Atheists don't exist?

[Cowtipper]

I haven't found a single scientific proof to prove that atheists exist. I've seen plenty of anecdotal evidence but no solid proof. So all you argumentative no-God-loving types should stand up and show proof they exist. Bonus points for showing proof God doesn't exist.

Claiming you're an atheist is anecdotal. I want real, solid, and scientific proof sustainable in a laboratory environment.

[Ankou]

chuck, how very dare you, lieing is against my religion.

ok, i am not convinced he is a "qualified" accountant, which probably explains that and many other things.

[Cowtipper]

There's some hilarious responses in here. Some angry ones too which surprises me. It was just a joke. Next time I'll toss in a few emoticons. 61 responses and I get a couple of laughs, a couple of frowns, and no proof that atheists exist or that God doesn't. "Because I think my opinion is right" is what I get most the time trying to have a reasonable discussion in defense of my belief by those that attack it; I thought I'd give people a shot at proving there's not a God to point out in a tongue in cheek way that "God doesn't exist" isn't an argument, its an opinion.

[jno]

the British don't do irony, I'm afraid, Cowtipper. You need a lot of emoticons to nudge them in the ribs with.

[sherminator]

I thought I'd give people a shot at proving there's not a God to point out in a tongue in cheek way that "God doesn't exist" isn't an argument, its an opinion.

This has been discussed so many times it untrue! Yes! No one can prove that god doesn't exist! Just like you can't prove that faries, Dragons, spaghetti monsters and chocolate teapots orbitinging the sun don't exist! Just Cause you cannot disprove something does NOT mean it gets an equal probabilty as something else!

There might very well be a god! But the probability is so small its not worth even bothering with!

[Cowtipper]

In the absence of facts a philosophical argument becomes subjective and therefore is only opinion. The burden of proof does lie in the believer (like the teapot) but because this is a subjective argument then opinions do count. In the absence of calling God down out of heaven and burning you all to a crisp all that leaves me is the Bible (which I'm willing to thump people with <-irony) to prove it exists.

[pa___ul3]

If I were to swear on the bible that I'm an atheist, would that be acceptable?

[ChuckFickens]

though going by CTs logic, the fact the Qur'an exists must make him a Muslim.

[pa___ul3]

aah shoot, does that mean Voldemort exists too, because a book says so!?

[Ankou]

and that the bible is made of iron ?
bunkum, we all know its made from the unblemished hides of choir boys

[ChuckFickens]

Wow....!!

Where did the catholic church find unblemished ones!

[sherminator]

all that leaves me is the Bible (which I'm willing to thump people with <-irony) to prove it exists.

Cow Tipper you read a book, therefore it must be true?

Is that really your argument?

[Old_Geezer]

I see so, where did these potential dimensions come from? Or potential anything for that matter. Where did the maths come from?

[jno]

perhaps if you wrote IRONY in capital letters, Cowtipper?

[Davethedog]

Beep Beep Beep - This bus is reversing - Beep Beep Beep

[Cowtipper]

Jno I appreciate your sense of humor. -.o On the plus side I think I can write a point down for believers. I've seen atheists complain that challenging a person on their view of God gets them up in arms and I've seen plenty of anger here for challenging a belief. The funny thing about this is most Christians doubt that I am one.

[beso]

Indeed Cowtipper we are talking about opinion but all opinions are not equally valid.

Galileo was of the opinion that the Earth went around the sun rather than the prevailing opinion held by the church at the time. Typically, the church threatened to kill Galileo if he didn't withdraw his assertion.

Kepler proved the case for heliocentricity. The church apologised just 400 years later.

Likewise modern science has shown there is no need for a God to explain our world and that the purported existence of a God contributes absolutely nothing to explaining how we got here, but introduces a conundrum about the origin of God which is clearly the most complex thing in the universe if we are to accept the deist hypothesis.

Science explains the ultimate complexity of the Universe and everything in it by starting out with a simple relationships between matter and energy that can be complied into a theory that covers every known phenomenon.

Moreover this theory has no place for a God to be manifested at all even if we wanted. In what form is this God? By what physical mechanism would this God perform the interactions attributed to Him? Until the theists can present evidence of the fields that would be involved then they won't be taken seriously.

The opinion of the church has repeatedly been shown to be wrong. Science has repeatedly been shown to be right.

The atheist opinion is backed by observation and theory. The theist opinion is backed by a book that is not even self consistent let alone consistent with observed facts.

[beso]

Theist mechanics explained by the Bible:
God said "Let there be light" and the was light.

If Newton explained gravity as God said "Let there be gravity" and there was gravity he would be quite unknown today.

[Cowtipper]

Insert tongue in cheek- POSSIBLE IRONY AHEAD ->
I like Galileo. A truly brilliant man and a good Catholic.
Kepler like wise- except he was a Lutheran.
"Likewise modern science has shown there is no need for a God to explain our world and that the purported existence of a God contributes absolutely nothing to explaining how we got here, but introduces a conundrum about the origin of God which is clearly the most complex thing in the universe if we are to accept the deist hypothesis. "
Modern science is a new field. To pretend that we've even touched the surface of what exists is arrogant and unworthy of being called scientific. A true scientist would be agnostic because preconceived notions are counter to true science.

"Science explains the ultimate complexity of the Universe and everything in it by starting out with a simple relationships between matter and energy that can be complied into a theory that covers every known phenomenon. "
Show me how to create life. Take matter and make it live. Don't cheat by reverse engineering.

"Moreover this theory has no place for a God to be manifested at all even if we wanted. In what form is this God? By what physical mechanism would this God perform the interactions attributed to Him? Until the theists can present evidence of the fields that would be involved then they won't be taken seriously. "
They aren't now.

"The opinion of the church has repeatedly been shown to be wrong. Science has repeatedly been shown to be right."
And also proven to be wrong time and time again. The Steady-State Theory and lobotomies have been pushed to the side.

Newton was really cool. "Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible, as he considered himself to be one of a select group of individuals who were specially chosen by God for the task of unders

[Cowtipper]

...the task of understanding Biblical scripture. Newton’s conception of the physical world provided a stable model of the natural world that would reinforce stability and harmony in the civic world. Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation."