Atheists are more intelligent than Religious people

[Cyclone]

I'm pretty sure there is no overall difference in intelligence really.

 

Based on your own meta analysis of the data available from previous scientific studies of course, and not just pulled out of a lower orifice at all.

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2017 at 17:33 ----------

 

 

I know that negatives can't be proven, that's the whole point. Atheists tend not to like it being pointed out to them that they are believers. To some/many of them theists are believers and they themselves are logical rational thinkers.

You're still not getting it.

You know that Santa isn't real, but you can't prove it.

Extraordinary claims (supernatural beings) require extraordinary proof (although any proof would help). Without any evidence at all the only logical position to take is that the assertion is untrue.

 

But if an opinion isn't proven then that's all it is, an opinion, which is a point of view without proof, it's a belief.

Knowing something is simply believing it a higher level of certainty.

 

Belief can be reinforced by some facts, for instance there is some evidence ( but not undeniable proof ) that a man called Jesus Christ existed.

No evidence that he was the son of god and could perform miracles though.

His existence isn't the point at all.

The orbiting situation of our part of the solar system wasn't known and then turned out to be wrong, it was believed incorrectly and then proven to be wrong, and is know known.

It was as known then as it is known now. Perhaps we're still getting it wrong and we'll correct what we know in the future.

You seem to think that things can be incontrovertibly proven, when in fact they can't. Science doesn't deal in proving things, it deals in making hypotheses and trying to disprove them. When we can't disprove them and they fit what we observe, we call them theories, and that's as solid as anything ever gets. And it's still open to correction should new evidence come along.

 

It amazes me to think you can't comprehend that some facts are known beyond any doubt whatsoever.

It amazes me that you think you can.

 

In between yesterday and today it went dark for a few hours.

Did it? Perhaps you're having a very complex delusion and that never happens. Unlikely I'll admit. But if you can't admit it's possible then you're fooling yourself.

 

People that I have known and cared for are dead.

 

Donald Trump is the most ridiculous person ever to be appointed President in my lifetime and I had thought Dubya was a run away winner of that title.

 

Loads of things are known, you and I were both alive yesterday, we hope but don't know we will be tomorrow.

Again, perhaps it's all a great big delusion in your head. Or maybe advanced super scientists are actually just messing with you. Maybe you're a simulation in a computer and in reality none of these things ever happened.

 

You being delusional about things around you sounds plausible, I'll let you have that one.

 

You only 'think' you know things? Well perhaps you do but I think you'll find that most of the rest of us are pretty certain that we know certain things for a fact whilst accepting that other things are a matter of conjecture.

You can be as certain as you like. I'd suggest that it makes you the less rational of the two of us.

[Carlinate]

Based on your own meta analysis of the data available from previous scientific studies of course, and not just pulled out of a lower orifice at all.

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2017 at 17:33 ----------

 

You're still not getting it.

You know that Santa isn't real, but you can't prove it.

Extraordinary claims (supernatural beings) require extraordinary proof (although any proof would help). Without any evidence at all the only logical position to take is that the assertion is untrue.

Knowing something is simply believing it a higher level of certainty.

No evidence that he was the son of god and could perform miracles though.

His existence isn't the point at all.

It was as known then as it is known now. Perhaps we're still getting it wrong and we'll correct what we know in the future.

You seem to think that things can be incontrovertibly proven, when in fact they can't. Science doesn't deal in proving things, it deals in making hypotheses and trying to disprove them. When we can't disprove them and they fit what we observe, we call them theories, and that's as solid as anything ever gets. And it's still open to correction should new evidence come along.

It amazes me that you think you can.

 

In between yesterday and today it went dark for a few hours.

.

 

You have gone beyond being irrational you are now entering the realms of the moronic .

 

Yes I know that santa isn't real, and therefore I don't need to prove it.

 

I do not know that god is real and therefore theists need to prove it.

 

I do not know that there is no god and so atheists need to prove it.

 

Knowing something is not simply believing at a higher level of certainty, that's a ridiculous statement.

 

Knowing is being certain believing is no more than an opinion. it may be right but it may also be wrong.

 

Something known is an unconditional fact it can not be wrong.

 

My parents are dead, they have been for over 27 years, do you want to contest that statement?

 

As much as I wish it were not so I cannot change it.

 

Stop talking nonsense about maybe something isn't as you think.

 

'Did it grow dark between yesterday and today, maybe you're having a very complex delusion'.

 

Get a grip, stop talking claptrap and do a little research into rational thinking.

[Cyclone]

You've now been reduced to circular reasoning.

 

You "know" something so you don't have to prove it. Whereas I say that I know god isn't real and you demand proof. Double standards much.

 

You don't know about santa anymore than you know about god or an orbiting teapot.

Atheists don't have to prove anything, theists suffer the burden of proof for their extraordinary claims.

Certainty doesn't alter reality, it's all a continuum of how sure you are in your belief.

 

There are no unconditional facts, not to someone who understands the scientific method anyway or indeed anyone who thinks about the world beyond a superficial level.

I don't particularly want to contest it, but the fact that you can't think of a way it could be untrue demonstrates a limited imagination.

Ironic that you want me to do the research whilst you refuse to see the huge logical errors you are now having to commit to maintain your demonstrably flawed opinion. Read the bit again where you don't have to prove something because you know it, but others have to prove things to you. Ridiculous.

[Carlinate]

You've now been reduced to circular reasoning.

 

You "know" something so you don't have to prove it. Whereas I say that I know god isn't real and you demand proof. Double standards much.

 

You don't know about santa anymore than you know about god or an orbiting teapot.

Atheists don't have to prove anything, theists suffer the burden of proof for their extraordinary claims.

Certainty doesn't alter reality, it's all a continuum of how sure you are in your belief.

 

There are no unconditional facts, not to someone who understands the scientific method anyway or indeed anyone who thinks about the world beyond a superficial level.

I don't particularly want to contest it, but the fact that you can't think of a way it could be untrue demonstrates a limited imagination.

Ironic that you want me to do the research whilst you refuse to see the huge logical errors you are now having to commit to maintain your demonstrably flawed opinion. Read the bit again where you don't have to prove something because you know it, but others have to prove things to you. Ridiculous.

 

You are apparently incapable of both logic and comprehension of simple English.

 

If something is known then it doesn't have to be proved, it's a fact no further opinion is relevant.

 

I can prove that Sheffield has a town hall. You can go and look at it and touch it if you wish.

 

Therefore I don't have to prove it, at least not to anyone who isn't a certifiable moron.

 

You on the other hand can not prove that there is,or is not, a god.

 

So asking for proof of a belief, which is only your opinion, is perfectly reasonable.

 

Do you understand?

 

Actually, that was a daft question, of course you don't understand, logic is not your forte.

[TORONTONY]

God and Jesus are playing golf.

 

Jesus drives off 385 yards and lands it on the green a foot from the hole.

 

God drives off and slices it badly. The ball veers a hundred yards to the left and ricochets off a tree into the rough.

 

A squirrel picks up the ball and starts to run across the fairway. A golden eagle swoops out of the sky and snatches the squirrel up still holding the ball. The eagle flies over the green and a sudden bolt of lightening out of a clear blue sky hits it.

 

The eagle and squirrel are incinerated and the ball drops down straight into the hole.

 

Jesus turns to God and says " Come on dad, how many more times, it's only a game!"

 

I'm here all week.

 

They caught the last train for the coast along with the Holy Ghost, according to Don McLean

[Carlinate]

They caught the last train for the coast along with the Holy Ghost, according to Don McLean

 

Great song. He was a terrific song writer.

 

Apparently he got tired of continuously being asked what American Pie meant and replied to one query with " It means that I never have to work again ".

[TORONTONY]

Great song. He was a terrific song writer.

 

Apparently he got tired of continuously being asked what American Pie meant and replied to one query with " It means that I never have to work again ".

 

Yes, and I suppose Phil Collins could have made the same reply, when he was always being asked what In The Air Tonight was all about lol

[onewheeldave]

 

I read quite a lot of science text and have an interest in astrophysics. So one question I once asked was, if the Earth was made for mankind by God, why were there all these (proven) giant balls of gas in the sky, many times larger that that which lights and warms the Earth, that mankind will never get to visit. His answer - they were put there to aid navigation.

 

In fairness, that's some impressive out-of-the-box thinking

[Cyclone]

You are apparently incapable of both logic and comprehension of simple English.

 

If something is known then it doesn't have to be proved, it's a fact no further opinion is relevant.

I know that you're wrong. Problem solved.

 

You can prove that the townhall exists, you can't prove that Santa doesn't. You know you can't prove it, you know it's the same issue as god, you refuse to accept it because you know that you'll look foolish for having argued for about 8 pages now about it.

Look at all that knowing. Since it's all known, I don't have to prove it, you said so.

[Carlinate]

I know that you're wrong. Problem solved.

 

You can prove that the townhall exists, you can't prove that Santa doesn't. You know you can't prove it, you know it's the same issue as god, you refuse to accept it because you know that you'll look foolish for having argued for about 8 pages now about it.

Look at all that knowing. Since it's all known, I don't have to prove it, you said so.

 

You appeared to be an obvious WUM/Troll to me when I originally saw your comments on other threads.

 

Matters not to me, I like a laugh and I'm retired, so plenty of time to indulge posters of that persuasion.

 

However it has begun to occur to me that maybe that isn't it, maybe you actually believe the utter nonsensical garbage you come out with.

 

I genuinely hope that that isn't the case because if it is I can only feel the utmost sympathy for your wife.

 

If you have a wife of course, it may be another one of your delusions.