By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - How to Destroy an Athiests in a argument! (Updated with poll)

 

Who won?

The Athiest 40 70.18%
 
The creationist 17 29.82%
 
Total:57
Ocelot on 13 December 2012

As there is no god theres no possible way for a christian to destory an atheist.



Around the Network
Player1x3 on 13 December 2012
KungKras said:
Player1x3 said:
KungKras said:
Player1x3 said:

This and this is how you destroy an atheist in an argument

Are you serious? WLC is a clown, he doesn't destroy anyone.


Keep the damage control classy :)

It really is Sam Harris that destroys him. I mean seriously, WLC is advocating the slaughter of children in that debate.


I mean seriously, Sam is using the pathetic '' bUT dan who created G0d ???!11!'' drivel. It's nice when we take 1 sentence out of context out of a 2 hour long debate...its atheists #1 tactic

I mean seriously, even Dawkins is too much of a bitch to debate William, even tho he's been called out million times by his sheep followers.



richardhutnik on 13 December 2012
Porcupine_I said:
richardhutnik said:
badgenome said:
This also works for "How to argue for Neo Keynesianism."

The difference though is, "We are all Keynesians now", including Obama, no matter how many protest to the contrary about Obama.  And I suggest HIGHLY people look up what a Keynesian is before they get on me for saying it.

Obama never was and never will be from Kenya! Unless you can show a birth certificate to prove otherwise!

Gee, I hope that is a joke retort

 

Ok, before I get grief, PLEASE go here people: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics



DaRev on 13 December 2012
KungKras said:
DaRev said:
Talal said:
I don't want to get in an argument, and I'm not taking any side, however, the person claiming that something that cannot be seen nor felt needs to prove that it exists, not the other way around. It's like me saying that I have an invisible friend, you don't need proof to tell me that it doesn't exist the fact that you can't see it nor feel it is proof enough. I however need to prove to you that it exists.

ha ha, that's pure rubbish! I'll simply say, to counter your point, that you need the right TOOLS and dedicated RESEARCH to PROVE whether somethng is true or not.For scientists don't go around proving things without the right TOOLS and dedicated RESEARCH. So my question to you would be what TOOLS and how much RESEARCH have you put into proving whether God exists?

What does tools and dedicated research have to do with anything. The non-existance of Oden is just as unfalsifiable as the non-existance of Jahve.

Yeah, because you know millions or people and diverse cultures and countries and governments that believe in Odin, just as they do God and thus the truth about Odin is worth dedicated tools and research.





Nintendo Network ID: DaRevren

I love My Wii U, and the potential it brings to gaming.

beatles1082 on 13 December 2012
richardhutnik said:
Porcupine_I said:
richardhutnik said:
badgenome said:
This also works for "How to argue for Neo Keynesianism."

The difference though is, "We are all Keynesians now", including Obama, no matter how many protest to the contrary about Obama.  And I suggest HIGHLY people look up what a Keynesian is before they get on me for saying it.

Obama never was and never will be from Kenya! Unless you can show a birth certificate to prove otherwise!

Gee, I hope that is a joke retort

 


it's way funnier if it's not



Around the Network
Dr.Grass on 13 December 2012
dsgrue3 said:
Mnementh said:
irstupid said:
Alara317 said:
HesAPooka said:
I'm not religious, but I also don't go around bashing people who are.

Criticizing religion is "There's no substantial proof in god or the spiritual.  Until you can prove it, I can't take your claims as anything more than empty claims."

That's the most pathetic argument ever invented.

It has the exact same counter argument.  "Prove that God doesn't exist"

Prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist.

Or Leprechauns, or Buddha, or fairies, or life on distant planets, or that there aren't infinite universes, etc, etc, etc. 


The Buddha existed. For goodness sake.



richardhutnik on 13 December 2012
Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:
badgenome said:
This also works for "How to argue for Neo Keynesianism."

The difference though is, "We are all Keynesians now", including Obama, no matter how many protest to the contrary about Obama.  And I suggest HIGHLY people look up what a Keynesian is before they get on me for saying it.

Well actually to be fair....  If you told John Maynard Keynes was alive now, and you told him you wanted to raise taxes on the rich, he'd probably slap the shit out of you.  Tax increases should only ever come when the economy was is booming.

Obama has essentially moved from Keynsian economics too... I don't even know what you'd call it.   The only term i could come up with is Neo-Liberal fantasy economics... and well, that's just insulting.

I can't think of a single economic theory that would support his debt ceiling negotiations position for example.

I feel like this might deserve it's own thread... but i'm not good enough to create a borderline trolling OP that generates discussion.

Actually, "tax the rich" ends up coming up because of a push to balance the budget.  I am sure Keynes would say now that focus is insane (I believe Krugman says the same thing).  Keynes would say stoke the stimulus like mad to get the economy going.

There are few, if any, economists who would advocate anything in the fiscal cliff at this point actually.  They would NOT say to do budget cuts now, and would not advocate budget cuts either.  

Actually, it does deserve its own thread.  Badgenome went off and brought that in here, and I was trying to say that Keynsian economics, in some form, is the baseline everyone operates out of these days.  It is taken for granted as right.



Dr.Grass on 13 December 2012
beatles1082 said:


This is the STUPIDEST. Argument in existence. My blood boils when I hear atheists spewing this utter crap. You're just jumping on the exact same bandwagon you're supposedly decrying.


You're just too stupid to see it.



dsgrue3 on 13 December 2012
Player1x3 said:
KungKras said:
Player1x3 said:
KungKras said:
Player1x3 said:

This and this is how you destroy an atheist in an argument

Are you serious? WLC is a clown, he doesn't destroy anyone.


Keep the damage control classy :)

It really is Sam Harris that destroys him. I mean seriously, WLC is advocating the slaughter of children in that debate.


I mean seriously, Sam is using the pathetic '' bUT dan who created G0d ???!11!'' drivel. It's nice when we take 1 sentence out of context out of a 2 hour long debate...its atheists #1 tactic

I mean seriously, even Dawkins is too much of a bitch to debate William, even tho he's been called out million times by his sheep followers.


I'm watching the "Does God Exist" source. Only 16 minutes in so far, but William has stated that infinity is an idea, not something that exists physically. Pretty powerful statement, actually. And would counter a source of infinity, i.e. God. 



Jay520 on 13 December 2012

I've noticed that most Christians on here happen to be Nintendo fans. What does this mean?