Official Atheist/Non-Believer Appreciation Thread. Vol. Yes we exist

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by jerryjones

i like this thread i thinks its a pretty dope discussion, i think alot of yall atheist believe in the god principle more than you think, this might b controversial but at the highest levels, minus dogma, i dont really think there's to much a difference between theism and atheism

Religious people-Believe there is a God, without a doubt.

Atheist-Ranges from doubt that there is a God to belief that God's non-existence is fact.

Extreme opposites of the spectrum.

I may not be atheist at all..... my beliefs are simple as "I don't know". There may or may not be a god but given the evidence presented I haveno reason to be a believer. Again even if I where compelled to believe in a higher being, which one do I chose? I like to believe a ticket into the"after-life" isn't a crap-shoot. From a Christian point of view, everyone else that is not Christian is an atheist/non-believer. If you don'tbelieve in Jesus, you might as well believe in nothing. If one of the religions happens to be the correct one.....a majority of the people living on thisplanet are going to be taking Ls in the after-life.

 

[essential1]

SuperAntigen wrote:

---

I will be brief...

Kicktionair wrote:

---

Im saying if I haven't seen it I really can't believe it...proof must be shown with the claim

AntonLaVey wrote:

---

Originally Posted by untouchable jc

Jesus is the only way to eternal life... Good luck if you don't make the choice

Say word? He told you this himself?

DMoney82 wrote:

---

God who?

SoCalBoy23 wrote:

---

god is just an imaginary friend for grown-ups

Originally Posted by J Dilla Himself

And i realized that god doesnt really exist... i also know theres no such thing as a god...

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

i'm not talking about a book written by hundreds of different authors that's been revised and reworded throughout the times. i'm asking if you have a reliable human source that was in contact with god or jesus, or a letter addressed to you personally by either of them, or if they even told you themselves.

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

i'm just having to laugh because blind faith is so ridiculous. it's like, "let's worship this invisible god". you never see him, hear him, or feel him... you believe you know his point of views and the way he believes you should live your life, yet you haven't heard him say it his self...

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay


i can't speak for other atheists, but i have a pretty much general argument (or reason) as to why i choose not to lead a religious lifestyle. i know that i don't want to believe and worship any deity without first having proof he/she/it exists...

The quoted statements above, made by some of my NT brethren, highlight a trend of logic I have come to notice amongst so-called "non-believers".






And to prove my point, I ask y'all this-- "What exactly is AIR"--you know, that thing we "supposedly" breathe in.

We can't see it, hear it, touch it, smell it, or taste it; simply stated, we can't sense it directly so why do YOU believe in it (and I KNOW YOU DO).




air has proof of existence... That's what you are not getting.. On a windy day what do you think the wind is... AIR... It is air motion.. I can feel theair hitting my face...

No one has given proof that god exists that's the difference.. You may feel "God's presence" but have you have not stated why it is 100%god who is in the presence

In life is something cannot be 100% proven you are allowed to believe it is truth but must be skeptical, although no one really knows (atheist or believer) theburden on proof is on the defendant (religion).. And without God or Jesus specifically there is no proof.. Where as evolution is an actual thing.

 

[cartier urkel]

Not trying to start nothing, but most of ya'll athiests must be non blacks for the most part, its NO WAY a black person who has God fearing parents becomesa non believer.

 

[callhimar]

Yes it is completely possible that he was just a wise man with formulating his own opinions but then we have to go into the Qur'an in-depth. There are various verses in the Qur'an that were unknown to the Arabs living at the time and the Prophet himself could not even explain them. One famous incident was when the people confronted him about verse 53 of chapter 20 which claims plants were created in pairs - male and females. The people ridiculed him and called him crazy for suggesting that plants could be male or female and there was no possible way he could explain it. Needless to say, with modern science, we do know that plants do have sexes. Another famous example is verse 47 of chapter 51 which states:

"The heavens, We have built them with power. And verily, We are expanding it "

The companions of the Prophet and classical scholars alike were very curious about this verse but there was no possible explanation of it at the time. During the time of the Prophet, it was accepted as the "ghaib" or the hidden knowledge of Allah. Once again, modern science has shown that this fits in line with the Big Bang Theory. There are many, many more examples of these kind of verses in the Qur'an and there has been many books written by both classical and modern Islamic scholars. Like you acknowledged, Muhammad was an illetrate man with no formal education. Science and technology was severely lacking in the Arabian peninsula during his time. The Qur'an is littered with information that was unknown to even the most learned men at the time. There are clear verses in the Qur'an that mention the spherical shape of the Earth, the Big Bang Theory, human embryology that was unknown at the time, the water cycle, etc. To add to all this, he would have to have been a genius in warfare and military strategy, psychology, poetry and linguistics. All this for an uneducated man is unimaginable.

While this may have been unknown to many Arabs, we don't have much proof of this. It is remarkable that he made such a statement about the plants, but itcould be attributed to his travels and speaking to many knowledgeable people or again, a deduction of common sense. I'd believe this before I'd believeit came from God, but that's just me. The second statement is very vague and doesn't really explain much. It is along the lines of the predictions of aNostradamus where you say something vague and later on it is looked at as prophetic.

He may very well have been a highly intelligent individual. Einstein came up with numerous theories, but do I think they came from God? Of course not. I wouldlike you to show me where in the Qur'an it is explicitly stated that the earth is round, human embryology, and the Big Bang Theory. While I have read agreat deal on the Prophets life, I have not in fact read the Qur'an.

Also, I'll come back with a couple of other errors I remember reading of. I came across a few in the book written by Ali Dashti, 23 Years. Are you familiarwith it?

So for every other miracle that was attributed to Muhammad such as splitting the moon, the cave and the spider incident, etc are considered minor miracles because it they are not present today. These were signs from God to show his prophethood to the people around him. It was not out of his power that he was performing these miracles but it was God giving it to him.
But it is stated numerous times that he is just a man, not a holy being. Also, if God were to preform these miracles, why not just preform theother minor miracles that were asked of him during his time in Mecca when his followers were being ostracized and killed? Wouldn't this have made theProphets experience much easier?

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by Cartier Urkel

Not trying to start nothing, but most of ya'll athiests must be non blacks for the most part, its NO WAY a black person who has God fearing parents becomes a non believer.

most atheists come from parents who are believers..

 

[chris boshs neck]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

^see...that's what I hate the most about an atheist.

they cannot be content with their beliefs.....inevitably...they have to put down(note, not DISPUTE but rather INSULT) the alternate view

thanks for generalizing

 

[chris boshs neck]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

^see...that's what I hate the most about an atheist.

they cannot be content with their beliefs.....inevitably...they have to put down(note, not DISPUTE but rather INSULT) the alternate view

thanks for generalizing

 

[nawlinsjunkie]

Originally Posted by RKO2004

Originally Posted by ACE BOMBER

Well as terrible as it sounds... I actually enjoy a decent amount of the bible, but pretty much just the parts that are relevant to an everyday life. There's just a lot of stuff in it that will never sit right with me. Nonetheless as I said before, I feel that there are countless lesson to be learned. I know that makes it sound like I am kinda half christian half not. Call it what you may, I just really can't buy into the whole thing. Parts of it work for me, parts of it don't. Now you wanna talk about going in circles?

You do sound like a border line believer though. This is honestly a first. I haven't seen this before.

thats fine, when I went to catholic school, even there we were told to not take all the stories in the Bible literally. my school was the most liberalchristian institution ive ever been to in my life

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by chris boshs neck

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

^see...that's what I hate the most about an atheist.

they cannot be content with their beliefs.....inevitably...they have to put down(note, not DISPUTE but rather INSULT) the alternate view

thanks for generalizing

He said 'most', Neck.

Whatever, he's right. You shouldn't insult people's beliefs. Sometimes you can't help them.

 

[nawlinsjunkie]

Originally Posted by chris boshs neck

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

^see...that's what I hate the most about an atheist.

they cannot be content with their beliefs.....inevitably...they have to put down(note, not DISPUTE but rather INSULT) the alternate view

thanks for generalizing

co-sign. I have no issues with people who believe in God. my boy is Catholic and very religious for the most part (no sex before marriage, sayingprayers before EVERY meal, etc). but he accepts the views of all religions and he doesnt say @#$% like Jesus is the only way. It's when followers forcetheir beliefs on you, and tell you that doing otherwise=you going to hell, thats what pisses me off. And people saying Christianity is being targeted, thatsbecause its the main religion in the US, and it unfortunately takes too much involvement in politics. Who are Christians to say no to abortions, stem cellresearch, gay marriage, etc? Theyre speaking only for their faith, so it pisses me off when they try to influence the law for all people using their set ofbeliefs

belief in God should be a personal, private matter, because everyone has their own way to connect with God.

 

[mo matik]

AR, it is important to note that the Qur'an does not specifically state itself to be a book of science.

What is key to remember here though, is that there are simply no contradictions.

So when in 57:25 it states:
"And We also sent down iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind…" (Quran 57:25)

The verb used for "sent down" is anzalna and it is peculiar because it is not used in describing the other parts of our world.

Iron is a product of the fission that takes place in extremely large stars. Stars larger, and hotter than our Sun. When too much iron is produced, theyexplode forming SuperNovas, which send iron out into outerspace.

"There is also evidence for older supernova events: Enhanced levels of iron-60 in deep-sea sediments have been interpreted as indications that a supernova explosion occurred within 90 light-years of the sun about 5 million years ago. Iron-60 is a radioactive isotope of iron, formed in supernova explosions, which decays with a half life of 1.5 million years. An enhanced presence of this isotope in a geologic layer indicates the recent nucleosynthesis of elements nearby in space and their subsequent transport to the earth (perhaps as part of dust grains)."http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/562/#_ftn5149

 

[phenomkickz]

Jesus

 

[socalboy23]

Originally Posted by JDashR

In its most simplest terms here is what i believe:

Religion and god are a man made construct to give people hope, and to give them a sense of purpose in life. I feel that it has been passed down generation to generation, by the devoted, as it was simply all they were taught to believe from a young age.

I feel that if one simply believes in themselves to follow the concept of natural law, accept the good and bad in other people, and realize the effect of science/evolution etc, there would be no need for religion or a belief in any deity.

co-sign
and organized religion is just business, im an athiest, but im down to become a priest or reverend or pastor or whatever they are called, there is this huge*%* church here in east los angeles, looks like a mansion, the priest's house is right next to it and it is bigger than the damn church, and homeboydidn't pay a dime to have it built, true story, im down for a mansion haha

 

[hybridsoldier23]

checking in

 

[jerryjones]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by jerryjones

i like this thread i thinks its a pretty dope discussion, i think alot of yall atheist believe in the god principle more than you think, this might b controversial but at the highest levels, minus dogma, i dont really think there's to much a difference between theism and atheism

Religious people-Believe there is a God, without a doubt.

Atheist-Ranges from doubt that there is a God to belief that God's non-existence is fact.

Extreme opposites of the spectrum.

I may not be atheist at all..... my beliefs are simple as "I don't know". There may or may not be a god but given the evidence presented I have no reason to be a believer. Again even if I where compelled to believe in a higher being, which one do I chose? I like to believe a ticket into the "after-life" isn't a crap-shoot. From a Christian point of view, everyone else that is not Christian is an atheist/non-believer. If you don't believe in Jesus, you might as well believe in nothing. If one of the religions happens to be the correct one.....a majority of the people living on this planet are going to be taking Ls in the after-life.

thats kinda what im sayin...from reading most of the post in here it seems like you guys don't believe in the concept of god as it is widelyunderstood in regards to the 3 major western religions (judaism , islam and christianity), also it seems that most people in the thread are unable to reconcilethemselves with the dogma of these religions (a bearded man in the sky determining the fate of all who walk the earth,eternal damnation for believing this orthat,eternal damnation for not beliveing this person ever existed, unequal justice admistered amongst the just and the wicked, concepts of heaven ,hell etc)

while many of you dont believe in a god narrowly defined along these lines i think a more wide ranging approach to the concept of god and also the question ofwhat god could or couldn't be, or whether even god exists or not might yeild a different perception in your minds on whether god exist or not...

for example to some god simply is the creative force of the universe

to others conciousness itself is god

 

[superantigen]

Originally Posted by bangtcg

antigen, air isn't really a thing dude--instead it is a combination of things (oxygen, carbon, nitrogen etc..). The air on earth is not made up of the same substances as air on mars.

I think a better question is, "what is oxygen and how can we prove it?" Apparently you want proof through the five senses? Well, oxygen is a colorless, odorless and tasteless. It makes no noise and you can't feel anything with the human touch because its a gas (I hope I don't have to establish what a gas is for you).

Obviously, several of the people in this thread are wrong to use the five senses as a standard to believe in things. So everybody should just trash that.

But anyways, antigen, we believe in "air" and have proof of it because humans have studied and recorded oxygen. It can be proven to exists over and over and over again like the sun rising in the morning. We can contain it and give it to NFL players when they need extra oxygen in their muscles.

Some people want that same standard when it comes believing a higher power.

Ahhhhh now we're actually getting somewhere...

Of course AIR is "thing"...you're actively breathing it in right now. Furthermore, I KNOW it's acombination of things like oxygen, carbon, nitrogen etc. but realize that I didn't ask y'all to describe for the PARTS of the whole. I asked for adescription of THE WHOLE.

See, it would be relatively easy to characterize and define, via at least some of your senses, those individual elementsreferred to as oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen. But doing so doesn't characterize and define to us/for us, what exactly AIR is as a substance. WHY? BecauseAir is not solely Oxygen or Nitrogen, or Carbon...etc. AIR is a predominant combination of all three of these gases so in asking for ANYONE to describe to me,via the main 5 senses, what AIR is, I need that, and not a breakdown and description of the parts that constitute AIR. AIR is a substance (supposedly--if iteven exists) in its own right hence why I asked about AIR and not oxygen or nitrogen or carbon.

The better question WOULD NOT be "what is oxygen and how can we prove it?" You only think so because that'sthe EASIER QUESTION for YOU TO ANSWER...

I am very aware of this thing we refer to as oxygen and quite frankly, I didn't ask about it simply because Oxygendoes not connote AIR. As you presented yourself, AIR is a combination/mixture of gases so why should my questions be addressed to only one of those gases, whenI'm interested in the whole. AIR = [a predominate makeup of nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon]. [A predominate makeup of nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon] =/=Oxygen, which is what you want.

What you want is very much akin to the notion of me asking you to describe for me, what exactly it means to be human--andyou answering by describing for me, what it means to be a black person in America, or white person in America, or a Latino person in America, or an Asianperson in America. All you did was tell me about some aspect, some portion/and address for me, some part of being a specific type of person (human) at aspecific place in the world. You DID NOT tell me what it means to human, by considering the whole scale of human life, and its inherent cultures, all aroundthe world.

***

Now, if you're suggesting that everyone trash the system of belief that is entirely based on ones ability to sense (see, touch, touch, hear, smell, andtaste) an object worth scrutinizing, then you mean to suggest and confirm what I've been saying all along; which is, the fact that the Atheistic logic isinnately flawed as a consequence of being rooted--firmly-- in the ability of the five senses to percieve and/or have/provide knowledge or perception of somesituation or fact ALWAYS. Or rather, i should say, as a consequence of being rooted in the logic that "if I can't sense something (oohhhh for the sakeof argument, let's just say something like God) then He cannot possibly exist". So, I suppose by implication, you're suggesting that this kind oflogic is trash huhhh...

...

***

Now, "humans have studied and recorded oxygen"...really...well....cool story bro. Notice how in order for you to even have anything worth discussingin rebuttal to what I have asked and presented, you HAVE TO talk exclusively about Oxygen. Notice that.

Yet again, and as previously stated, the question that I proposed in my first post and have proposed since then, is unconcerned with the gaseous element knownto us as Oxygen. I asked about AIR which is a substance NOT EXCLUSIVELY OXYGEN, but rather, a substance composed of MORE THAN OXYGEN. That said, why are youinsistant on describing for me, this PART (that we refer to as Oxygen), when my questions are asking for anyone to elucidate for me, via the five senses, THEWHOLE (that we refer to as AIR).

That said, using whatever logic you have, please describe for me, what AIR sounds like, taste like, smells like, looks like, and what it feels like when youTOUCH IT. Now understand--I didn't ask for what Oxygen sounds, taste, smells, looks, and feels like when you touch it...I asked for/about AIR...

Now to directly address another point in your statement--"humans have studied and recorder oxygen".... When you say HUMANS have studied..., whoexactly are you referring to. Yourself or scientists (past, current, and future). Because unless YOU HAVE DIRECTLY STUDIED and have SENSED Air, then yourargument is baseless.

I mean, the argument espoused by you Atheists against the Bible being a source of evidence for God's existence is the fact that, (1) The Bible, forgenerations now, has been written for and by man...and (2) the fact that no current believer can provide tangible evidence via the 5 senses, of proof God'sexistence, according to y'all. But wait a minute, you can believe in the concept that is AIR even though you yourself have probably never tested for it,and your belief in it comes from the "evidence" gathered by men/women (past, current, future) who you've personally never met. And secondly, youcan believe in it even though, as has been showed for 2-3 pages now, you cannot "sense" this thing known us AIR. So essentially, your belief in AIRis merely a belief in word of mouth--now how is this any different from me, as a believer, accepting the documentation in the Bible that says that God exist(on top of the fact that depending on whom you ask, God has been sensed).

I'm just using the vary same logic y'all insist on using--nothin' more...

Ohhh and also, no one has yet to describe for me, what AIR sounds like, taste like, smells like, looks like, and what it feels like when you TOUCHIT...

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey


OK AFTER READING THIS, I'M CONVINCED YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT AIR IS.

air definition

air (er, ar)

noun

1. the elastic, invisible mixture of gases (chiefly nitrogen and oxygen, as well as hydrogen, carbon dioxide, argon, neon, helium, etc.) that surrounds the earth; atmosphere
2. space above the earth; sky
3. 1. a movement of air; breeze; wind
   2. cool, refreshing air; fresh air

1. Objects makes sounds through vibrations and friction with other substances, this isn't a property exclusive to air. It's physics. Air is matter, it makes a sound when it rubs against other forms of matter. If you leave a subject of water uninterrupted it doesn't make a sound by itself. A inanimate object is incapable of producing a sound until it is set in motion against other forms of matter. (Hence things not being able to produce sound in a VACUUM) DO YOU WANT AIR TO SPEAK TO YOU?

[h2]Physics of sound[/h2]
The mechanical vibrations that can be interpreted as sound are able to travel through all forms of matter: gases, liquids, solids, and plasmas. The matter that supports the sound is called the medium. Sound cannot travel through vacuum.




from wiki

Although "the speed of sound" is commonly used to refer specifically to the speed of sound waves in air, the speed of sound can be measured in virtually any substance. Sound travels faster in liquids and non-porous solids (5,120 m/s in iron) than it does in air, traveling about 4.3 times faster in water (1,484 m/s) than in air at 20 degrees Celsius.

There has to be a disturbance to matter for sound to be created....things don't create sound by themselves. A guitar isn't going to play itself.

2. For someone to feel cold or warmth or a substance it has to be tangible......heat can only flow through matter, therefore AIR exists.

3. AIR is usually oxygen and nitrogen which are both odorless....but the properties of air can vary...add pollutions like METHANE GAS or SULFUR GAS....you get a smell or even color.

4. FLOURESCENT OXYGEN-water is colorless, but when you add dyes to it you can visualize it same can be done with air.

5. When air blows at a high velocity (hurricanes) it carries objects.....again air has MASS to it. AIR is matter. AIR creates FRICTION. AIR EXISTS.

BDW Your original argument is still flawed for the following reasons:

You called what I said earlier about the pigs farting rainbows and pooping skittles trivial. Your absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence argument is inherently trivial. You made a good point tho, we both don't know for sure if god exists (neither do we know whether dragons, unicorns, mermaids, fairies and the lochness monster exist)....but I'll treat the existence of a god like I treat the existence of all other things fictional. No evidence=doesn't exist until I see evidence.

Don't equate something like air existing to God existing, it's a terrible argument. We don't live in the dark ages, we have evidence that air is matter. I was at least able to offer enough evidence that air exists, you haven't given me anything to work with for god's existence.

You're convinced that I don't even know what AIR is? Well I am playing devil'sadvocate so i suppose, with respect to this thread, and the argument being presented, I DON'T know what AIR. I'm completely fine withthat. Now the real question is CAN YOU, as the enlightened astute individual you are (and as I've asked for many times now), [color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]tell me what AIR sounds like, taste like, smells like, looks like, and what it feels like when you TOUCH IT[/color].

The assertion that "AIR exists" is quite the same as the assertion that "God exists". We can all claim that something exist. The key is,can we prove that it exist. The central argument in the Atheistic belief in God's nonexistence solely revolves around, and is DEPENDENT on the logic--whichstems from a supposed lack of evidence--that postulates that "If I can't sense God with my five sense--sight, hearing, touch, taste, andsmell--meaning that if there is no perceptible evidence for God, then He clearly must not exist." If this is the rational for Atheistic thinking (forhardcore Atheists) then none of you can believe in AIR then...correct?

***

Two points: A & B

A

1. Your very own definition of AIR: ...an INVISIBLE MIXTURE OF [Different] gases. Key words here, "different" and "mixture".

2. "Objects makes sounds through vibrations and friction with other substances"...
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________


So if AIR is a mixture of different gases, inherently different "substances", referring to Point #2 in A (your very own words), shouldn't thesevery different substances--inherently different gases--make a sound all by themselves as they arein constant friction with each other?

In other words, AIR is a composition of Nitrogen, Oxygen, Carbon and some other irrelevant substances. These gases are all different and they are constantly incontact with each other--Yes? So if sound is generated from the vibrations that stem from the frictions created between two different substances/mixtures, thenAIR by itself, should technically be generating a sound all by itself.

Now I don't know about you, but I am still in my bed, as a just woke up about a few hours ago, in a room filled with AIR. And yet, I don't here thissound it supposedly makes even though it's composed of different substances that are constantly vibrating against each other, and/or in friction with eachother. So really though, where's all this sound that AIR, using your very own definitions, is supposedly creating?
[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]
"A inanimate object is incapable of producing a sound until it is set in motion against other forms of matter."[/color]

But the substance we refer to as AIR is NOT AN INANIMATE OBJECT. In fact, AIR is probably one of those few things in our world that is forever in a state ofmotion. I'm sure you've heard of the principle that is known as "AIR circulation" correct? So then again, why don't you hear this veryanimated AIR as it circulated about in your room?

A guitar doesn't make a sound because intrinsically, it is an INANIMATE OBJECT that is composed of FIXED HOMOGENEOUS PARTS that don't react with eachother unless an external force acts on them. Sound Air (edit @ 2.57 pm eastern time...

), however, is a VERY ANIMATED SUBSTANCE composed of LOOSE HETEROGENEOUS PARTSthat are constantly interacting with each other irrespective on whether an outside force "acts" upon it.

And yet, it still doesn't produce a sound exclusive to its very own self--WHY?

The answer, AIR as a substance is incapable of generating a sound that is innate to it and only it. Proof of this, let's look back to your very ownevidence--which is the basis of point B.

B

1. The matter that supports the sound is called the medium. Sound cannot travel through vacuum.

2. The mechanical vibrations that can be interpreted as sound are able to travel through all forms of matter: gases, liquids, solids, and plasmas. The matter that supports the sound is called the medium. Sound cannot travel through vacuum.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You just shot your foot your very own foot with point #1. Why--because you just, whether you realize it or not, showed that AIR is but the MEDIUM through whichsound travels. That's exactly why sound cannot travel through a vacuum--because the medium of support, which is AIR, is nonexistent in a vacuum.

Now do you know what a MEDIUM is?...

A medium is merely the "unit", some unit, through which some process is facilitated. A medium IS NOT the source of the process, but rather, thecomplex in which the process is dispersed. But lets refer to a more accurate definition:

medium |ˈmēdēəm|
noun ( pl. -dia |-dēə| or -diums )
1 an agency or means of doing something : using the latest technology as a medium for job creation | their primitive valuables acted as a medium of exchange.
• a means by which something is communicated or expressed : here the Welsh language is the medium of instruction.

What does this mean with respect to AIR? Well, using your very own definition in conjunction with that of a dictionary, what this tells us that AIR (as amedium--if it in fact exists) is NOT the source of sound of any kind. Rather, it is the means, the complex, the system, the process by which sound ORIGINATINGFROM ANOTHER SOURCE is communicated or expressed.

Air is the matter which is the medium that supports sound. In other word, AIR is the matter which is the medium THROUGH WHICH sound travels--and not thesource/origination of said sound...

***

AIR is usually oxygen and nitrogen which are both odorless....but the properties of air can vary...add pollutions like METHANE GAS or SULFUR GAS....you get a smell or even color.

Just more cases of you invalidating yourself even more. If you need to "add pollutions like METHANE GAS or SULFUR GAS" to "detect AIR",because AIR by itself is undetectable, than all you're actually identifying is the change brought on by the METHANE GAS and/or the SULFUR GAS.

If I am trying to see the "color" of water, and I do so by adding a pigment to the water, causing the water to become red, is that evidence that thewater is naturally red, or merely proof that the pigment I added was red and/or initiated some chemical reaction that resulted in the precipitation of a redcolor...

On another note, i like how you didn't even reference my previous post on the very subject of "smell"...maybe you realized that what you do infact smell IN THE AIR, is not innate property of the "AIR" itself, but rather evidence of the diffusion of certain molecules, from some object, thatinteracts with your olfactory bulb...

...

4. FLOURESCENT OXYGEN-water is colorless, but when you add dyes to it you can visualize it same can be done with air.

Already threw this out the window...

Are you detecting the "color" of the AIR or are you just visualizing the activities of the dyes...

Furthermore, you're referecing OXYGEN--who here is talking about OXYGEN (by itself). I'm only asked about AIR (which is a mixture of gases) in all thetime I have been involved in this post. Why--because I am concerned with the WHOLE OF THE SUBSTANCE we breathe in, not a fraction of it. Try again. I'm notgoing to make this easy for y'all.

5. When air blows at a high velocity (hurricanes) it carries objects.....again air has MASS to it. AIR is matter. AIR creates FRICTION. AIR EXISTS.

Prove to me that AIR exists then. If you've believe in it, then you've sensed it--so please describe the substance we refer to as AIR the way via thesensory complexes.

Tell me what it looks like, feels like when you TOUCH IT, taste like, smells like, sounds like? Thus far, you have failed to do this, and in weak attempts tocorroborate your opinion by citing "outside evidence" did not prove anything.

Like I said, I'm playing devil's advocate in an attempt to shine light on the hypocrisy that that is the Atheistic line of thinking/logic. And I'vedone so by showing how ya choose to believe in something you can't sense, but are so quick to attempt to invalidate the notion of God because you can'tsense him.

BDW Your original argument is still flawed for the following reasons:

You called what I said earlier about the pigs farting rainbows and pooping skittles trivial. Your absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence argument is inherently trivial. You made a good point tho, we both don't know for sure if god exists (neither do we know whether dragons, unicorns, mermaids, fairies and the lochness monster exist)....but I'll treat the existence of a god like I treat the existence of all other things fictional. No evidence=doesn't exist until I see evidence.

Don't equate something like air existing to God existing, it's a terrible argument. We don't live in the dark ages, we have evidence that air is matter. I was at least able to offer enough evidence that air exists, you haven't given me anything to work with for god's existence.

Like I said, playing devil's advocate, SHOW/DESCRIBE TO ME how AIR exist if one is unable to detect it with the 5 senses? That's what this all comesdown to.

"We both don't know that God exist"--really, (not playing devil's advocate anymore) prove to me that He doesn't?

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

my rebuttal to your following statements is this: we are much more capable of sensing air than we are of sensing god. we can't see air? have you ever breathed in a cold winter? you most definitely can hear wind blow when it blows its' hardest. and we definitely can feel it, so that's a lot more than i can say for god isn't it? just the simple fact that we breathe it in on a constant basis should be proof enough that air exists because how else would we be living? and just for the record, atheism isn't just about not having proof that something exists, but also being capable of seeing that a religious lifestyle is not in your best interest.

Eigghhhh...only because I need to go get up out this bed and go handle bizness, read all the things I just posted above.

Originally Posted by Nako XL


you might be the dumbest person on nt...

Ahhhhh...an example of the vivid display of the defensive mechanism of the NT organism after he's been shut down in a debate. When you have nothing else tooffer, just hurl insults--

...

Don't tell me that you have nothing to offer besides "SMOG" and "VAPOR"...

At least your boy Anton is making this somewhat worthwhile...

Ohh and please don't flatter yourself...I don't take things that serious to the point where I am reporting people. Dirty, If I've contacted you inany way of form regarding Nako's comment towards me, please post it. I will RETIRE MY SN if such evidence exists...

...

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by jerryjones

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by jerryjones

i like this thread i thinks its a pretty dope discussion, i think alot of yall atheist believe in the god principle more than you think, this might b controversial but at the highest levels, minus dogma, i dont really think there's to much a difference between theism and atheism

Religious people-Believe there is a God, without a doubt.

Atheist-Ranges from doubt that there is a God to belief that God's non-existence is fact.

Extreme opposites of the spectrum.

I may not be atheist at all..... my beliefs are simple as "I don't know". There may or may not be a god but given the evidence presented I have no reason to be a believer. Again even if I where compelled to believe in a higher being, which one do I chose? I like to believe a ticket into the "after-life" isn't a crap-shoot. From a Christian point of view, everyone else that is not Christian is an atheist/non-believer. If you don't believe in Jesus, you might as well believe in nothing. If one of the religions happens to be the correct one.....a majority of the people living on this planet are going to be taking Ls in the after-life.

thats kinda what im sayin...from reading most of the post in here it seems like you guys don't believe in the concept of god as it is widely understood in regards to the 3 major western religions (judaism , islam and christianity), also it seems that most people in the thread are unable to reconcile themselves with the dogma of these religions (a bearded man in the sky determining the fate of all who walk the earth,eternal damnation for believing this or that,eternal damnation for not beliveing this person ever existed, unequal justice admistered amongst the just and the wicked, concepts of heaven ,hell etc)

while many of you dont believe in a god narrowly defined along these lines i think a more wide ranging approach to the concept of god and also the question of what god could or couldn't be, or whether even god exists or not might yeild a different perception in your minds on whether god exist or not...

for example to some god simply is the creative force of the universe

to others conciousness itself is god

Doesn't relegating the word 'god' to the 'it's however you interpret the word' bin sort of take away from whatever a god is to you?

 

[jerryjones]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by jerryjones

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by jerryjones

i like this thread i thinks its a pretty dope discussion, i think alot of yall atheist believe in the god principle more than you think, this might b controversial but at the highest levels, minus dogma, i dont really think there's to much a difference between theism and atheism

Religious people-Believe there is a God, without a doubt.

Atheist-Ranges from doubt that there is a God to belief that God's non-existence is fact.

Extreme opposites of the spectrum.

I may not be atheist at all..... my beliefs are simple as "I don't know". There may or may not be a god but given the evidence presented I have no reason to be a believer. Again even if I where compelled to believe in a higher being, which one do I chose? I like to believe a ticket into the "after-life" isn't a crap-shoot. From a Christian point of view, everyone else that is not Christian is an atheist/non-believer. If you don't believe in Jesus, you might as well believe in nothing. If one of the religions happens to be the correct one.....a majority of the people living on this planet are going to be taking Ls in the after-life.

thats kinda what im sayin...from reading most of the post in here it seems like you guys don't believe in the concept of god as it is widely understood in regards to the 3 major western religions (judaism , islam and christianity), also it seems that most people in the thread are unable to reconcile themselves with the dogma of these religions (a bearded man in the sky determining the fate of all who walk the earth,eternal damnation for believing this or that,eternal damnation for not beliveing this person ever existed, unequal justice admistered amongst the just and the wicked, concepts of heaven ,hell etc)

while many of you dont believe in a god narrowly defined along these lines i think a more wide ranging approach to the concept of god and also the question of what god could or couldn't be, or whether even god exists or not might yeild a different perception in your minds on whether god exist or not...

for example to some god simply is the creative force of the universe

to others conciousness itself is god

Doesn't relegating the word 'god' to the 'it's however you interpret the word' bin sort of take away from whatever a god is to you?

i dont understand what you mean

 

[nawlinsjunkie]

seriously? it has to be proven that air is a real thing?you've never seen what happens to the human body and life in general when theres obviously no air ? you cant see, hear, or smell air but you know what airdoes for life on earth, so you know that its a concrete thing

what a horrible, horrible analogy. no wonder people all over the world laugh at our general populations' lack of knowledge in science

 

[socalboy23]

Originally Posted by nawlinsjunkie

seriously? it has to be proven that air is a real thing? you've never seen what happens to the human body and life in general when theres obviously no air ? you cant see, hear, or smell air but you know what air does for life on earth, so you know that its a concrete thing

what a horrible, horrible analogy. no wonder people all over the world laugh at our general populations' lack of knowledge in science

we went from debating about god, to explaining how air is real.

 

[jbone2308]

This thread still going and got way off topic about air. I see what you doing though with your explanation, but Jesus said even a child shall understand.

As Morpheous said, "Is it really so hard to believe?"

Heres somone spitting the truth hard,

http://www.datpiff.com/Dj_I_Rock_Jesus_Corey_RedTone_Trump_Corey_Red_.m61934.html

 

[lobotomybeats]

whoa, the air argument is still going? That's brilliant. The worse analogy here and it is still being defended.

 

[blackxme]

Air is fake? Really? How else could sound travel? It needs a vaccum so that it may travel, air being that vaccum. I'm sorry I hate to generalize, I reallydo, but many of you who are proponents of religion/God are lacking a fundamental understanding of science all around.

 

[Master Zik]

@ we all believe in air.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

whoa, the air argument is still going? That's brilliant. The worse analogy here and it is still being defended.

i agree that it's horrible, yet the person who made the analogy won't give up on it. i mean, technically, we can't see sound, but we know it exists right? or we wouldn't be hearing anything. we know gravity exists, or we'd be floating. we know air exists because we breathe it plus more, so really i don't see how you can compare god to any of these things.

you can see sound waves.