Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[leroy]

When either one of you understands what the burden of proof relative to a claim and the definition of evidence is, our luck will change.

Ok

So you are claiming (or implying) that I don’t understand the concept of evidence.

So the way I understand it, and given that you are the one who is making a positive claim …….. you have the burden proof……… right?...........So íll wait for you to support your claim.

that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Good, to know………. So if you don’t mind I will dismiss your claim untill you support it.



BTW
Here is my cliam:

You will not support your assertion within the next 24 hours you will ether ignore the request, avoid the challenge or find a stupid excuse for not answering………………I have no problem is accepting the burden proof.

Give me a few seconds…….I will travel to the future with my time machine, …

Ok I am back in the present…………I looked in to the future and proved that my claim is correct

 

[Pogo]

Can you quote anywhere where I have used the term “evidence” or burden proof incorrectly? ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, NO ………..so how do you know that I don’t understand those concepts?

Two different questions, did you hit the side of the barn or did you hit the target.

 

[YoursTrue]

There you go again, making apparently false accusations against others. Please prove that it is "conjecture".

No pudding, no proof. Pictures of a pudding doesn't mean it's pudding. Hey! Have a good one. Along with fishy stuff.

 

[YoursTrue]

Two different questions, did you hit the side of the barn or did you hit the target.

Any idea? What's your idea?

 

[Pogo]

Ok I am back in the present…………I looked in to the future and proved that my claim is correct

Well it did take me a few seconds but there should be more than enough here for any rational person even without your most recent claim that I could not provide evidence in a timely fashion.

Search results for query: evidence

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Pogo]

Any idea? What's your idea?

Have you lost the thread again? Do you understand what the phrase means this time?

 

[YoursTrue]

Well maybe that goes to the point, the term evidence generally refers to that which both sides have reason to understand due to prior experience.
Revelation that is only known by one is by definition not evidence.
For simplicities sake, your evidence is that which we both can confirm and which you can also convince me logically that your interpretation is rational. I can then take the rest of my knowledge in hand and determine whether I accept it.

Your type of evidence doesn't work except in the minds of believers that believe magic of nature did it. Bye again.

 

[YoursTrue]

Have you lost the thread again? Do you understand what the phrase means this time?

Do you? If so explain it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes we have learned, no matter how much evidence we supply, you cannot see it. That we do it less frequently is in response to learning as unrewarded behaviours decrease over time.

It's very fishy. Your reluctance to do anything but insult pleases some fish.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No pudding, no proof. Pictures of a pudding doesn't mean it's pudding. Hey! Have a good one. Along with fishy stuff.

So are you saying that you were lying? That is what it seems like. Everyone that understands the sciences at all knows that there is massive evidence for evolution so you could not be supporting your silly claim with that sort of statement.

Can your prove your claim about "conjecture". Sometimes I wonder if English is your first language since you seem to have trouble understanding some very basic ideas.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your type of evidence doesn't work except in the minds of believers that believe magic of nature did it. Bye again.

Again you appear to be terribly confused. Scientific evidence is generally recognized as the most reliable evidence that exists since scientists go out of their way to eliminate human prejudices.

 

[Pogo]

Your type of evidence doesn't work except in the minds of believers that believe magic of nature did it. Bye again.

Interesting case of projection.

 

[YoursTrue]

So are you saying that you were lying? That is what it seems like. Everyone that understands the sciences at all knows that there is massive evidence for evolution so you could not be supporting your silly claim with that sort of statement.

Can your prove your claim about "conjecture". Sometimes I wonder if English is your first language since you seem to have trouble understanding some very basic ideas.

Sounds like...seems like...the onus is on you. Take care.

 

[YoursTrue]

Interesting case of projection.

Nothing but your own projection.

 

[YoursTrue]

Again you appear to be terribly confused. Scientific evidence is generally recognized as the most reliable evidence that exists since scientists go out of their way to eliminate human prejudices.

You don't know about scientific data.

 

[Pogo]

Nothing but your own projection.

Reduced to "I know you are but what am I" sad

 

[Pogo]

You don't know about scientific data.

Interesting claim coming from you.

 

[firedragon]

I used to grant that, but then I “learned atheists dishonest tactics” and decided to apply them …….in this case the tactic that I learned was to “change definitions” instead of addressing your actual point

In all honesty, the hyper evangelical atheists in this very forum don't even spend a few minutes to do the research on definitions in the beginning. In my opinion, after making a false definition based on colloquial verbiage they don't like to go back and stand corrected. So there is a necessity to stay with it out of pride. It's not that they necessarily change definitions right at the beginning. Most of the missionaries are simply unaware.

 

[Pogo]

In all honesty, the hyper evangelical atheists in this very forum don't even spend a few minutes to do the research on definitions in the beginning. In my opinion, after making a false definition based on colloquial verbiage they don't like to go back and stand corrected. So there is a necessity to stay with it out of pride. It's not that they necessarily change definitions right at the beginning. Most of the missionaries are simply unaware.

Examples please, especially in terms of your questioning colloquial verbiage which is generally allowed until it becomes obvious that the poster really doesn't understand. Misunderstandings of colloquial verbiage are a major source of misunderstandings though the dichotomy does not appear to be Christian-atheist but a subset of Christians.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sounds like...seems like...the onus is on you. Take care.

No, you still have not justified your claim. I need to remind you at this time that you to date have refused to learn what is and what is not scientific evidence even though I have offered to go over the concept with you many times over.

And I am still confused. A literal reading of your posts looks as if at the start that you were admitting to lying. You never clarified that.