dislike atheism

[Subduction Zone]

what example?

You have not been paying attention to your own thread? That is all but inexcusable. Your use of an argument from ignorance.

 

[syo]

We exist because life evolved on Earth.

WHO created earth? who created gravity? who created the sun? and the list goes forever..... did earth create itself????

 

[ChristineM]

atheists deny a creator god but they don't deny their own being. why and how do we exist then, if not for a creating power? so atheists believe that only themselves exist, and the creation power is imaginary. atheism is totally wrong. they deny the creator god, and they think that only their own temporary being exists. how atheism has followers is strange.

You seem to make a lot of assumption's about atheism.

All you need to do is provide valid evidence for god and you could end atheism at a stroke. As it strands no one has ever provided such evidence therefore, based on the evidence, atheism ius not wrong.

As for not denying our own being, there is evidence we exist, touch, feel, ability to change environment.

 

[Jesster]

WHO creted earth? who created gravity? who created the sun? and the list goes forever..... did earth create itself????

How do you know a who caused it?

 

[syo]

You have not been paying attention to your own thread? That is all but inexcusable. Your use of an argument from ignorance.

you mean the flying pan?

 

[syo]

How do you know a who caused it?

because Something started all.

 

[Jesster]

because Something started all.

How do you know that?

I also like how you used something instead of someone this time. Better.

 

[Subduction Zone]

you mean the flying pan?

No, but that was another example of your tendency to use arguments from ignorance. That was brought up by another. And please it was a teapot. How on Earth would a flying pan get between the Earth and Mars, that idea is ridiculous.

 

[Subduction Zone]

because Something started all.

Why? You do realize that on a quantum level there is no "law of cause and effect" don't you? And at best all that argument shows is that there always was something, not that that something was a god.

 

[syo]

How do you know that?

because zero leads to zero. if zero leads to something then it wasn't zero in the first place.

 

[Jesster]

because zero leads to zero. if zero leads to something then it wasn't zero in the first place.

Or it could have always existed. The fact is that nobody knows for sure. Many of us would like to know, but that doesn't mean we actually know. You are just filling in that "I don't know" with a claim you feel is right. This is your biggest fallacy here, and I am not the only one pointing it out.

 

[Altfish]

you are joking right?

Only in the same way as the first post was a joke.

 

[Subduction Zone]

because zero leads to zero. if zero leads to something then it wasn't zero in the first place.

This is another unsupported statement. Matter and energy does "appear from nothing" on a quantum level. That concept can be and has been tested.

Also you are using undefined terminology again. Physicists know that with the standard definition of "nothing" that the universe can come from nothing. This is an hour long video, but it goes over the reasoning and evidence used very well:

 

[ChristineM]

WHO created earth? who created gravity? who created the sun? and the list goes forever..... did earth create itself????

Earth accreted from the solar nebula.

Gravity is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of masses such as earth, the sun, asteroids, gas cloud, subatomic particles etc.

The sun formed when slight deviations in gravity caused hydrogen to clump.

 

[syo]

Or it could have always existed.

like what?

 

[ChristineM]

stars die.

So do universe's

 

[Jesster]

like what?

What is this question directed at? It doesn't make sense in this context.

 

[syo]

Matter and energy does "appear from nothing" on a quantum level.

that ''nothing'' is ethereal, it's god.

 

[syo]

Or it could have always existed.

you wrote this

 

[Subduction Zone]

Or it could have always existed. The fact is that nobody knows for sure. Many of us would like to know, but that doesn't mean we actually know. You are just filling in that "I don't know" with a claim you feel is right.

And trying to claim that a god has always existed and needs no creator, but that the universe does need a creator is merely a special pleading error.

Not your error, but his:

Your logical fallacy is special pleading