Oh, didn’t you know, Daffy can turn invisible and intangible. Just like the imaginary God you believe in. How weird!
He did. He told it to me. He gave me 13 animation cells with rules to live by.
Daffy told Tex to keep his mouth shut. It’s one of those plans that we poor humans aren’t supposed to understand.
Speaking of unproveable statements…
“Rabbit season!”
“Duck season!”
“Rabbit season!”
“Duck season!”
See, this is why atheists debate Christians. Who knew this was going to turn into a discussion of Looney Tunes?
That’s what it’s always been… a rose by any other name…
We do have evidence that the God of the Jews was created long after the existence of the universe. Archaeological and historical evidence that shows He only began to be worshiped after the Earth had cooled and life evolved on it.
If Daffy told Tex Avery to keep his mouth shut, then how do you know Tex Avery was told to keep his mouth shut unless Tex Avery told you this himself, thus meaning that what you said wasn’t done was, indeed, done?
So the supposedly real talking duck is now imaginary?
And I’m sure you’ll have no problem submitting those 13 animation cells for analysis then.
…Now, I realize you’re being facetious because you think you’re making a point, but you really aren’t.
So God only exists if He’s worshiped?
What makes conventional god beliefs any more plausible or less silly than Daffy Duck beliefs, though?
In all seriousness, we have substantial archaeological evidence that El/Yahweh evolved from an earlier Canaanite pantheon. Yahweh even used to have a girlfriend.
:rolleyes: And should I “acknowledge I might be wrong” about Santa Claus?
We all know where this line of rhetoric goes, we’ve seen it a thousand times before. You want me to “admit” I might be wrong, so you can treat some minuscule hypothetical possibility of God as if it was just as reasonable as believing in China.
And again; all the facts, all logic are on my side. You are in the position of someone trying to pretend that believing in Santa Claus is just as reasonable as disbelieving in him. Since you don’t have any good arguments for a claim like that, you are trying to produce a false equivalence and shout dissenters down.
You need to keep notes, it will keep you from losing focus in a fast moving debate thread. You said that Daffy Duck couldn’t have created the universe because he was created by a man a few decades ago.
I told you that the Jewish God was created by men a few millennia ago. You are arguing that the historical and archaeological evidence we have are when man started worshiping Yahweh, not when he came into existence.
I am trying to show you that the same argument could be said for Daffy Duck.
Hopefully, this will eventually sink in and you will realize that what you think is a solid argument for the existence of a God you favor, is in actuality an shittty, shitty, ignorant argument for any God whatsoever.
But I’m not gonna hold my breath on that one. 
These are the types my posts refer to. It’s illogical to me to discuss something you believe does not exist so fervently. And then go on to repeat that it does not exist and berate anyone who disagrees with you. I really believe it has a cause. There’s anger and frustration behind it. Someone said earlier it’s more characteristic of new atheists. This is the second post I’ve seen here and I am brand new, where the same people do not wish to even discuss the question asked, they wish to derail into a God debate.
It puzzles me. Seems a tremendous waste of time. Why does it always have to be the same derailment? Why not just create a post where you fight believers or do the ‘pit’? Is it that noone will engage them elsewhere?
Reread the thread. What’s happening here is theists are making factually incorrect claims. Atheists are showing them that they are incorrect, and the theists are ignoring it.
It is factual that there is no evidence for God. There are plenty of intelligent people who embrace religion for emotional reasons. This is all well and good, but when people make factual claims, on a site that is devoted to reducing ignorance, what do you expect to happen?
You’re seeing “fervency” where it doesn’t exist. You also aren’t seeing anyone get berated for per se beliefs, but for bad arguments or for missing the point.
what’s happening here is my question is not being answered and you guys are derailing the conversation to suit yourselves. Theists and atheists alike.
We have time to burn… it’s why we’re here.
And I’m gonna go back to what Bryan Ekers said… it’s fun in it’s own way. True believers are so easily tripped up because they seem unable to distinguish among facts, opinions, evidence and beliefs.
I have no argument at all with a believer who says, “I believe this because it comforts me, whether or not there in any evidence to support it.” But so few of them say that… they insist they have the Truth, and the people who don’t are the ones who are deluded.
Are you getting angry? We are having fun. Perhaps this is your answer.
Yeah, that’s called conversation, it’s this thing humans do.
(The answer, by the way is that your original question is pretty boring. Atheists argue with theists because theists use unsupported and illogical arguments to make untestable conclusions about our world. If someone tells me the sky is green, I express disbelief. If someone tells me their Aunt Agatha watches them from heaven and tells them which lottery numbers to pick, I express disbelief about that too.)
And very often, the claims they make are more the equivalent of saying that the sky is a perfectly spherical rectangle. Or that the sky is florb.