallacy? 😅

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence, is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position


How come when you meet a superior argument, you succumb to fallacies? 😂

Is the rat outside the house? No, it is not outside the house. It's so simple, you are just playing a pointless semantic game. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:
Is the rat outside the house? No, it is not outside the house. It's so simple, you are just playing a pointless semantic game. Bwahahahahaha!

So if the rat is not outside of the house, does that automatically means that the rat is inside the house?

Workch:
I won't, I swear. Just stop asking me to do your atheist job for you 😂

If you disbelieve, then be ready to bring evidence 🤣 simple.

Agnosticism doesn't work with beliefs and disbeliefs

I’m glad this is what you have been reduced to 😂

Workch:
I won't, I swear. Just stop asking me to do your atheist job for you 😂

If you disbelieve, then be ready to bring evidence 🤣 simple.

Agnosticism doesn't work with beliefs and disbeliefs

LoLz! You won't because then you will have to admit that you had no real point. Enjoy your label my guy, nothing do you. Bwahahahahaha!

Workch:
So if the rat is not outside of the house, does that automatically means that the rat is inside the house?

Is the wall not part of the house?
Is the wall outside the house?
Cc lordreed
😂😂

LordReed:
Is the rat outside the house? No, it is not outside the house. It's so simple, you are just playing a pointless semantic game. Bwahahahahaha!

What is a false dichotomy fallacy?
It's a logical fallacy in which a spectrum of possible options is misrepresented as an either-or choice between two mutually exclusive things.

If the rat is not in the house, it does not mean that the rat in outside of the house. There are some other options, it could be inside the wall or the roof.

The rat in the roof can not tell you what's inside of the room.

Keep calm with your numerous fallacies.

Maynman:
I’m glad this is what you have been reduced to 😂

As in. Very laughable. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:
LoLz! You won't because then you will have to admit that you had no real point. Enjoy your label my guy, nothing do you. Bwahahahahaha!

I won't because I don't want to dance to your tone.

I won't do the job of providing your disbelieve evidence for you. You do it or stop crying 😂

Workch:
If the rat is not in the house, it does not mean that the rat in outside of the house. There are some other options, it could be inside the wall or the roof.

Is the wall not part of the house?
Is the wall not in the house? 😂

Workch:
What is a false dichotomy fallacy?
It's a logical fallacy in which a spectrum of possible options is misrepresented as an either-or choice between two mutually exclusive things.

If the rat is not in the house, it does not mean that the rat in outside of the house. There are some other options, it could be inside the wall or the roof.

The rat in the roof can not tell you what's inside of the house.

Keep calm with your numerous fallacies.

There is no dichotomy false or otherwise, you simply playing a nonsensical semantic game.

Workch:
I won't because I don't want to dance to your tone.

I won't do the job of providing your disbelieve evidence for you. You do it or stop crying 😂

LoLz! Who came to open thread about atheists? Bwahahahahaha!

Workch:
I won't do the job of providing your disbelieve evidence for you. You do it or stop crying 😂

We should provide disbelieve evidence 😂😂

Mad Agnostic fellow

LordReed:
There is no dichotomy false or otherwise, you simply playing a nonsensical semantic game.

It's false dichotomy.

You are only working with two option of either believe or disbelieve.
You are incapable of comprehending the fact that some people called agnostics don't fall into these two categories.

You have to reset your brain to admit it 😂

Maynman:
Is the wall not part of the house?
Is the wall outside the house?
Cc lordreed
😂😂

No mind am, make e dey dribble e own shadow for there. Bwahahahahaha!

Workch:
It's false dichotomy.

You are only working with two option of either believe or disbelieve.
You are incapable of comprehending the fact that some people called agnostics don't fall into these two categories.

You have to reset your brain to admit it 😂

The position that the agnostics is holding is also a BELIEF.

LordReed:
LoLz! Who came to open thread about atheists? Bwahahahahaha!

Bros, atheism is not scientific.
Science works with evidence and not with disbelieve like atheism does.

It's simple, and I have proven that. No atheist has provided any evidence and we are in the 17th page of this thread 😂

Workch:
It's false dichotomy.

You are only working with two option of either believe or disbelieve.
You are incapable of comprehending the fact that some people called agnostics don't fall into these two categories.

You have to reset your brain to admit it 😂

LoLz. You that can't admit simple glaring mistakes? Bwahahahahaha!

Workch:
Bros, atheism is not scientific.
Science works with evidence and not with disbelieve like atheism does.

It's simple, and I have proven that. No atheist has provided any evidence and we are in the 16th page of this thread 😂

Who said “atheism” is scientific?
Think na bro

LordReed:
LoLz. You that can't admit simple glaring mistakes? Bwahahahahaha!

another whataboutism fallacy 😂

Atheists eat fallacies like food just like theists when they meet a superior argument.

Workch:
another whataboutism fallacy 😂

Atheists eat fallaciez like food just like theists when they meet a superior argument.

A superior argument on the word “god” and you say you are not a theist sympathizer 😂😂

Workch:
Bros, atheism is not scientific.
Science works with evidence and not with disbelieve like atheism does.

It's simple, and I have proven that. No atheist has provided any evidence and we are in the 17th page of this thread 😂

I asked you asimple question: what am I supposed to prove if my position and yours are exactly the same. You still can't answer it because that will also show you are on a pointless semantic ramble.

LordReed:
I asked you asimple question: what am I supposed to prove if my position and yours are exactly the same. You still can't answer it because that will also show you are on a pointless semantic ramble.

If you are an atheist, our position is not the same.

Why is that hard for you to grasp?

Workch:
another whataboutism fallacy 😂

Atheists eat fallacies like food just like theists when they meet a superior argument.

LoLz! As superior as a rat running inside walls. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:
LoLz! As superior as a rat running inside walls. Bwahahahahaha!

Yes, atleast we have evidence of rats living inside a wall, there's no evidence for atheism 🤣🤣🤣

Lol 😅😅😅😅

Workch:
Yes, atleast we have evidence of rats living inside a wall, there's no evidence for atheism 🤣🤣🤣

Lol 😅😅😅😅

“Living inside a wall”, and the wall is where, inside or outside the house?

Atheism has made you a dullard 😂