Evidence For And Against Evolution

[ecco]

It is ironic that you give atheists the powers of a god to proclaim that gods do not exist.

Nonsense. Don't try to make it something it isn't. One does not need to be Omni-all to understand that gods are the creations of man's imaginings.

That is a viewpoint that you are in almost complete agreement with.

However, I may be mistaken. Perhaps you believe that Maahes is an actual god and not just the creation of man's imaginings. How about Unahlahnauh? Real god or just the creation of man's imaginings?

We could go through a list of thousands of gods. In every instance, you would agree that the "god" is nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings. Every instance except one. Would your response to that one be based on ego or hypocrisy or indoctrination?

 

[ecco]

Yes, and now I've been examining the issue. Now let's take animals that supposedly evolved earlier than humans (just sayin'), again -- do they have courts, law books, tribunals to determine right from wrong? So evolutionists proclaim that it's "social" evolution or something like that. But how come bonobos, gorilllas, birds, turtles, worms, do not have these things? Not enough brain power?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Do try to keep track of the conversation. The first usage of "proof/prove" was your...
See post # 2654 above.

[/QUOTE]
No sir. Not at all. You used it and I responded.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Nonsense. Don't try to make it something it isn't. One does not need to be Omni-all to understand that gods are the creations of man's imaginings.

That is a viewpoint that you are in almost complete agreement with.

However, I may be mistaken. Perhaps you believe that Maahes is an actual god and not just the creation of man's imaginings. How about Unahlahnauh? Real god or just the creation of man's imaginings?

We could go through a list of thousands of gods. In every instance, you would agree that the "god" is nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings. Every instance except one. Would your response to that one be based on ego or hypocrisy or indoctrination?

Show me that you know things. Show me so I can know it like a creationist too. Like you do.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I see that you did not dispute that Atlas is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Superman. There is no reason to believe that Atlas or Superman are, in any sense, real entities.

I see that you did not dispute that Shiva is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Wonderwoman. There is no reason to believe that Shiva or Wonderwoman are, in any sense, real entities.

The argument I made about the actions of men is that they create(d) gods. The creations of man's imaginings are not real entities - not Atlas, not Superman. Do I really need to continue to make the argument to specify all of man's creations like Spiderman or Mighty Mouse or Mickey Mouse or Ra or UNkulunkulu?

If we take away all the gods that are the creations of man's imaginings, how many gods, which gods, are we left with - NONE.

In none of this have I seen your evidence to support your claim. I might as well be talking to a jw.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Care to support your asertion?

Do you know what irony is?

 

[ecco]

No sir. Not at all. You used it and I responded.

This is your post #2639...(my emphasis)

This I do not dispute, but it is evidence why some do not believe in a god and not that one or another is demonstrated not to exist. I don't believe in Bigfoot, but I can't prove it doesn't exist.

If you can show a post preceding 2639 where I asked for proof, I will apologize. On the other hand...

 

[ecco]

Show me that you know things. Show me so I can know it like a creationist too. Like you do.

Yadda, yadda, yadda. It's plain to all that you did not refute my assertions. It's plain to all that you can not refute that gods are nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings.

 

[ecco]

In none of this have I seen your evidence to support your claim. I might as well be talking to a jw.

You liken me and my comments to Creationists and JW's.

Unlike Creationists and JW's, I have prevented evidence.

Like Creationists and JW's, you have not refuted my evidence.

Instead, like the Creationists and JW's that you deride, you duck and dodge and resort to name-calling.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I see that you did not dispute that Atlas is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Superman. There is no reason to believe that Atlas or Superman are, in any sense, real entities.

I see that you did not dispute that Shiva is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Wonderwoman. There is no reason to believe that Shiva or Wonderwoman are, in any sense, real entities.

The argument I made about the actions of men is that they create(d) gods. The creations of man's imaginings are not real entities - not Atlas, not Superman. Do I really need to continue to make the argument to specify all of man's creations like Spiderman or Mighty Mouse or Mickey Mouse or Ra or UNkulunkulu?

If we take away all the gods that are the creations of man's imaginings, how many gods, which gods, are we left with - NONE.

You have failed to show atheists KNOW there are no gods. So the rest of this is creationist thrashing anout. You can still be atheist despite this but you creationists demand otherwise.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You liken me and my comments to Creationists and JW's.

Unlike Creationists and JW's, I have prevented evidence.

Like Creationists and JW's, you have not refuted my evidence.

Instead, like Creationists and JW's, you duck and dodge and resort to name-calling.

In this claim that you cannot and have not supported, you are behaving no different then a creationist. All the tricks and fallacies.

Even if I were to accept to ideas of atheism, I could not accept the creationist version that you are promoting.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You liken me and my comments to Creationists and JW's.

Unlike Creationists and JW's, I have prevented evidence.

Like Creationists and JW's, you have not refuted my evidence.

Instead, like the Creationists and JW's that you deride, you duck and dodge and resort to name-calling.

put me on ignore if you have issues.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yadda, yadda, yadda. It's plain to all that you did not refute my assertions. It's plain to all that you can not refute that gods are nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings.

It is just terrible of me to question dogma. I should know better. Just accept your religious claims without question.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You liken me and my comments to Creationists and JW's.

Unlike Creationists and JW's, I have prevented evidence.

Like Creationists and JW's, you have not refuted my evidence.

Instead, like the Creationists and JW's that you deride, you duck and dodge and resort to name-calling.

Do you mean your gish gallop? I saw it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I see that you did not dispute that Atlas is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Superman. There is no reason to believe that Atlas or Superman are, in any sense, real entities.

I see that you did not dispute that Shiva is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Wonderwoman. There is no reason to believe that Shiva or Wonderwoman are, in any sense, real entities.

The argument I made about the actions of men is that they create(d) gods. The creations of man's imaginings are not real entities - not Atlas, not Superman. Do I really need to continue to make the argument to specify all of man's creations like Spiderman or Mighty Mouse or Mickey Mouse or Ra or UNkulunkulu?

If we take away all the gods that are the creations of man's imaginings, how many gods, which gods, are we left with - NONE.

I had one request and it is clear you will not respond to that. I see no reason to continue wasting my time.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

This is your post #2639...(my emphasis)


If you can show a post preceding 2639 where I asked for proof, I will apologize. On the other hand...

Apologize for what?

 

[ecco]

You have failed to show atheists KNOW there are no gods. So the rest of this is creationist thrashing anout.

More yadda, yadda, yadda distractions o avoid admitting you cannot dispute or counter my argument that gods are nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings.

In any case, I never made any claims about what atheists know or don't know. My argument is based on knowledge that is available to everyone. You are aware of it. You have been unable to dispute it.

You can still be atheist despite this but you creationists demand otherwise.

What? That's rather unintelligible.

 

[ecco]

In this claim that you cannot and have not supported, you are behaving no different then a creationist. All the tricks and fallacies.

What tricks and fallacies?

There are people who believe that Unahlahnauhi is a god. My contention is that Unahlahnauhi is nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings. Is that a trick? Is that a fallacy? If you believe that is a fallacy, then please present evidence to the contrary.

There are people who believe that Anhur is a god. My contention is that Anhur is nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings. Is that a trick? Is that a fallacy? If you believe that is a fallacy, then please present evidence to the contrary.

I've made essentially the same argument over the past half dozen posts. In the past half dozen posts, I've given you the opportunity to provide evidence against my argument. You haven't been able to do so.


You cannot provide evidence against my argument because you know that Unahlahnauhi and Anhur are not gods.

You cannot provide evidence against my argument because you know that Unahlahnauhi and Anhur are merely the creation of man's imaginings.

 

[ecco]

It is just terrible of me to question dogma. I should know better. Just accept your religious claims without question.

You can accept them, or you can reject them.

What you have been unable to do is refute them.

 

[ecco]

put me on ignore if you have issues.

No. I'd rather show up your hypocrisy for all to see.