There is a rim.

A rim, causes a equal and opposite reaction. The water acts on the rim. The rim makes the water rise.

The reaction made by the immune system works in this way. It is decernable.

How can man. Listen. Because this destroys atheism.

How can man be a plural format ?
If Atheism was correct wouldn't it be a anti-format ? No format ? No existence. No now ?

Remember. The immune system acts like water to the rim. A cut is healed be the immune system no ?

So how can eternity have a immune system, that's formatted ? And that you exist in and have existed in. And how can the cosmos end if you are here now ?

lol. lol.

There is no rim. There is Meniscus. Water is made up of polar molecules, with positively and negatively charged ends, as is glass. Since polar molecules like to stick together, the water in a glass tube will actually tend to stick to the sides of the tube.
The immune system has no meniscus. The immune system rejects things foreign, such as the concept of supernatural beings, ie God. Thus the intense inner turmoil often experienced by Christians and other Godly peoples.
Man is not a plural format. Man is a singular indicator of the species Homo Sapien (I use the term sapien lightly). Thus atheism (to follow your er, logic) would be pro-format, all format, existance, now.
The cut is not healed by the immune system, the immune system attempts to reject infection. The cut is healed by tissue regeneration, just as regeneration of the population will (and does) slowly heal the injury of religion.
Whether or not eternity has an immune system I can't argue as I haven't been there yet and don't, at this time , have time to do the math. To suppose, however, that said eternity's alleged immune system is formatted is to assume an intelligent entity capable of constructing cosmological code, developing the required interface, outsourcing beta models for testing, fine tuning, and finally, release of the bug free final product.
Of course, we now recognize that there is no geological/fossil record of any previous beta issues, and the extant model is anything but bug free.
It is the illusion of existing in the supernaturally formatted cosmos that permits that very existance in comfort. We seem to be either willfully blind to the bugs,or are so astounded when they rear their distasteful little heads, that the collateral damage that ensues with our often extreme attempts to deal with them, can be appalling.
The cosmos can end if we are here now because we will eventually run out of "nows".
Therefore, atheism is absolutely "TRUE".

Why it's b11ng00 b11ng00: you've come back. You really should stick to one name, though.

You make some good points.
Unfortunately they are beyond my comprehension at this point in time.

I should go and study for awhile. Talk to you in a few years (hope I remember).

Peace........

Paradox is proportional/symmetric reaction.

In other words, Symmetry is a case of action and reaction.

Or a radius (a circular region whose area is indicated by the length of its radius) on a circle making the circle.

This concept is testable be this proof.
Look at a circle. And see all radius points on the circle. If you can, my theory is false. If not, my theory is true. And a circle is not the set of radius/plural, but radius/singular acting to make the symmetric circle figure.

Now. a circle is a format(1 : the shape, size, and general makeup (as of something printed)).Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Now then. We/Mankind. Act for a symmetric reaction. But a circle is this already. A circle is a format. A symmetric action reaction

So we act for a preformatted reaction !

The future is preformatted. Symmetric. And plural. As long as a circle is a circle.

How can mankind have a plural/symmetric/preformatted future that reacts to our action ? Like this action ?

As mankind developes cures and heals with time. The future must also do the same. Hence. Intelligence is before us. Waiting for us. The provides a format for us. That is symmetric/perfect. This creature(whatever it is) is perfect/symmetric. And since we are here now. The future must be itself. It thinks therefore it is. Perfect without the inperfection we present.

Hence. Atheism is false.

Peace.

b11ngoo b11ngoo.

I lost my password and I cancelled my yahoo email so I couldn't ask for a new one.

edit 60.

edit 61.

Even if you could prove that atheism is false, nobody would care especially the atheists. Atheism is a belief system derrived from the belief that there is no divine being (essentially). As you all likely know since you are obviously lovers of wisdom, it is nearly impossible to change one persons belief system. Furthermore, I propose that it is impossible to eliminate any belief system by rendering it invalid to its followers/practitioners.

P.S: I do not see why anybody cares about anybody elses belief system. It is more important to make sure that your belief system is legit. Is that what this whole thread is about inadvertantly (e.g. if I prove that your belief system sucks, it makes mine more valid)?

Last one proselyizing wins reality.

But atheism is not a belief system. It is simply lack of belief in a deity. There is no doctrine, no dogma. no black masses.

A belief system does not imply doctrine, only a firm adherance to a specific ideology. No real rules have to be involved. I feel that a belief system can involve the presence or absence of belief in a specific action, behavior, or thing.

Atheism is the belief that there is no deity. This is essentially a rewording of your quote, but it does lessen the valididty of your argument.

_________________
The world owes us nothing but a grave.

You have a point there. Belief that God does not exist is commonly refered to as strong atheism. Not believing in God is weak atheism. However, a belief does not a system make. I would think a belief system would encompass all the philosophical baggage that was necessary to support the system.

Atheism has no built in philosophical framework. Atheists probably cover the gamut of philosophical viewpoints, aside from Theism. Universality is one of the attractive things about atheism. Anybody can be one. No prerequisites.

Atheism is probably the one thing atheists have in common. We can, and do, differ on most other aspects of life...different politics, former religions (if any), races and nationalities, sexes, ages, philosophies, lifestyles, musical tastes, etc.

There is no common ideology, only a common idea.

You disagree with: "A belief system does not imply doctrine, only a firm adherance to a specific ideology (the science of ideas)."

You agree, to some extent with: "A belief system does not imply doctrine, only a firm adherance to a specific idea.

I think your issue is based on semantics, but that's fine. Due to the fact that I have an interest in programming, which by its very nature is anti-ambiguity, I am the same way.

I do not agree entirely with your previous post, but I do not disagree with it either. Another issue based on semantics.

Semantically, I disagree

As you state, I don't agree with...

OK, Ek. I'm not trying to be flip so if my statements and questions seem so I apologize. This is something that I have never understood about Atheism.

Atheist, hard or soft, do not believe in God. Correct?
How do they come to this conclusion? Do you just get up one morning and decide not to believe in God?
Once this realization is made, is it supported in anyway? You and others have put up many posts here in support of atheism. If there is no belief system, why the support?
It seem to me that an Atheist supports by their belief with biological macro-evolution, the big bang, the correctness of our system for dating fossil remains and the classification of life. Wouldn't these then be considered part of the belief system of Atheism?

I know that you think that all theist want to see Atheism as a "religion".
Between you and me, I don't care but I am constantly confronted but the same arguments in support of this belief just as you always hear the same ones for Christanity. No matter how I slice it, it comes up peanuts.
The topic is very confusing. How can Atheist believe something without support?