Faith

[falcon9]

You just proved that no matter what I reproduce you're going to say it doesn't support my claim just because you do not agree with it which makes no sense whatsoever as your opinion is not at all fact.

Quoting what you wrote in the message IDs you referenced isn't my "opinion"; it is part of the record of the posted exchanges.  These are your own quoted words which do not support your own assertion - none of them can be remotely construed as supporting your assertion.  If you disagree with the inherent meanings of your own words, go ahead and try to spin them as supporting your assertion ... that might "prove" to be even more 'illuminating' than your shooting yourself in the foot was.

[SurveyMack10]

You just proved that no matter what I reproduce you're going to say it doesn't support my claim just because you do not agree with it which makes no sense whatsoever as your opinion is not at all fact.

Quoting what you wrote in the message IDs you referenced isn't my "opinion"; it is part of the record of the posted exchanges.  These are your own quoted words which do not support your own assertion - none of them can be remotely construed as supporting your assertion.  If you disagree with the inherent meanings of your own words, go ahead and try to spin them as supporting your assertion ... that might "prove" to be even more 'illuminating' than your shooting yourself in the foot was.

I wasn't talking about your quoting the message IDs, I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

[SurveyMack10]

these are just the 1st 15 messages where I am shown discussing atheism as a belief system

Message ID: 433627

Message ID: 433627
on: October 17, 2011, 03:01:40 pm

"Absolutely! Atheism is definitely a belief system within itself, you are totally right....Agnostics are the only ones who haven't committed to a belief system."

Merely agreeing with another xtian, sans anything other than restating your unsupported assertion, does not constitute supporting your assertion.

Message ID: 433639 - "Do you not believe that all occurences can be explained by science?

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433648 - "Are you admitting that there are things that science cannot explain?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433665 - "When did I try to convince you that it should be applied to "imagined dieties?" I merely asked a yes or no question ...?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433717 - "I was actually going to ask if you think that science will EVENTUALLY explain every single thing that has ever occured and will ever occur. However, according to you that is not what I was going to ask."

That snide remark did not support your assertion that atheism is a belief system.  By now, others can observe a distinctive pattern in the message IDs you choose to alledgedly support your assertion ... namely, that they don't.  I'll quote one more, your second to last reference to message ID 434704 -

"Please show where you challenged my claim (this is not the same thing as denying the definition of atheism)"

That request was met and making it did not support your asserted claim.  Doubtless, the remaining message IDs are more along the same lines, (if not, please reproduce a quote from them which supports your assertion unless the message IDs you referenced do not do so).  You did however, provide 15 additional examples of your _Not_ supporting your assertion, (rather than "discussing atheism", which was not the challenge; that challenge was to reproduce quotes of yours supporting your asserted claim that "atheism is a belief system").

Message ID: 433720
Message ID: 434018
Message ID: 434064
Message ID: 434079
Message ID: 434196
Message ID: 434500
Message ID: 434551
Message ID: 434595
Message ID: 434704
Message ID: 435172

Your claim was that I dodged every challenge to atheism as a belief system
My proof was that I spent over 15 posts discussing atheism as a belief system
Whether you agree with the discussion or not, you cannot deny that it was not dodged as I have shown 15 messages of said discussion

[falcon9]

You just proved that no matter what I reproduce you're going to say it doesn't support my claim just because you do not agree with it which makes no sense whatsoever as your opinion is not at all fact.

Quoting what you wrote in the message IDs you referenced isn't my "opinion"; it is part of the record of the posted exchanges.  These are your own quoted words which do not support your own assertion - none of them can be remotely construed as supporting your assertion.  If you disagree with the inherent meanings of your own words, go ahead and try to spin them as supporting your assertion ... that might "prove" to be even more 'illuminating' than your shooting yourself in the foot was.

I wasn't talking about your quoting the message IDs, I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

[falcon9]

these are just the 1st 15 messages where I am shown discussing atheism as a belief system

Message ID: 433627

Message ID: 433627
on: October 17, 2011, 03:01:40 pm

"Absolutely! Atheism is definitely a belief system within itself, you are totally right....Agnostics are the only ones who haven't committed to a belief system."

Merely agreeing with another xtian, sans anything other than restating your unsupported assertion, does not constitute supporting your assertion.

Message ID: 433639 - "Do you not believe that all occurences can be explained by science?

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433648 - "Are you admitting that there are things that science cannot explain?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433665 - "When did I try to convince you that it should be applied to "imagined dieties?" I merely asked a yes or no question ...?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433717 - "I was actually going to ask if you think that science will EVENTUALLY explain every single thing that has ever occured and will ever occur. However, according to you that is not what I was going to ask."

That snide remark did not support your assertion that atheism is a belief system.  By now, others can observe a distinctive pattern in the message IDs you choose to alledgedly support your assertion ... namely, that they don't.  I'll quote one more, your second to last reference to message ID 434704 -

"Please show where you challenged my claim (this is not the same thing as denying the definition of atheism)"

That request was met and making it did not support your asserted claim.  Doubtless, the remaining message IDs are more along the same lines, (if not, please reproduce a quote from them which supports your assertion unless the message IDs you referenced do not do so).  You did however, provide 15 additional examples of your _Not_ supporting your assertion, (rather than "discussing atheism", which was not the challenge; that challenge was to reproduce quotes of yours supporting your asserted claim that "atheism is a belief system").

Message ID: 433720
Message ID: 434018
Message ID: 434064
Message ID: 434079
Message ID: 434196
Message ID: 434500
Message ID: 434551
Message ID: 434595
Message ID: 434704
Message ID: 435172

Your claim was that I dodged every challenge to atheism as a belief system

As your own message ID references, (and the ones I presented), show; you didn't support your contention that "atheism os a belief system" therefore, that constitutes evidence of your dodging presenting support for your contention.

My proof was that I spent over 15 posts discussing atheism as a belief system

Read your own posts again; only one 'discussed' trying to conflate merriam-webster's definition, (which used the terms "disbelief" and "doctrine" but not "belief system"), with your interpretative dance.  To reiterate; the challenge was _not_ to simply 'discuss' "atheism as a belief system", (which the first six didn't even do), it was/is to support your claim that "atheism is a belief system".  None of the referenced messaage ID posts support your claim.

Whether you agree with the discussion or not, you cannot deny that it was not dodged as I have shown 15 messages of said discussion

Whether you are trying, (and failing), to conflate 'discussing' "atheism as a belief system" with Supporting Your Contention That "atheism is a belief system", such a diversion will not work.  The fact remains that none of the message IDs you referenced support your contention that "atheism is a belief system", (the disputed contention _was not_ that you feel that you "discussed" it).  As far as I can tell, this cannot be made any clearer and, ironically enough, you've been attempting to dodge the fact that the discussion itself wasn't being disputed - your failure to support your assertion that "atheism is a belief system" was and still is.

Now that the actual assertion you made, ("atheism is a belief system"), has been mentioned several times - in this posted reply alone - any 'misundestanding' on your part can only be construed in certain disparaging ways.

[SurveyMack10]

You just proved that no matter what I reproduce you're going to say it doesn't support my claim just because you do not agree with it which makes no sense whatsoever as your opinion is not at all fact.

Quoting what you wrote in the message IDs you referenced isn't my "opinion"; it is part of the record of the posted exchanges.  These are your own quoted words which do not support your own assertion - none of them can be remotely construed as supporting your assertion.  If you disagree with the inherent meanings of your own words, go ahead and try to spin them as supporting your assertion ... that might "prove" to be even more 'illuminating' than your shooting yourself in the foot was.

I wasn't talking about your quoting the message IDs, I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

We're not talking about whether or not you agree with the evidence I chose to use, IF I produced evidence it is not considered a dodge just because you don't agree with the evidence. A dodge would be ignoring the question altogether

[SurveyMack10]

these are just the 1st 15 messages where I am shown discussing atheism as a belief system

Message ID: 433627

Message ID: 433627
on: October 17, 2011, 03:01:40 pm

"Absolutely! Atheism is definitely a belief system within itself, you are totally right....Agnostics are the only ones who haven't committed to a belief system."

Merely agreeing with another xtian, sans anything other than restating your unsupported assertion, does not constitute supporting your assertion.

Message ID: 433639 - "Do you not believe that all occurences can be explained by science?

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433648 - "Are you admitting that there are things that science cannot explain?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433665 - "When did I try to convince you that it should be applied to "imagined dieties?" I merely asked a yes or no question ...?"

That "answer" was a divergent question and did not support your assertion.

Message ID: 433717 - "I was actually going to ask if you think that science will EVENTUALLY explain every single thing that has ever occured and will ever occur. However, according to you that is not what I was going to ask."

That snide remark did not support your assertion that atheism is a belief system.  By now, others can observe a distinctive pattern in the message IDs you choose to alledgedly support your assertion ... namely, that they don't.  I'll quote one more, your second to last reference to message ID 434704 -

"Please show where you challenged my claim (this is not the same thing as denying the definition of atheism)"

That request was met and making it did not support your asserted claim.  Doubtless, the remaining message IDs are more along the same lines, (if not, please reproduce a quote from them which supports your assertion unless the message IDs you referenced do not do so).  You did however, provide 15 additional examples of your _Not_ supporting your assertion, (rather than "discussing atheism", which was not the challenge; that challenge was to reproduce quotes of yours supporting your asserted claim that "atheism is a belief system").

Message ID: 433720
Message ID: 434018
Message ID: 434064
Message ID: 434079
Message ID: 434196
Message ID: 434500
Message ID: 434551
Message ID: 434595
Message ID: 434704
Message ID: 435172

Your claim was that I dodged every challenge to atheism as a belief system

As your own message ID references, (and the ones I presented), show; you didn't support your contention that "atheism os a belief system" therefore, that constitutes evidence of your dodging presenting support for your contention.

My proof was that I spent over 15 posts discussing atheism as a belief system

Read your own posts again; only one 'discussed' trying to conflate merriam-webster's definition, (which used the terms "disbelief" and "doctrine" but not "belief system"), with your interpretative dance.  To reiterate; the challenge was _not_ to simply 'discuss' "atheism as a belief system", (which the first six didn't even do), it was/is to support your claim that "atheism is a belief system".  None of the referenced messaage ID posts support your claim.

Whether you agree with the discussion or not, you cannot deny that it was not dodged as I have shown 15 messages of said discussion

Whether you are trying, (and failing), to conflate 'discussing' "atheism as a belief system" with Supporting Your Contention That "atheism is a belief system", such a diversion will not work.  The fact remains that none of the message IDs you referenced support your contention that "atheism is a belief system", (the disputed contention _was not_ that you feel that you "discussed" it).  As far as I can tell, this cannot be made any clearer and, ironically enough, you've been attempting to dodge the fact that the discussion itself wasn't being disputed - your failure to support your assertion that "atheism is a belief system" was and still is.

Now that the actual assertion you made, ("atheism is a belief system"), has been mentioned several times - in this posted reply alone - any 'misundestanding' on your part can only be construed in certain disparaging ways.

Whether or not you agree with the evidence is irrelevant, since I did produce evidence it is not considered a dodge. Even if I produced evidence from an unacceptable source it still is not a dodge since I did attempt to answer the challenge, even though that is not relevant because my sources were all acceptable.

[falcon9]

I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

We're not talking about whether or not you agree with the evidence I chose to use

What you chose to use does constitute "evidence"; it merely constitutes you unsupported opinion that "atheism is a belief system."  Since I've previously disagreed with your empty assertion, (and produced the reasoning behind that dissent), we sertianly were talking about the so-called "evidence" you chose to use in lieu of valid evidence.


 

IF I produced evidence it is not considered a dodge just because you don't agree with the evidence. A dodge would be ignoring the question altogether

That is incorrect.  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing"
the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

[SurveyMack10]

I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

We're not talking about whether or not you agree with the evidence I chose to use

What you chose to use does constitute "evidence"; it merely constitutes you unsupported opinion that "atheism is a belief system."  Since I've previously disagreed with your empty assertion, (and produced the reasoning behind that dissent), we sertianly were talking about the so-called "evidence" you chose to use in lieu of valid evidence.


 

IF I produced evidence it is not considered a dodge just because you don't agree with the evidence. A dodge would be ignoring the question altogether

That is incorrect.  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing"
the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

Actually a dodge carries the implication that someone purposely avoided something, not that someone directly answered something and that the other person didn't agree with their answer.

[falcon9]

Whether or not you agree with the evidence is irrelevant, since I did produce evidence it is not considered a dodge. Even if I produced evidence from an unacceptable source it still is not a dodge since I did attempt to answer the challenge, even though that is not relevant because my sources were all acceptable.

You ignored the entire content of this post in order to repeat your previous nonsense, (merely responding to a post without replying to the content is the same dodge you're using in attempting to substitute filler verbiage for valid evidence).  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing" the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

[falcon9]

I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

We're not talking about whether or not you agree with the evidence I chose to use

What you chose to use does constitute "evidence"; it merely constitutes you unsupported opinion that "atheism is a belief system."  Since I've previously disagreed with your empty assertion, (and produced the reasoning behind that dissent), we sertianly were talking about the so-called "evidence" you chose to use in lieu of valid evidence.


 

IF I produced evidence it is not considered a dodge just because you don't agree with the evidence. A dodge would be ignoring the question altogether

That is incorrect.  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing"
the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

Actually a dodge carries the implication that someone purposely avoided something, not that someone directly answered something and that the other person didn't agree with their answer.

Then, according to your own parameters you've continued to dodge backing up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion, a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your empty assertion and an irrational insistance that invalid references somehow constitute "evidence", (which would be parallel to someone asking a person how they feel today and getting a 'response' of "opaque butter limpet" ... the rfesponse is unrelated to the question).

[SurveyMack10]

Whether or not you agree with the evidence is irrelevant, since I did produce evidence it is not considered a dodge. Even if I produced evidence from an unacceptable source it still is not a dodge since I did attempt to answer the challenge, even though that is not relevant because my sources were all acceptable.

You ignored the entire content of this post in order to repeat your previous nonsense, (merely responding to a post without replying to the content is the same dodge you're using in attempting to substitute filler verbiage for valid evidence).  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing" the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

[/quote]

I did not IGNORE the content of the post. You have repeatedly told me that you do not accept the proof that I provide. Also, I asked you many yes or no questions in order to form a point. You fought this process and also rejected the point. Therefore, we must agree to disagree because we do not have the same opinion on this subject. Honestly, why are you really SO confrontational that you refuse to acknowledge anything I say if it is not 100% equialent to your beliefs. Be an adult, agree to disagree.

[SurveyMack10]

I was talking about you telling me a dictionary definition wasnt sufficient enough proof for you

That's because the dictionary definition you tried to use to support your assertion didn't define atheism as a "belief system" and thus, failed to support your assertion or, qualify as proof/evidence of doing so.  The merriam-webster definition you supplied did not mention "belief system"; it mentioned "disbelief" and "doctrine" instead.  Your liberal misinterpretation notwithstanding, that source did not support your claim that "atheism is a belief system" while both the message IDs you and I both quoted show an exchange of comments which lacked any content supporting your claim. (not the 'abridged' claim you've attempted to substitute lately).

We're not talking about whether or not you agree with the evidence I chose to use

What you chose to use does constitute "evidence"; it merely constitutes you unsupported opinion that "atheism is a belief system."  Since I've previously disagreed with your empty assertion, (and produced the reasoning behind that dissent), we sertianly were talking about the so-called "evidence" you chose to use in lieu of valid evidence.


 

IF I produced evidence it is not considered a dodge just because you don't agree with the evidence. A dodge would be ignoring the question altogether

That is incorrect.  It is still a dodge because the "evidence" does not qualify as valid evidence, (since it consisted of your references to "discussing"
the topic of atheism in general terms, using a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your assertion and merely repeating your empty declaration that "atheism is a belief system").  None of the foregoing can even be loosely considered to be evidence so, it didn't even make it to the disagreement phase.  Producing non-evidence in lieu of evidence still constitutes ignoring the salient question.

In case you once again forgotten what the question you've been assidiously dodging was/is; can you back up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion?

Actually a dodge carries the implication that someone purposely avoided something, not that someone directly answered something and that the other person didn't agree with their answer.

Then, according to your own parameters you've continued to dodge backing up your bald claim that "atheism is a belief system" with anything other than your empty declaration of opinion, a dictionary definition which _Did Not_ support your empty assertion and an irrational insistance that invalid references somehow constitute "evidence", (which would be parallel to someone asking a person how they feel today and getting a 'response' of "opaque butter limpet" ... the rfesponse is unrelated to the question).

[/quote]
I did not refuse to back up my "bald" claim and have already addressed this is my previous post.

[falcon9]

I did not IGNORE the content of the post.

Then why do your responses contain so little content relevant to the context of the posts you replied to?

[falcon9]

I did not refuse to back up my "bald" claim and have already addressed this is my previous post.

Your empty declaration of opinion that "atheism is a belief system" remains unsupported by any valid evidence.  'Addressing' the challenge by way of dancing around it does not constitute a reasoned refutation.  It may constitute an irrational and thus, invalid one however.