When New Atheists claim "I lack belief in a god", what is it they are really trying to say?

[Calvin Ramsey]

The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
it, or do something in between. But you cannot return to a lack of
belief position, if lack of belief is defined as a non-intellectual
commitment or non-action concerning belief.

In my opinion, lack of belief is really an attempt by atheists to avoid
facing and defending the problems in their atheistic position. You see,
if they say they have no position by saying they lack belief, then their
position is not open to attack and examination, and they can quietly
remain atheists.

The problem for atheists, however, is that atheism is coming under more
serious attack by Christians and others who recognize its problems and
are exposing them. Without a doubt, there are far more people in the
world who believe in God (or a god) than don't, and more and more
Christians are tackling atheism as an untenable position. If the
majority believe, that doesn't make it right; but the increase in
examination of atheism has made it more difficult for atheists to defend
their position. This also explains why atheists, it seems, are becoming
more aggressive in their attacks on theism in its different forms. There
is an intellectual battle being waged, and both defensive and offensive
measures are being taken on both sides. In the end, the truth will be
known and atheism will become extinct.

(by Matt Slick, "Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry")

[Davej]

On Sep 20, 12:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
> they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns.

Exactly.

Or Santa Claus. The only evidence for Santa Claus are actually
provided by dishonest parents. The only evidence for Gawd are the
miracles and fables actually provided by dishonest liars.

[raven1]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:58:01 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
>they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
>no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
>on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
>may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
>to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it.

Sane people can.

> You invariably make a
>judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
>brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
>it, or do something in between.

i.e.: stay neutral. You've had this rather obvious "own goal" in the
article pointed out to you several times. What's your mental
malfunction that you keep re-posting it?

[Father Haskell]

On Sep 20, 1:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:

> In the end, the truth will be known and atheism will become extinct.

Why are you so interested in killing off other beliefs
and ways of thinking? I hate to think what sort of
mass-murdering monster lives inside your skin.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/20/2012 6:34 PM, Father Haskell wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> In the end, the truth will be known and atheism will become extinct.
>
> Why are you so interested in killing off other beliefs
> and ways of thinking?

Are you saying New Atheism is a belief system, or a philosophy?

> I hate to think what sort of
> mass-murdering monster lives inside your skin.

Trust me when I tell you it's not me you need to be worried about.

And, as always, you're welcome.

:) <-- notice the emoticon?

[Syd M.]

On Sep 21, 1:31 am, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/2012 6:34 PM, Father Haskell wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 1:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>
> >>   In the end, the truth will be known and atheism will become extinct.
>
> > Why are you so interested in killing off other beliefs
> > and ways of thinking?
>
> Are you saying New Atheism is a belief system, or a philosophy?
>

I am saying that 'New Atheism' doesn't exist, asshole.
Atheist are just atheists, we don't need any rebranding.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:44:12 -0700 (PDT), "Syd M."
<pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sep 21, 1:31 am, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>> On 9/20/2012 6:34 PM, Father Haskell wrote:
>>
>> > On Sep 20, 1:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>   In the end, the truth will be known and atheism will become extinct.
>>
>> > Why are you so interested in killing off other beliefs
>> > and ways of thinking?
>>
>> Are you saying New Atheism is a belief system, or a philosophy?

Obviously not.

Once again the pathological liar puts words into people's mouths he
knows they didn't say.

>I am saying that 'New Atheism' doesn't exist, asshole.
>Atheist are just atheists, we don't need any rebranding.

He's a fucking moron.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/21/2012 1:31 AM, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
> On 9/20/2012 6:34 PM, Father Haskell wrote:
>> On Sep 20, 1:57 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In the end, the truth will be known and atheism will become extinct.
>>
>> Why are you so interested in killing off other beliefs
>> and ways of thinking?
>
> Are you saying New Atheism is a belief system, or a philosophy?

<no reply>

It's amazing how quickly they shut-up when you force them to look at
themselves in the mirror.

[Calvin Ramsey]

The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced

to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a

judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject

it, or do something in between. But you cannot return to a lack of
belief position, if lack of belief is defined as a non-intellectual
commitment or non-action concerning belief.

In my opinion, lack of belief is really an attempt by atheists to avoid
facing and defending the problems in their atheistic position. You see,
if they say they have no position by saying they lack belief, then their
position is not open to attack and examination, and they can quietly
remain atheists.

The problem for atheists, however, is that atheism is coming under more
serious attack by Christians and others who recognize its problems and
are exposing them. Without a doubt, there are far more people in the
world who believe in God (or a god) than don't, and more and more
Christians are tackling atheism as an untenable position. If the
majority believe, that doesn't make it right; but the increase in
examination of atheism has made it more difficult for atheists to defend
their position. This also explains why atheists, it seems, are becoming
more aggressive in their attacks on theism in its different forms. There
is an intellectual battle being waged, and both defensive and offensive

measures are being taken on both sides. In the end, the truth will be

known and atheism will become extinct.

[Les]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.

Almost correct,

We do not believe there is a god to believe in.

Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
In all other respects we are no different from the average person.

For anybody wishing to know what atheists really are as opposed
to what theist would like them to believe I suggest this website
written by Richard Packham:

http://packham.n4m.org/atheist3.htm

Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"In our more diverse and secular society, the place of religion has
come to be a matter of lively discussion. It is rightly acknowledged
that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the wellbeing
and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals
and groups of all faiths and of none. "

- Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
- from a speech to the Synond of the Church of England in 2010

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/25/2012 7:59 AM, Les wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>
>
> Almost correct,
>
> We do not believe there is a god to believe in.

See my canned response to the post that you posted five minutes after
this one.

Let me know if you ever make it past the first line. Ok, Les?

Maybe then you'll begin to understand that the real topic of the post is
not what you think it is.

--
"Is English your First Language, Les?"

[raven1]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:58:01 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

Probably that he's too deluded to notice the rather obvious fatal flaw
in the argument, one that I have pointed out numerous times...

>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
>they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
>no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
>on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
>may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
>to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
>judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
>brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
>it, or do something in between.

ie: remain neutral. End of discussion; the author has just demolished
his own position.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:26:35 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:58:01 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>Probably that he's too deluded to notice the rather obvious fatal flaw
>in the argument, one that I have pointed out numerous times...
>
>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
>>they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
>>no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
>>on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
>>may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
>>to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
>>judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
>>brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
>>it, or do something in between.
>
>ie: remain neutral. End of discussion; the author has just demolished
>his own position.

Remain neutral about what?

It's merely something somebody else's religious belief that we don't
happen to share, ourselves.

And it never gets beyond that.

There is nothing to be neutral about - certainly not in the way stupid
theists who can't think outside the box seem to imagine.

They have a heck of a lot of work to do before it can get to that
stage.

Because their doctrines, tenets, presumptions only apply inside it.

Rather like the "rules" in the Harry Potter universe.

Is anybody neutral about Hogwarts?

[Dakota]

On 9/25/2012 9:26 AM, raven1 wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:58:01 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
> Probably that he's too deluded to notice the rather obvious fatal flaw
> in the argument, one that I have pointed out numerous times...
>
>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
>> they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
>> no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
>> on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
>> may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
>> to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
>> judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
>> brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
>> it, or do something in between.
>
> ie: remain neutral. End of discussion; the author has just demolished
> his own position.
>
>> But you cannot return to a lack of
>> belief position, if lack of belief is defined as a non-intellectual
>> commitment or non-action concerning belief.
>

Because I had never thought about the concept of gods, I lacked
belief. When concept of gods was introduced to me, I pondered the
possibility. Because no evidence supports the concept, I rejected it.
I did not "return to" a lack of belief position. My initial lack of
belief continued unchallenged.

>
>> In my opinion, lack of belief is really an attempt by atheists to avoid
>> facing and defending the problems in their atheistic position.
>

You are welcome to be of opinion that there is an "atheistic
position." Until you can provide evidence to support it, it remains an
unsubstantiated opinion.

>
>> You see,
>> if they say they have no position by saying they lack belief, then their
>> position is not open to attack and examination, and they can quietly
>> remain atheists.
>

You are correct. I can easily understand why you find it frustrating.

>
>> The problem for atheists, however, is that atheism is coming under more
>> serious attack by Christians and others who recognize its problems and
>> are exposing them. Without a doubt, there are far more people in the
>> world who believe in God (or a god) than don't, and more and more
>> Christians are tackling atheism as an untenable position. If the
>> majority believe, that doesn't make it right; but the increase in
>> examination of atheism has made it more difficult for atheists to defend
>> their position.
>

Lack of belief is not a position regardless of how often you claim it
to be a position or how much you wish it to be a position.

>
>> This also explains why atheists, it seems, are becoming
>> more aggressive in their attacks on theism in its different forms. There
>> is an intellectual battle being waged, and both defensive and offensive
>> measures are being taken on both sides. In the end, the truth will be
>> known and atheism will become extinct.
>

Many theists are indeed offended when the inconsistencies between
their beliefs and reality, the historic and ongoing horrors inflicted
by adherents to their beliefs, and the lack of credible evidence for
their beliefs are exposed. Without a way to defend their beliefs, and
without their historic authority to use force to impose their beliefs
on others, they must dream up ways to attack those who expose the
theistic position for what it truly is.

They are forced to invent non-existent positions, attempt to attach
those positions to atheists, and attack the non-existent position.
Because their own beliefs rely on faith without evidence, they find it
easy to maintain yet another unsubstantiated position.

As more and more people become aware of the truth, theism will
continue along the path to extinction.

[raven1]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 07:52:12 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
<chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:26:35 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:58:01 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>Probably that he's too deluded to notice the rather obvious fatal flaw
>>in the argument, one that I have pointed out numerous times...
>>
>>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
>>>they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
>>>no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
>>>on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
>>>may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
>>>to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
>>>judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
>>>brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
>>>it, or do something in between.
>>
>>ie: remain neutral. End of discussion; the author has just demolished
>>his own position.
>
>Remain neutral about what?

About whatever proposition was introduced.

[duke]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>
>
>Almost correct,

>We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>In all other respects we are no different from the average person.

What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.


The dukester, American - American
********************************************
A vote for obama is a vote for the end of
democracy in America as we know it. Let the
rolling thunder guide your decision at the
ballot box to put an end to Imperial Obama.
May God bless America.
********************************************

[Les]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>
>>
>>Almost correct,
>
>>We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>
>What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.

Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
sure.

There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/26/2012 5:55 PM, Les wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les<l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>
>>>
>>> Almost correct,
>>
>>> We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>> Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>> In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>
>> What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.
>
>
> Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
> claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence.

Then you admit to taking a stand either for or against the existence of God.

You dismiss the claim that God exists.

That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.

Whether you have to cojones to accept it or not no longer matters. You
have just confessed, in writing, that you believe God does not exist;
which, by the way, is a trait that can be found in every amateur New
Atheist.

[Andy W]

On Sep 26, 9:01 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
> >On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
> ><calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>
> >>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>
> >Almost correct,
> >We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
> >Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
> >In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>
> What is your basis for proclaiming no God?  Answer:  you have squat.
>

Funnily enough, that's actually correct. But not in the way you think.

[raven1]

Duke hasn't met "think" in the lifetime of the universe.

---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight

[Free Lunch]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:20:48 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

>On 9/26/2012 5:55 PM, Les wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les<l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Almost correct,
>>>
>>>> We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>> Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>> In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>>
>>> What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.
>>
>>
>> Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>> claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence.
>
>Then you admit to taking a stand either for or against the existence of God.
>
>You dismiss the claim that God exists.

I dismiss all empty claims that are unsupported by any evidence.

>That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.

No, but it is a reasonable conclusion.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:20:48 -0400, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 9/26/2012 5:55 PM, Les wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les<l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.

It's a clarification of the fact that we are no theists.

>>>> Almost correct,
>>>
>>>> We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>> Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>> In all other respects we are no different from the average person.

Why is this so hard to understand?

>>> What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.

Nobody does that outside the paranoid delusions of theists.

Because this is the real world beyond their religion.

>> Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>> claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence.

That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without
evidence - Christopher Hitchens.

>Then you admit to taking a stand either for or against the existence of God.

Liar.

>You dismiss the claim that God exists.

BECAUSE NONE OF YOU MORONS EVER SUPPORT IT, imbecile.

Once again, this is the real world beyond your religion - where your
god remains merely somebody else's religious belief until demonstrated
otherwise.

We simply treat it the same way as any other baseless claim.

>That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.

Liar.

>Whether you have to cojones to accept it or not no longer matters. You
>have just confessed, in writing, that you believe God does not exist;
>which, by the way, is a trait that can be found in every amateur New
>Atheist.

Where did he do that, pathological liar?

And why can't you stop lying about atheists?

[Les]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:20:48 -0400, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 9/26/2012 5:55 PM, Les wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les<l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Almost correct,
>>>
>>>> We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>> Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>> In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>>
>>> What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.
>>
>>
>> Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>> claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence.
>
>Then you admit to taking a stand either for or against the existence of God.

Calvin's favourite trick: putting words into peoples mouths using
tricks such as, 'you seem to be saying', 'you are saying' 'you are
clearly saying', and 'you imply'. In this case he has not bothered
with these phrases and gone straight into a 'then you admit', when of
course no such admission was made ...

>
>You dismiss the claim that God exists.

.. I am not even rejecting a god, only a claim that is not supported
by any kind of evidence as any rational person would for any such
claims. If I accepted every claim that comes along on that basis life
would become untenetable and I would fall for every other scam going.

>That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.

Calvin 'the assertors' Ramseys opinions are of no interest to me. He
is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
consideration given his clearly hostile intent.

>Whether you have to cojones to accept it or not no longer matters. You
>have just confessed, in writing, that you believe God does not exist;
>which, by the way, is a trait that can be found in every amateur New
>Atheist.

Yep, this is standard for Calvin 'the assertor' Ramsey (or whoever he
really is) which he does quite frequently. He puts words into peoples
mouths and then makes a 'devastating' (in his mind) conclusions about
this strawman he has created. It is not me he attacks here and what I
really said but his own straw creation for which he is entirely
responsible.

It is the old story:

They cannot attack us for what we really are so they build
strawmen to attack and try to pass them off as us.

This gives me the confidence to know we are standing on the
more solid ground and they are ones who feel the need to try and push
us off it. this initiative comes entirely from them. We did not
invite them here is is them who feel the need to come here.


In other words Calvin 'the assertor' Ramseys post here is nothing
more the the usual dross we have come to expect from him and
which I now just generally ignore.

[Les]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:22:21 -0700 (PDT), Andy W
<vor...@mailinator.com> wrote:

Right :-)

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote

>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>

> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He

> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.

So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
said that you believe that God does not exist, all you manage to eek out
is a whimpering little complaint that I don't belong here, and I'm not a
member of this community, which is exactly what anyone would expect to
see, coming from someone who's just unintentionally exposed his real
beliefs.

You "dismiss" the claim that God exists. Whether there was or was not
any evidence in support of the claim is moot and irrelevant. If you were
being at all consistent with New Atheism you would neither accept nor
dismiss the claim, since you allegedly have "no belief" whatsoever, one
way or the other. You would simply have no comment on the subject
whatsoever.

But, now, Les, anybody and everybody can plainly read for themselves
that you *do* have a comment, because you *do* have a belief, and that
belief of yours motivated you, caused you, drove you to "dismiss" the
claim that God exists. And anybody and everybody can also plainly and
logically infer for themselves that by "dismissing" the claim that God
exists, you are conversely claiming that God does not exist. Which is,
in itself, a belief statement.

Therefore; you are claiming that you believe that God does not exist.

You can whine, you can moan, you can complain all you want that I don't
belong here, and that I'm not a member of your community. But that, as
anyone can very plainly see, is a Red Herring, in your meager attempt to
change the subject.

You've been trapped once again by your own words, Les, and, as anyone
knows, it would naturally take someone who is "not a member" to bring
that fact to light. That's what you're really complaining about. Not
that you've contradicted yourself. Not that you were being very
inconsistent with your supposed non-beliefs. According to you, that kind
of behavior is acceptable and should be overlooked. But for someone who
doesn't belong here to expose your self-contradiction and inconsistency,
well, that's just not right, and you shouldn't listen to him.

That is precisely the kind of deceitful and unscrupulous behavior that
is so commonly found here among the regular members, and is so rampant
wherever you find New Atheists crawling around.

You've been trapped by your own words, Les, and you very definitely do
*not* have the cojones to accept that you've now been exposed, in full
view of everyone. And for anyone lurking, to discover what kind of
person can be found here, you have not made a very good first
impression. But you are showing the lurkers exactly the kind of person
that inhabits this blot on the landscape, full of the dregs of society.

And I thank you, Les.

[Les]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>
>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>
>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>
>
>So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>said that you believe that God does not exist,

You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
actually saying that.

<rest of dross and twaddle snipped snipped>

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:30:21 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>
>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>
>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>
>>
>>So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>said that you believe that God does not exist,
>
>You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>actually saying that.
>
><rest of dross and twaddle snipped snipped>

Like most of these morons, he is too stupid to understand that "it
doesn't exist" is only one possibility for "I don't believe" - and
that the most common reason is that it remains merely something he
believes until he demonstrates otherwise.

Again, like most of these morons, he cannot grasp that until he does
this it is no different than all the other god-beliefs out there.

A belief, not a thing to be believed doesn't exist - the belief
certainly exists but that is all it is.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>
>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>
>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>
>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>
> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
> actually saying that.

That's the part you snipped, Les.

And I didn't know you were that masochistic and self-destructive.

So, enjoy!

[Les]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 19:27:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>>
>>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>>
>>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>>
>>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>>
>> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>> actually saying that.
>
>That's the part you snipped, Les.

I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist.

<same dross and twaddle snipped>

It is most gratifying that gatecrasher Ramsey takes such a great
interest in my not sharing his religious beliefs and find it most
fascinating that he goes to such much trouble to try and make
me be something I am not.

He is doing an excellent demoliion job on his strawman
representation of me I must say :-)

Standing here, on solid ground watching him try to drag me
into the quicksand with him is most amusing.

Can we have some more of this gatecrasher Ramsey, it
is fun and clearly helps keep you out of mischief :-)

It is certainly a big improvement on the turgid nonesense
about Calvinism, the fastest declining religion in the west.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/28/2012 2:45 AM, Les wrote:

> On 9/27/2012 19:27:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:

>
>> On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:

>>> On 9/27/2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>>>
>>>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>>>
>>>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>>>
>>> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>>> actually saying that.
>>
>> That's the part you snipped, Les.
>
> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist.

Anybody with half a brain, and can read, can see that you implied that
you believe that God does not exist.

Here, I'll show it again. You snipping it tells me that you know I'm
right, and that you don't want anyone else to see that I'm right.
There's just some things you cannot hide, Les.

By the way, everyone can also see that you weren't really serious when
you wrote this:

"Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me."

and this:
"He is not....worthy of any consideration."

You must enjoy sticking your foot into your mouth, Les. I mean, you do
it so much.
<smirk>

[Les]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 03:00:28 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 9/28/2012 2:45 AM, Les wrote:
>> On 9/27/2012 19:27:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>>
>>> On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>>>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>>>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>>>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>>>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>>>>
>>>> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>>>> actually saying that.
>>>
>>> That's the part you snipped, Les.
>>
>> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist.
>
>Anybody with half a brain, and can read, can see that you implied that
>you believe that God does not exist.

I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist

but finding one of those would be impossble for people even with full
brains let alone half-wits.

<same dross and twaddle snipped>

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:24:04 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

>On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 03:00:28 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>On 9/28/2012 2:45 AM, Les wrote:
>>> On 9/27/2012 19:27:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>>>>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>>>>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>>>>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>>>>>
>>>>> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>>>>> actually saying that.
>>>>
>>>> That's the part you snipped, Les.
>>>
>>> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist.
>>
>>Anybody with half a brain, and can read, can see that you implied that
>>you believe that God does not exist.
>
> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist
>but finding one of those would be impossble for people even with full
>brains let alone half-wits.

The moron uses the Sherlock Holmes maxim - when you have eliminated
all the alternatives it must be the only one left.

But he misses obvious ones because he can't think outside his religion
and doesn't even consider any other reasons for not believing.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 9/28/2012 3:24 AM, Les wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 03:00:28 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/28/2012 2:45 AM, Les wrote:
>>> On 9/27/2012 19:27:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On 9/27/2012 1:30 PM, Les wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2012 07:42:45 -0400, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/27/2012 4:03, Les wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/26/2012 12:20, Calvin Ramsey wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is the same as claiming that God does not exist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Calvin's opinions are of no interest to me. He
>>>>>>> is not even a member of our community here and worthy of any
>>>>>>> consideration given his clearly hostile intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, rather than try and explain, using logic, why you could not have
>>>>>> said that you believe that God does not exist,
>>>>>
>>>>> You made that claim which you know need to prove by quoting me
>>>>> actually saying that.
>>>>
>>>> That's the part you snipped, Les.
>>>
>>> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist.
>>
>> Anybody with half a brain, and can read, can see that you implied that
>> you believe that God does not exist.
>
> I see no quote of me actually saying that I believe gods do not exist

I wonder why you keep leaving out where I show that you implied the same.

In the English language, Les, implying something is taken to mean the
same thing as saying it.

It's right here:

[Les]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 07:48:31 -0400, Calvin Ramsey

I see gatecrasher Ramsey is still having fun demolishing his strawman
representation of me and it looks quite devastating too. Since it
means he is not attacking me for what I really am and really say I
think I shall leave him to play with it.

I do not answer to gatecrashers like him for things I never
said anyway. In fact I do not answer to him for anything since
is nothing to me with opinions I consider worthless.

[Calvin Ramsey]

No. In the English language, Les, implying something is usually taken to
mean the same thing as actually saying it.

You want to imply something without being held accountable for it.

And that's what you're all upset about.

You're starting to realize that I won't let you get away with it.

Aren't you, Les? ;)

> I do not answer to gatecrashers like him for things I never
> said anyway. In fact I do not answer to him for anything since
> is nothing to me with opinions I consider worthless.

Oh yes you will.

By not explaining yourself when the evidence clearly indicates your
guilt, that's the same thing as admitting you are guilty, Les.

So by not answering, you are actually answering, Les.

You're welcome.

<smirk>

[Les]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:54:51 -0400, Calvin Ramsey

Just to remind people, here is what I actually wrote:
(it was in a reply to Duke and not to gatecrasher Ramsey)

------------------

"Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a

claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
sure.

There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me."

-------------------

Something that gatecrasher Ramsey has never quoted in full.

>
>You want to imply something without being held accountable for it.

<snip dross>

[Calvin Ramsey]

> Something that Ramsey has never quoted in full.

Whatever comes after "...they are claimed to exist, a claim I
dismiss...." is irrelevant.

In case you've forgotten, Les, I'll keep reminding you that by not

explaining yourself when the evidence clearly indicates your guilt,

that's the same thing as admitting you are guilty.

So by not answering, you are actually answering, Les.

You're welcome.

<smirk>

[duke]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:55:37 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>
>>>
>>>Almost correct,
>>
>>>We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>
>>What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.

>Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
>not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
>sure.

And you have zero evidence for their being no God. I have all evidence and I
profess the reality of God thereby.

>There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
>elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me.

You can't say anything at all, You have squat for evidence.

[Les]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:00:19 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:55:37 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Almost correct,
>>>
>>>>We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>>Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>>In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>>
>>>What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.
>
>>Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>>claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
>>not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
>>sure.
>
>And you have zero evidence for their being no God. I have all evidence and I
>profess the reality of God thereby.
>
>>There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
>>elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me.
>
>You can't say anything at all, You have squat for evidence.

Exactly right.

Which is why I am not a theist.

[Andy W]

On Sep 28, 2:34 pm, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:54:51 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>

> Just to remind people, here is what I actually wrote:
> (it was in a reply to Duke and not to gatecrasher Ramsey)
>
> ------------------
> "Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
> claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
> not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
> sure.
>
> There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
> elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me."
> -------------------
>
> Something that gatecrasher Ramsey has never quoted in full.
>

The thing with Calvin is, in whatever he uses for a mind, if he
believes something about God, that is proof that it is true, because
God must have caused him to believe that and God wouldn't lie.
However, if WE believe something about God, such as that he doesn't
exist, that's because God has caused us to believe something that
ISN'T true. But it is quite impossible that God would do that to
Calvin.

Obviously, that strain of believing such ridiculous things takes its
toll, and so Calvin has developed defences to deal with all those
times when he's confronted by the fact that all his beliefs are
absurd. One of those is to nitpick over some unimportant detail of
what you posted and hope you won't notice that he has ignored the
important stuff that he couldn't deal with. As you can see, he's had a
lot of practice.

Andy

[duke]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:18:15 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

>On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:00:19 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:55:37 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:59:02 +0100, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:42:46 -0400, Calvin Ramsey
>>>>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Almost correct,
>>>>
>>>>>We do not believe there is a god to believe in.
>>>>>Atheist are people who are not theists, nothing more nothing less.
>>>>>In all other respects we are no different from the average person.
>>>>
>>>>What is your basis for proclaiming no God? Answer: you have squat.
>>
>>>Exactly. All I know about gods is that they are claimed to exist, a
>>>claim I dismiss when it is never supported by evidence. I am certainly
>>>not about to accept such a claim entirely on your say-so that is for
>>>sure.
>>
>>And you have zero evidence for their being no God. I have all evidence and I
>>profess the reality of God thereby.
>>
>>>There is nothing more I can say other that it is just somebody
>>>elses religious beliefs and nowt ter to wi' me.
>>
>>You can't say anything at all, You have squat for evidence.
>
>Exactly right.
>
>Which is why I am not a theist.

Plus I have a plethora of evidence FOR the existence of God.

:
>YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
>
>"In our more diverse and secular society, the place of religion has
>come to be a matter of lively discussion. It is rightly acknowledged
>that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the wellbeing
>and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals
>and groups of all faiths and of none. "
>
>- Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
>- from a speech to the Synond of the Church of England in 2010

[Budikka666]

Budikka writes:
>On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>Plus I have a plethora of evidence FOR the existence of God.

Then why don't you go ahead and post it right here in this thread (or
post a URL to where you've previously posted it), and you and me will
formally debate its validity?

Or you can RUN as you always do *every* *single* *time* I challenge you,
thereby openly admitting to everyone on Usenet that you have ZERO faith
in this worthless god you're pushing.

Budikka

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:

> Plus I have a plethora of evidence FOR the existence of God.
>

Would you say I have a plethora of pinatas Pepe?

--
Because I am an 1337 h4x0r and don't want to use anything that you n00bs
might be able to understand.

[Budikka666]

On Sep 29, 10:24 am, Budikka666 <Budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> Budikka writes:

> >On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:01:36 -0500, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >Plus I have a plethora of evidence FOR the existence of God.
>
> Then why don't you go ahead and post it right here in this thread (or
> post a URL to where you've previously posted it), and you and me will
> formally debate its validity?
>
> Or you can RUN as you always do *every* *single* *time* I challenge you,
> thereby openly admitting to everyone on Usenet that you have ZERO faith
> in this worthless god you're pushing.
>
> Budikka

I guess it's "Run Awayyyyyy" yet again for Dumbass Dewk.

Kepe running you Chickenshit for Christt™, it's what you do best,
after all.

Budikka