Faith

[SurveyMack10]

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?

Simple, because earlier I was having a conversation with you asking simple yes or no questions in order to prove a point and you refused to comply. So, I agree to disagree. I guess whether or not you are able to do the same is your own inner issue to resolve

[SurveyMack10]

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.

I danced around nothing, but you are entitled to your opinion and I disagree. ( and that is my right )

[falcon9]

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).  

[/quote]

You have repeatedly told me that you do not accept the proof that I provide.

That's because you've failed to produce any valid evidence.  Since such invalid "evidence" 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?

Therefore, we must agree to disagree because we do not have the same opinion on this subject.

The salient difference being that yours is an empty, unsupported opinion of preference while mine is supported by the fact that a 'disbelief' isn't a "belief system" by definition, (most expressly Not the one you tried to fob off as faux "evidence").  I see no reason to "agree to disagree" since that is nominally used as a euphemism used to attempt to 'save face' while losing an argument.

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.

My dissent does not stem from any "beliefs", it arises from a disbelief in your numerous unsupported claims.  Since this forum is D+D, (Debate + Discuss), one would normally expect some debate to be "confrontational" therefore, your complaint is a non sequitur.  Once again, you attempt the "insult" alledgedly disparaging my 'maturity'.  That being the case, don't whine when you get what you dish out back; I find myself in the unchallenging position of having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Speaking of which, in view of the lack of valid evidence to support your claimed declaration, it must be concluded that your opinion is baseless and factually invalid.  This is apparently analoguous to your 'blind faith' declarations of religious opinion.  Empty as a holey bucket.

[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?

Simple, because earlier I was having a conversation with you asking simple yes or no questions in order to prove a point and you refused to comply.

More accurately, you asked _leading questions_, which myself and at least one other saw the direction they were leading, I refused to help you "prove" your counter-attacking divergent "point" and you decided to engage in irrationalities.  That's fine and all however, such behaviour is hardly 'mature' and tends to support my previous contention that some people make willfully-irrational decisions.

[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.

I danced around nothing, but you are entitled to your opinion and I disagree. ( and that is my right )

You dance clumsily; it isn't an empty "opinion" to note that you've dodged/danced around actually providing any valid evidence to support your empty opinion that "atheism is a belief system".  Your empty opinion cannot be accurately conflated with a reasoned refutation by your implicit comparison of 'opinions' and is disregarded.  That's my "right"; to disregard empty opinions which are declared as if they carried any weight.

[SurveyMack10]

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).  

You have repeatedly told me that you do not accept the proof that I provide.

That's because you've failed to produce any valid evidence.  Since such invalid "evidence" 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?

Therefore, we must agree to disagree because we do not have the same opinion on this subject.

The salient difference being that yours is an empty, unsupported opinion of preference while mine is supported by the fact that a 'disbelief' isn't a "belief system" by definition, (most expressly Not the one you tried to fob off as faux "evidence").  I see no reason to "agree to disagree" since that is nominally used as a euphemism used to attempt to 'save face' while losing an argument.

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.

My dissent does not stem from any "beliefs", it arises from a disbelief in your numerous unsupported claims.  Since this forum is D+D, (Debate + Discuss), one would normally expect some debate to be "confrontational" therefore, your complaint is a non sequitur.  Once again, you attempt the "insult" alledgedly disparaging my 'maturity'.  That being the case, don't whine when you get what you dish out back; I find myself in the unchallenging position of having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Speaking of which, in view of the lack of valid evidence to support your claimed declaration, it must be concluded that your opinion is baseless and factually invalid.  This is apparently analoguous to your 'blind faith' declarations of religious opinion.  Empty as a holey bucket.
[/quote]

Just because you do not agree with an opinion does not make it false.
I am not complaining.
This debate will continue to go nowhere as we view things form opposite sides of the spectrum, I see no reason for either of us to continue wasting our time when it is obvious we will continue to disagree. This is not saving face, it is accepting that two people do not always see things the same way.
Your opinion that my opinion is "baseless and factually invalid" shows that we will never agree as you believe that nothing I say holds any value, so there is no reason for this conversation to continue.
I did not ignore your questions, you merely do not accept my answers.
When I disagree with you- you tell me I am wrong. When I say you are entitled to your opinion- you accuse me of dodging a question. When I agree to disagree- you accuse me of trying to save face. You are confrontational to the point of arguing with everything I say, this is different than debating, and I see no reason to sit around and disagree constantly with someone. I am acknowledging that we disagree and I am fine with that, if you cannot agree to disagree that is you own inner issue to deal with.

[SurveyMack10]

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.

I danced around nothing, but you are entitled to your opinion and I disagree. ( and that is my right )

You dance clumsily; it isn't an empty "opinion" to note that you've dodged/danced around actually providing any valid evidence to support your empty opinion that "atheism is a belief system".  Your empty opinion cannot be accurately conflated with a reasoned refutation by your implicit comparison of 'opinions' and is disregarded.  That's my "right"; to disregard empty opinions which are declared as if they carried any weight.

I offered evidence and discussion about atheism as a belief system, you choose not to accept it and that is your right. I am asking you to please stop wasting my time with petty repetition of your opinions. I have acknowledged that our opinions are different. We do not agree. We never will. That is fine.

[falcon9]

Just because you do not agree with an opinion does not make it false.

That wasn't the cognizant reason your empty opinion had no validity; the fact that you produced no valid supporting evidence for it was what reduced your asserted claim to a "false" statement.  This merely emphasizes the observation that not all "opinions" are equal; some contain false statements, (such as your statement that "atheism is a belief system", lest you forget again).

I am not complaining.

Then someone else may be posting under your "SurveyMack10" 'nym.

This debate ...

This isn't a "debate"; as you referred to it earlier as a "discussion", (in which you attempted to studiously avoid actually debating/responding to reasoned refutations of your empty declarations, etc.).  

You opinion that my opinion is "baseless and factually invalid" shows ...

What it showed was the reasoning and evidence, (as opposed to your empty opinion), that you failed to support your assertion that "atheism is a belief system".  That means that your opinion that "atheism is a belief system" is baseless and factually invalid.

I did not ignore your questions, you merely do not accept my answers.

By failing to address the contextual content of those questions, your "answers" were merely unrelated responses which did not actually answer the questions, (and therefore, were non-answers which ineffectively ignored the questions ... they were ineffective because the dodge was seen, commented upon and reduced your 'argument' to an empty opinion).

When I disagree with you- you tell me I am wrong.

Not even close ... when you disgree, you tend to present such disagreement as unsupported opinion.  While you are nominally correct in that you're "entitled" to holding empty opinions, these remain invalid due to having nothing whatsoever to back them up other than your bland declaration of them.

When I say you are entitled to your opinion- you accuse me of dodging a question.

While you are nominally correct in that you're "entitled" to holding empty opinions, these remain invalid due to having nothing whatsoever to back them up other than your bland declaration of them.

When I agree to disagree- you accuse me of trying to save face.

Having observed such a 'retreat' subterfuge many times before, I simply noted the continued pattern of dodging the salient points which you've engaged in throughout.

You are confrontational to the point of arguing with everything I say, this is different than debating, and I see no reason to sit around and disagree constantly with someone.

That is incorrect; in debates, participants commonly make, (and usually defend), positional assertions while opposing participants may either concur with or, challenge those assertions.  Upon perusing the threads in which I've challenged you to support your assertions, you've either avoided substantiating them, countered with tangential diversions or, otherwise failed to defend your stated assertions.  Therefore, I've engaged in 'debate' while you've been doing something "different", (as you noted).  Your "see no reason to sit around and disagree constantly ..." comment
does directly imply that you are unable to defend what turns out to be merely an empty opinion and are tacitly retreating.

[SurveyMack10]

Just because you do not agree with an opinion does not make it false.

That wasn't the cognizant reason your empty opinion had no validity; the fact that you produced no valid supporting evidence for it was what reduced your asserted claim to a "false" statement.  This merely emphasizes the observation that not all "opinions" are equal; some contain false statements, (such as your statement that "atheism is a belief system", lest you forget again).

I am not complaining.

Then someone else may be posting under your "SurveyMack10" 'nym.

This debate ...

This isn't a "debate"; as you referred to it earlier as a "discussion", (in which you attempted to studiously avoid actually debating/responding to reasoned refutations of your empty declarations, etc.).  

You opinion that my opinion is "baseless and factually invalid" shows ...

What it showed was the reasoning and evidence, (as opposed to your empty opinion), that you failed to support your assertion that "atheism is a belief system".  That means that your opinion that "atheism is a belief system" is baseless and factually invalid.

I did not ignore your questions, you merely do not accept my answers.

By failing to address the contextual content of those questions, your "answers" were merely unrelated responses which did not actually answer the questions, (and therefore, were non-answers which ineffectively ignored the questions ... they were ineffective because the dodge was seen, commented upon and reduced your 'argument' to an empty opinion).

When I disagree with you- you tell me I am wrong.

Not even close ... when you disgree, you tend to present such disagreement as unsupported opinion.  While you are nominally correct in that you're "entitled" to holding empty opinions, these remain invalid due to having nothing whatsoever to back them up other than your bland declaration of them.

When I say you are entitled to your opinion- you accuse me of dodging a question.

While you are nominally correct in that you're "entitled" to holding empty opinions, these remain invalid due to having nothing whatsoever to back them up other than your bland declaration of them.

When I agree to disagree- you accuse me of trying to save face.

Having observed such a 'retreat' subterfuge many times before, I simply noted the continued pattern of dodging the salient points which you've engaged in throughout.

You are confrontational to the point of arguing with everything I say, this is different than debating, and I see no reason to sit around and disagree constantly with someone.

That is incorrect; in debates, participants commonly make, (and usually defend), positional assertions while opposing participants may either concur with or, challenge those assertions.  Upon perusing the threads in which I've challenged you to support your assertions, you've either avoided substantiating them, countered with tangential diversions or, otherwise failed to defend your stated assertions.  Therefore, I've engaged in 'debate' while you've been doing something "different", (as you noted).  Your "see no reason to sit around and disagree constantly ..." comment
does directly imply that you are unable to defend what turns out to be merely an empty opinion and are tacitly retreating.

[/quote]

So since I referred to it as a discussion it cannot be a debate, got it.
Since you do not agree with my opinions I am not entitled to them, got it.
Since I do not consider myself to be complaining I deserve a condescending remark from you, got it.
Since you do not accept my opinions you do not consider me to be debating, got it.
And since you are overly confrontational you will disagree with every single thing I say, even it I said that I am agreeing to disagree with you, got it.
You are doing your best to stretch out a conversation that is clearly over and only going in circles and repeating itself- I am agreeing to disagree, if you cannot do so that is your own inner issue and not something I can fix for you.

[falcon9]

I offered evidence and discussion about atheism as a belief system ...

That is patently untrue; no such valid evidence supporting your claim that "atheism is a belief system" has been presented.  "Discussion about atheism" does not constitute valid evidence supporting your claim.  If you did have valid evidence supporting your claim, amply opportunity to repost it in quoted form has existed for several days.  So, where's the "evidence"?

I am asking you to please stop wasting my time with petty repetition of your opinions. I have acknowledged that our opinions are different.

The salient difference being that yours is an empty, unsupported opinion of preference while mine is supported by the fact that a 'disbelief' isn't a "belief system" by definition, (most expressly Not the one you tried to fob off as faux "evidence").  My dissent does not stem from any "beliefs", it arises from a disbelief in your numerous unsupported claims and is therefore not conflated with being a "petty" 'opinion'.  Your insult reveals your weak ability to reason and the weakness of your undefended asserted "opinion".  If you wish to stop wasting your time, the easiest solution would be for you to cease replying here.  Surely someone with an alledged 4.0 GPA could've figured that simple resolution out; unless that was anotehr empty declaration without supportive evidence.

[SurveyMack10]

I offered evidence and discussion about atheism as a belief system ...

That is patently untrue; no such valid evidence supporting your claim that "atheism is a belief system" has been presented.  "Discussion about atheism" does not constitute valid evidence supporting your claim.  If you did have valid evidence supporting your claim, amply opportunity to repost it in quoted form has existed for several days.  So, where's the "evidence"?

I am asking you to please stop wasting my time with petty repetition of your opinions. I have acknowledged that our opinions are different.

The salient difference being that yours is an empty, unsupported opinion of preference while mine is supported by the fact that a 'disbelief' isn't a "belief system" by definition, (most expressly Not the one you tried to fob off as faux "evidence").  My dissent does not stem from any "beliefs", it arises from a disbelief in your numerous unsupported claims and is therefore not conflated with being a "petty" 'opinion'.  Your insult reveals your weak ability to reason and the weakness of your undefended asserted "opinion".  If you wish to stop wasting your time, the easiest solution would be for you to cease replying here.  Surely someone with an alledged 4.0 GPA could've figured that simple resolution out; unless that was anotehr empty declaration without supportive evidence.

You don't agree with my evidence and consider it invalid.
Your continued reference to my personal life is such a joke, you are a waste of time.
You cannot help but want the last word even though there is clearly nothing left to discuss.

[falcon9]

So since I referred to it as a discussion it cannot be a debate, got it.

Nope, you've still managed to miss the point; you haven't engaged in "debate" and you acknowledged that.

Since you do not agree with my opinions I am not entitled to them, got it.

That's another failing grade in reading comprehension for you since that isn't what I wrote in refutation.  The salient difference being that yours is an empty, unsupported opinion of preference while mine is supported by the fact that a 'disbelief' isn't a "belief system" by definition, (most expressly Not the one you tried to fob off as faux "evidence").  

Since I do not consider myself to be complaining I deserve a condescending remark from you, got it.

No, since the standard consensual meaning of your remarks constitutes "complaining", your internally-biased opinion that you're not complaining when you're complaining is yet another irrational and inaccurate opinion.

Since you do not accept my opinions you do not consider me to be debating, got it.

Closer; your failure to support your asserted declarations makes them unsubstantiated and empty opinions and not supporting your own assertions means that you hoped to fob off such without debating them when they are challenged.

And since you are overly confrontational you will disagree with every single thing I say, even it I said that I am agreeing to disagree with you, got it.

Since you've yet to agree with anything I've thusfar stated, that remains a hypothetical situation and your estimate of what I "will" do is specious.

You are doing your best to stretch out a conversation that is clearly over and only going in circles and repeating itself-

It's going in circles because you've continued to avoid supporting your asserted claim that "atheism is a belief system" and instead, hoped that the non-evidence of "discussing atheism" and tossing out a dictionary definition of atheism which did Not support your claim would do in lieu of valid evidence.  That boat doesn't float and the 'circling' you perceive in your own mind are the metaphorical carrion over the demise of your empty opinion.

[falcon9]

You don't agree with my evidence and consider it invalid.

No, the "evidence" you presented failed to support your asserted contention that "atheism is a belief system" therefore, it wasn't relevantly valid in of of itself, (not because I "consider it invalid" however, if you have any rational reason why such specious non-evidence should be considered for validity, wouldn't you have presented it by now?)

Your continued reference to my personal life is such a joke, you are a waste of time.

What reference to your "personal life" are you imagining was made?  The nearest, most recent remark to that I'd made referred to the dubious GPA claim you'd previously made.  Since grades are not 'top secret', this was hardly a reference to your "personal life".  I have no idea how you conduct your "personal life" however, were I to speculate, such speculation may include your propensity for attempting to fob off unsupported opinions as implied facts ... lying profusely and then lying about prior lying when such deceptions have been quoted in your own words, excessive whining, (while claiming not to be whining while tossing out insults yourself), generally coming across as a spoiled kid and apparently laboring under the false impression that your inherently 'because-I-said-so' opinions aren't weightless. 

You cannot help but want the last word even though there is clearly nothing left to discuss.

What an amazing coincidence; I just mentioned that you were doing what you accuse me of ... and right after I'd posted that the simple solution for someone who views this "discussion" as a "waste of time" would be to cease replying.  Of course, the implicit "reason" she doesn't would because she "wants the last word even though there is clearly nothing left to discuss", (except the fact that she's failed to support her empty claim that "atheism is a belief system").  If it'll help, I formally accept your implicit surrender and resoundingly demostrated defeat.

[SurveyMack10]

You don't agree with my evidence and consider it invalid.

No, the "evidence" you presented failed to support your asserted contention that "atheism is a belief system" therefore, it wasn't relevantly valid in of of itself, (not because I "consider it invalid" however, if you have any rational reason why such specious non-evidence should be considered for validity, wouldn't you have presented it by now?)

Your continued reference to my personal life is such a joke, you are a waste of time.

What reference to your "personal life" are you imagining was made?  The nearest, most recent remark to that I'd made referred to the dubious GPA claim you'd previously made.  Since grades are not 'top secret', this was hardly a reference to your "personal life".  I have no idea how you conduct your "personal life" however, were I to speculate, such speculation may include your propensity for attempting to fob off unsupported opinions as implied facts ... lying profusely and then lying about prior lying when such deceptions have been quoted in your own words, excessive whining, (while claiming not to be whining while tossing out insults yourself), generally coming across as a spoiled kid and apparently laboring under the false impression that your inherently 'because-I-said-so' opinions aren't weightless. 

You cannot help but want the last word even though there is clearly nothing left to discuss.

What an amazing coincidence; I just mentioned that you were doing what you accuse me of ... and right after I'd posted that the simple solution for someone who views this "discussion" as a "waste of time" would be to cease replying.  Of course, the implicit "reason" she doesn't would because she "wants the last word even though there is clearly nothing left to discuss", (except the fact that she's failed to support her empty claim that "atheism is a belief system").  If it'll help, I formally accept your implicit surrender and resoundingly demostrated defeat.

My school grades are a part of my personal life, but thanks for your assessment of a stranger- very enlightening.

[falcon9]

My school grades are a part of my personal life

Perhaps so however, you initially brought them up and posted your alleged GPA here, as if tacitly making your GPA a matter of public information.
That earlier action inherently contradicts your later complaint.

but thanks for your assessment of a stranger- very enlightening.

You're merely young and inexperienced. With any luck, persistence and ability, that might change.  Doubtless you'll reject the observational "assessment of a stranger", (given the unspoken 'you don't know me' implicit in your remark).  The remarks, statements, opinions and unsupported claims you've made on a public forum are known, however.  That's what those "assessments" are based upon - although you would be correct in assuming that I don't know you.