It is kind of self-evident that they have to be extremely small in order to live and thrive in your brain.
And I seriously doubt you would hear things that happen in your brain, especially from something as small as a brain-elf. Besides, they are magical creatures, you do not get brain damage from them.
Science as we know it shows that elves are not that small.
Atheists’ biggest claim is zilch. We claim nothing, we just don’t believe in god. We aren’t a group or society, we simply don’t believe in god.
As Burbinator has said, you don’t need to prove something doesn’t exist if there’s no evidence for it to exist, that’s just stupid.
Also, that last bit. What on earth do you mean by that?
Yes you do
The meaning of evolution is to adapt to a certain envrioment and/or threat in order to surrive, gravitys meaning is to keep on us on this planet, these may be precieved as a definitions but they serve a purpose, they have meaning, life, as of yet, does not
If you pubically regard yourself as an atheist, that means that you have a belief, but if you can not provide any solid evidence their is no god then who are any of us, to say theres not? Is that not proof enough?
Brain-elves are very tiny. Like, tiny-tiny!
Evolution is used to described change in genes, and has nothing to do with survival as of such. Natural selection is what describes the process of some genes surviving instead of others.
Gravity is a law that describes why mass is attracted other mass, it was not designed to prevent humans from falling off the Earth, haha.
So the phrase “Innocent until proven guilty” is a lie?
Those are meanings you’ve arbitrarily given to various processes of the universe, and weird meanings at that. Every piece of matter throughout the universe produces some force of gravity, so how can its ‘meaning’ be to keep us on the earth? And things evolve because some others have died due to certain environments and threats.
Your arguments are like saying the meaning of tectonic plates is to create mountains. The reason why your ‘meanings’ don’t make sense is because none of these processes need to have ‘meanings’.
This makes little to no sense, and I can’t actually work out what you’re trying to say.
Are you essentially saying that because God is neither provable nor disprovable, he exists? If so, that is terrible, terrible logic.
I can see my last bit of babble didnt make much sense, my apologies, I was simply trying to point out that a few athesists around here were asking for evidence of their being god, yet they can not provide evidence that their isn’t. Very basically, because they cant back up their arguement with facts they shouldnt try to bully the other side to provide any facts, and vice versa. No one can prove that god exsists or if he doesn’t, so each to his own beliefs until one side can prove they are right. I personally will keep my mind open until that day comes
On this logic who are any of us to say if he exsists or not?
But the onus isn’t on us Atheists to disprove any god whom any individual chooses believe in. We haven’t invented a deity in the first place have we?
As far as I am concerned, there is no proof in any of the currently popular gods apart from the texts from which their word is supposedly laid down and the ‘amendments’ made by human beings who belong to religion (see: Pope John Paul II re-jigging the amount of miracles required for sainthood, in the case of Mother Theresa). On the other hand, if it’s evidence against a god you want, then I think there’s plenty in the guise of evolution, the abandonment of ancient gods (such as the Egyptian or Roman gods) and the field of astronomy, which has shown our planet to be exceptionally insignificant (barring it’s obvious ability to support life) - apt, considering the religious connotations of the Earth being the centre of the universe (or between Heaven and Hell).
Well it isn’t because they’ve been recorded since the 8th century:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asA2iCvg2m8
They also recorded sightings of the lock Ness monster and the yeti in the past. Doesn’t make it valid.
EDIT, sorry double post
This is very true
And so I’ve decided to do some research
“Claiming that atheists “cannot prove that God does not exist” often relies upon the misunderstanding that atheists claim “God does not exist” and should prove this. In reality, atheists merely fail to accept the theists’ claim “God exists” and, hence, the initial burden of proof lies with the believer. If the believer is unable to provide good reason to accept the existence of their god, it is unreasonable to expect the atheist to construct a disproof of it — or even care much about the claim in the first place”
From an article “Atheism is Based on Faith”
On this alone I think my point is invalid and so I stand corrected
Is another page I came across that presents many intresting for and against arguements, that some of you might like to have a little look at. The most intresting arguement for god exsisiting to me is about the creation of the universe, how did it start (That’s if it did)? and if it did start how (And I’m not talking about Earth, I mean the bigger picture)? and is giving god as an answer to that question a “get out of jail free card”, or logic?
And if their is a God I think Futurama got it right
Why would a god be logical?
if the universe started, would this not be work of a god, or some great “being”, who would have had to designthe universe, thus the creator of all life, thus god? I mean how do you explain the very begining without falling in to what some would percieve as the realms of fantasy?
Quite easily.
Big Bag, expanding and cooling mass, planets and whanot, early conditions of earth plus meteorites plus suitable chemicals equals first cell, first cell mutliplies, first cells mutate slightly, some cells do better, some do worse, best mutations multiply more, so on and so on until now.
Where’s the realm of fantasy there?
i wasnt talking about earth, that is what I believe to be two massive asteriods colliding together, I was referring to the entire universe
The Big Bang theory is about the universe, not just Earth.
What Mr Smith said.
I actually watched that.
So a poorly edited video (with volume going from barely audible to god damn loud) should convince me that man-made bread and wine are actually a 2000-year old man’s flesh and blood, just because supposedly according to a 1500-year old book that has been edited and censored through the ages that same man endorsed cannibalism to be practised on himself?
And Codgin, how is a great being that designed the universe and all life not fantastical?
The universe didn’t even ‘start’ as such, but I’m not going to try to explain that. Read some books about the universe that were written by actual scientists, like Stephen Hawking.
And two big asteroids colliding? :retard: