Atheism

As usual, you exercise your tunnel vision. You are only concerned with the issue of whether or not there are gods. Guess does not have the same or evern a similar definition to that of belief. Leaving aside the word game, you last responded to someone asking you if you exercise the same attitude toward fairies or elves by telling them not to be childish. This is how you came up with the guess BS in the first place. You were getting hammered about your consistently selective agnosticism, and you flew off the handle saying you "don't do belief," and you've been peddling your guess BS ever since. You also would like to continue to pretend that your agnostic position is morally and intellectually superior.

From 2003, here is the opening post in Portal Star's thread which he entitled "Atheism has the same logical flaws as religion":

Portal Star wrote:

I had this debate on another forum link removed by me, but would like to bring it here.

I intend to prove that agnostic is the only logical religious viewpoint.
I'll start out with definitions from dictionary.com, you can refer to these definitions for debate.

a·the·ist
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

the·ism
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

God
1.
a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.

2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.



ag·nos·tic

1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

adj.

1. Relating to or being an agnostic.
2. Doubtful or noncommittal: "Though I am agnostic on what terms to use, I have no doubt that human infants come with an enormous �'acquisitiveness' for discovering patterns" (William H. Calvin).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[a-1 + Gnostic.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ag·nosti·cal·ly adv.

Word History: An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning "without, not," as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnsis, "knowledge," which was used by early Christian writers to mean "higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things" hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as "Gnostics" a group of his fellow intellectuals"ists," as he called themwho had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a "man without a rag of a label to cover himself with," Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870.

You were all over that one.

Note that Portal Star did not take into account the distinction between those who don't believe there is a god, and those who assert that there is no god; nor does he take into account the distinction between those who believe that there is a god, and those who assert that there is. This is your essential position, although you've gotten hammered over that one so often that i doubt that you;ll be honest about it now.

This is the origin of that silliness of trying to equate belief nd guess.

Yes, it is a paltry rhetorical position. Not the least of the reasons is embodied Portal Star's definition 1. a. for agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. (emphasis added). In your silly lexicon, we would be obliged to say "One who guesses that it is impossible to know whether there is a god." Witness your signature line with its self-congratulatory tone. You cannot tell the atheist that he or she cannot know there is no god unless you know that there is. You cannot tell the theist that he or she cannot know that there is a god unless you now that there is not. The only consistent thing about your posturing here, apart from its implicit conceits, is its incoherence.

I have yet to understand why an agnostic gets away with trolling the thread for thousands of posts in his hysterical try to keep atheists from being atheists. With the same essential post, rebuttered, again and again, infinitum. It merely makes adults dig in their heels against the incessant battering.

Again, you’re asserting that all beliefs about gods and reality are blind guesses, but you haven’t explained the reasoning behind your assertion. I.e., why are they blind guesses if they too have a value of estimation and calculation?

By now, Frank, after at least ten years of your view, probably several more marking your same point, I don't care what you think.

I do care about why you need to scream stuff, since I don't like the screaming.
Apparently it isn't an eye problem on your part, you just like boldly screaming to somehow increase power to your point.

And you also need to copy whatever anyone says to answer, thus miles of repetitive text. Please, it's just a click to see.

The guy has had his run. Time for him to step back and contemplate his lack of success and move on.

I don't read his crap. I just resent his rudeness at trolling every thread he gets on and this one in particular.

Oh, ****, not again..

InfraBlue wrote:

Again, you’re asserting that all beliefs about gods and reality are blind guesses, but you haven’t explained the reasoning behind your assertion. I.e., why are they blind guesses if they too have a value of estimation and calculation?

Actually...I DIDN'T.

I was very specific in what I said.

Quote what I actually said...and then question me on what I actually said...rather than making stuff up; pretending I said it; and then questioning me on the stuff you made up.

Because there are no data that support the theistic conclusion. You estimate or calculate based on data. A volcano erupting is evidence for a volcano erupting, not for an invisible spirit in the sky punishing you for not wiping your ass in the prescribed manner.