The Ref wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 08:23:51 -0400, Attila < wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:50:59 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9c496Fsit6U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Attila wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:39:27 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9bsiiFrec7U1@mid.individual.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> D wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Maximus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:38:00 -0700, The Starmaker
>>>>>>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>> <662F2428.72E6@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is a belief, it's not a science.
>>>>>>>>> Religious beliefs and Atheism beliefs are both on the same level
>>>>>>>>> of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Atheist are confident that there is no God, as Religions are
>>>>>>>>> confident that there is a God.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They are are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>> Not really.  Theists postulate the existence of something without
>>>>>>>> any supporting evidence for that existence.
>>>>>>> I disagree. billions of believers and personal testimony is
>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>> That is not scientific proof.
>>>>> I never said it was
>>>>>
>>>>>> In order to count as proof, they need to devise a test that proves
>>>>>> god. No such test has ever been devised that satisfies the rigorous
>>>>>> standards of science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If personal testimony would be enough, then you end up with a
>>>>>> pantheon of gods, pink unicorns, ufos etc. I am sure you can see how
>>>>>> foolish this position is.
>>>>> with any evidence, we must determine credibility. there are currently
>>>>> 2.4 billion christians and almost 2 billion muslims in the world
>>>>> today.
>>>>> believers in pink unicorns, or other gods, don't even come close.
>>>> Interesting. At some point there were less than 20 persons who
>>>> believed in Christianity and millions that believed in other gods.
>>>> Does that mean those gods were valid at that time and Christianity was
>>>> not? Does a religion become valid when a certain level of belief is
>>>> reached? What is the number needed to validate a religion as being
>>>> true?
>>> I don't believe any number can.
>> Then why did you mention the number of Christians and other religions as
>> if the numbers matter?
>>
>>
>>>> Are you say the numbers prove both Christians and Muslims are valid so
>>>> there are at least two gods? Do Hindus contribute a third?
>>>
>>> no, could be it's just different beliefs about God
>> The issue is numbers, not beliefs. And whether numbers can validate
>> beliefs.
> They can't

yes, but they provide circumstantial evidence

> -- it's a logical fallacy:
>
> https://infidels.org/library/modern/constructing-a-logical-argument/#numerum
>
> Argumentum ad numerum
> This fallacy is closely related to the argumentum ad populum. It consists
> of asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition,
> the more likely it is that that proposition is correct. For example:
>
> “The vast majority of people in this country believe that capital
> punishment has a noticeable deterrent effect. To suggest that
> it doesn’t in the face of so much evidence is ridiculous.”

so why would so many ppl think it does? (see comment below)

>
> “All I’m saying is that thousands of people believe in pyramid
> power, so there must be something to it.”
>
> Followups: alt.atheism

however, in the real world, the more ppl who believe something, the more
likely it is to be true, or at least have some validity. and the basis
for that would be that they have reached the same conclusion after
consideration of what evidence there is, or the merits of what they are
in agreement about.

--
“Atheism is the birth right of all human, remember that!”- hhyapster 7.4.23

"Christian beliefs fail against reason, facts, and knowledge"

"Religion is not about truth, it's about lifestyle"

"God is a convenient explanation for what man does not understand.
The less that's inexplicable, the less need for a 'God' explanation."

"The problem with theism is that it never remains within
the realm of belief, but invariably proceeds to assertion"

On Sun, 5 May 2024 09:23:37 +1000, Maximus
<gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
<l9nubsFlr0aU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:

>The Ref wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 08:23:51 -0400, Attila < wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:50:59 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9c496Fsit6U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:39:27 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9bsiiFrec7U1@mid.individual.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> D wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Maximus wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:38:00 -0700, The Starmaker
>>>>>>>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>> <662F2428.72E6@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is a belief, it's not a science.
>>>>>>>>>> Religious beliefs and Atheism beliefs are both on the same level
>>>>>>>>>> of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Atheist are confident that there is no God, as Religions are
>>>>>>>>>> confident that there is a God.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They are are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>> Not really.  Theists postulate the existence of something without
>>>>>>>>> any supporting evidence for that existence.
>>>>>>>> I disagree. billions of believers and personal testimony is
>>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>> That is not scientific proof.
>>>>>> I never said it was
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In order to count as proof, they need to devise a test that proves
>>>>>>> god. No such test has ever been devised that satisfies the rigorous
>>>>>>> standards of science.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If personal testimony would be enough, then you end up with a
>>>>>>> pantheon of gods, pink unicorns, ufos etc. I am sure you can see how
>>>>>>> foolish this position is.
>>>>>> with any evidence, we must determine credibility. there are currently
>>>>>> 2.4 billion christians and almost 2 billion muslims in the world
>>>>>> today.
>>>>>> believers in pink unicorns, or other gods, don't even come close.
>>>>> Interesting. At some point there were less than 20 persons who
>>>>> believed in Christianity and millions that believed in other gods.
>>>>> Does that mean those gods were valid at that time and Christianity was
>>>>> not? Does a religion become valid when a certain level of belief is
>>>>> reached? What is the number needed to validate a religion as being
>>>>> true?
>>>> I don't believe any number can.
>>> Then why did you mention the number of Christians and other religions as
>>> if the numbers matter?
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Are you say the numbers prove both Christians and Muslims are valid so
>>>>> there are at least two gods? Do Hindus contribute a third?
>>>>
>>>> no, could be it's just different beliefs about God
>>> The issue is numbers, not beliefs. And whether numbers can validate
>>> beliefs.
>> They can't
>
>yes, but they provide circumstantial evidence

For what it is worth. Unverified evidence is a bit useless.

As far as numbers are concerned there are many examples of
where the numbers were about as far from reality as
possible.

>
>> -- it's a logical fallacy:
>>
>> https://infidels.org/library/modern/constructing-a-logical-argument/#numerum
>>
>> Argumentum ad numerum
>> This fallacy is closely related to the argumentum ad populum. It consists
>> of asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition,
>> the more likely it is that that proposition is correct. For example:
>>
>> “The vast majority of people in this country believe that capital
>> punishment has a noticeable deterrent effect. To suggest that
>> it doesn’t in the face of so much evidence is ridiculous.”
>
>so why would so many ppl think it does? (see comment below)
>
>>
>> “All I’m saying is that thousands of people believe in pyramid
>> power, so there must be something to it.”
>>
>> Followups: alt.atheism
>
>however, in the real world, the more ppl who believe something, the more
>likely it is to be true, or at least have some validity.

And the Earth is flat.

> and the basis
>for that would be that they have reached the same conclusion after
>consideration of what evidence there is, or the merits of what they are
>in agreement about.

Shall we find some witches to burn when the next plague
hits? Perhaps we should have burned some to end Covid.

--

Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting
and abhorrent.
Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying.

Whatever it takes - Stop the Democrats. Or the Dims
as I prefer to call them

The most dangerous enemies the United States has:

Biden the Senile Bastard and his Bitch and
supported by the Sluts and Pimps including
Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Jamaal Bowman,
Cori Bush, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, Jerry Nadler,
Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and Cory Booker. They
have stepped over the line and are working against
the country and what it stands for.

Do not work with them but oppose everything they attempt.

Stop the Green Raw Deal! I dare call it treason.
Go WOKE. Go broke.
CRT - Criminals Recruiting Thugs
DEI - Dumbass Egotistical Idiocy
End all social engineering programs.

I don't know how Comical Karine can still hold a straight
face with what she has to say.

Did the last sane person leaving California remember to
turn off the lights? Did he do the same for the Rotten
Apple?

Abortion should be like any other medical procedure
and be the decision of the patient and the doctor.
It is the business of no one else.

There is only one reason for a woman to get an abortion.
She want's it. All else is irrelevant

I support a Pro-Choice Constitutional Amendment.

Don't build a wall, build a kill zone.

Attila wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2024 09:23:37 +1000, Maximus
> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
> <l9nubsFlr0aU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>
>> The Ref wrote:
>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 08:23:51 -0400, Attila < wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:50:59 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9c496Fsit6U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:39:27 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9bsiiFrec7U1@mid.individual.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> D wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Maximus wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:38:00 -0700, The Starmaker
>>>>>>>>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>> <662F2428.72E6@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is a belief, it's not a science.
>>>>>>>>>>> Religious beliefs and Atheism beliefs are both on the same level
>>>>>>>>>>> of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Atheist are confident that there is no God, as Religions are
>>>>>>>>>>> confident that there is a God.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>> Not really.  Theists postulate the existence of something without
>>>>>>>>>> any supporting evidence for that existence.
>>>>>>>>> I disagree. billions of believers and personal testimony is
>>>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>>> That is not scientific proof.
>>>>>>> I never said it was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In order to count as proof, they need to devise a test that proves
>>>>>>>> god. No such test has ever been devised that satisfies the rigorous
>>>>>>>> standards of science.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If personal testimony would be enough, then you end up with a
>>>>>>>> pantheon of gods, pink unicorns, ufos etc. I am sure you can see how
>>>>>>>> foolish this position is.
>>>>>>> with any evidence, we must determine credibility. there are currently
>>>>>>> 2.4 billion christians and almost 2 billion muslims in the world
>>>>>>> today.
>>>>>>> believers in pink unicorns, or other gods, don't even come close.
>>>>>> Interesting. At some point there were less than 20 persons who
>>>>>> believed in Christianity and millions that believed in other gods.
>>>>>> Does that mean those gods were valid at that time and Christianity was
>>>>>> not? Does a religion become valid when a certain level of belief is
>>>>>> reached? What is the number needed to validate a religion as being
>>>>>> true?
>>>>> I don't believe any number can.
>>>> Then why did you mention the number of Christians and other religions as
>>>> if the numbers matter?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Are you say the numbers prove both Christians and Muslims are valid so
>>>>>> there are at least two gods? Do Hindus contribute a third?
>>>>> no, could be it's just different beliefs about God
>>>> The issue is numbers, not beliefs. And whether numbers can validate
>>>> beliefs.
>>> They can't
>> yes, but they provide circumstantial evidence
> For what it is worth. Unverified evidence is a bit useless.
>
> As far as numbers are concerned there are many examples of
> where the numbers were about as far from reality as
> possible.
>
>>> -- it's a logical fallacy:
>>>
>>> https://infidels.org/library/modern/constructing-a-logical-argument/#numerum
>>>
>>> Argumentum ad numerum
>>> This fallacy is closely related to the argumentum ad populum. It consists
>>> of asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition,
>>> the more likely it is that that proposition is correct. For example:
>>>
>>> “The vast majority of people in this country believe that capital
>>> punishment has a noticeable deterrent effect. To suggest that
>>> it doesn’t in the face of so much evidence is ridiculous.”
>> so why would so many ppl think it does? (see comment below)
>>
>>> “All I’m saying is that thousands of people believe in pyramid
>>> power, so there must be something to it.”
>>>
>>> Followups: alt.atheism
>> however, in the real world, the more ppl who believe something, the more
>> likely it is to be true, or at least have some validity.
> And the Earth is flat.

most ppl believe the earth is a sphere. are they wrong or not?

>
>> and the basis
>> for that would be that they have reached the same conclusion after
>> consideration of what evidence there is, or the merits of what they are
>> in agreement about.
> Shall we find some witches to burn when the next plague
> hits? Perhaps we should have burned some to end Covid.

we can burn MX if you like..

> --
>

--
“Atheism is the birth right of all human, remember that!”- hhyapster 7.4.23

"Christian beliefs fail against reason, facts, and knowledge"

"Religion is not about truth, it's about lifestyle"

"God is a convenient explanation for what man does not understand.
The less that's inexplicable, the less need for a 'God' explanation."

"The problem with theism is that it never remains within
the realm of belief, but invariably proceeds to assertion"

On Sun, 5 May 2024 14:45:59 +1000, Maximus
<gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
<l9oh8aFoengU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:

>Attila wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 May 2024 09:23:37 +1000, Maximus
>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>> <l9nubsFlr0aU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The Ref wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 08:23:51 -0400, Attila < wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:50:59 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9c496Fsit6U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:39:27 +1000, Maximus <gladiator@colosseum.rome>
>>>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <l9bsiiFrec7U1@mid.individual.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> D wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Maximus wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:38:00 -0700, The Starmaker
>>>>>>>>>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>> <662F2428.72E6@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is a belief, it's not a science.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Religious beliefs and Atheism beliefs are both on the same level
>>>>>>>>>>>> of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheist are confident that there is no God, as Religions are
>>>>>>>>>>>> confident that there is a God.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They are are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>> Not really.  Theists postulate the existence of something without
>>>>>>>>>>> any supporting evidence for that existence.
>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. billions of believers and personal testimony is
>>>>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>>>> That is not scientific proof.
>>>>>>>> I never said it was
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In order to count as proof, they need to devise a test that proves
>>>>>>>>> god. No such test has ever been devised that satisfies the rigorous
>>>>>>>>> standards of science.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If personal testimony would be enough, then you end up with a
>>>>>>>>> pantheon of gods, pink unicorns, ufos etc. I am sure you can see how
>>>>>>>>> foolish this position is.
>>>>>>>> with any evidence, we must determine credibility. there are currently
>>>>>>>> 2.4 billion christians and almost 2 billion muslims in the world
>>>>>>>> today.
>>>>>>>> believers in pink unicorns, or other gods, don't even come close.
>>>>>>> Interesting. At some point there were less than 20 persons who
>>>>>>> believed in Christianity and millions that believed in other gods.
>>>>>>> Does that mean those gods were valid at that time and Christianity was
>>>>>>> not? Does a religion become valid when a certain level of belief is
>>>>>>> reached? What is the number needed to validate a religion as being
>>>>>>> true?
>>>>>> I don't believe any number can.
>>>>> Then why did you mention the number of Christians and other religions as
>>>>> if the numbers matter?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you say the numbers prove both Christians and Muslims are valid so
>>>>>>> there are at least two gods? Do Hindus contribute a third?
>>>>>> no, could be it's just different beliefs about God
>>>>> The issue is numbers, not beliefs. And whether numbers can validate
>>>>> beliefs.
>>>> They can't
>>> yes, but they provide circumstantial evidence
>> For what it is worth. Unverified evidence is a bit useless.
>>
>> As far as numbers are concerned there are many examples of
>> where the numbers were about as far from reality as
>> possible.
>>
>>>> -- it's a logical fallacy:
>>>>
>>>> https://infidels.org/library/modern/constructing-a-logical-argument/#numerum
>>>>
>>>> Argumentum ad numerum
>>>> This fallacy is closely related to the argumentum ad populum. It consists
>>>> of asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition,
>>>> the more likely it is that that proposition is correct. For example:
>>>>
>>>> “The vast majority of people in this country believe that capital
>>>> punishment has a noticeable deterrent effect. To suggest that
>>>> it doesn’t in the face of so much evidence is ridiculous.”
>>> so why would so many ppl think it does? (see comment below)
>>>
>>>> “All I’m saying is that thousands of people believe in pyramid
>>>> power, so there must be something to it.”
>>>>
>>>> Followups: alt.atheism
>>> however, in the real world, the more ppl who believe something, the more
>>> likely it is to be true, or at least have some validity.
>> And the Earth is flat.
>
>most ppl believe the earth is a sphere. are they wrong or not?

Fact with independent verification says they are correct.
But for hundreds of years the average person thought the
Earth was flat.

>
>>
>>> and the basis
>>> for that would be that they have reached the same conclusion after
>>> consideration of what evidence there is, or the merits of what they are
>>> in agreement about.
>> Shall we find some witches to burn when the next plague
>> hits? Perhaps we should have burned some to end Covid.
>
>we can burn MX if you like..

He is too much fun to use as a target. He has so many
buttons.

--

Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting
and abhorrent.
Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying.

Whatever it takes - Stop the Democrats. Or the Dims
as I prefer to call them

The most dangerous enemies the United States has:

Biden the Senile Bastard and his Bitch and
supported by the Sluts and Pimps including
Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Jamaal Bowman,
Cori Bush, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, Jerry Nadler,
Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and Cory Booker. They
have stepped over the line and are working against
the country and what it stands for.

Do not work with them but oppose everything they attempt.

Stop the Green Raw Deal! I dare call it treason.
Go WOKE. Go broke.
CRT - Criminals Recruiting Thugs
DEI - Dumbass Egotistical Idiocy
End all social engineering programs.

I don't know how Comical Karine can still hold a straight
face with what she has to say.

Did the last sane person leaving California remember to
turn off the lights? Did he do the same for the Rotten
Apple?

Abortion should be like any other medical procedure
and be the decision of the patient and the doctor.
It is the business of no one else.

There is only one reason for a woman to get an abortion.
She want's it. All else is irrelevant

I support a Pro-Choice Constitutional Amendment.

Don't build a wall, build a kill zone.