tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post9193537413063815416..comments2023-01-21T08:06:16.422ZComments on Explicit Atheist: Atheists Are Non-Believers, Even Explicit Atheists Like Me.Explicit Atheisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05501109533475045969noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post-45664581048196904702012-03-19T22:02:24.242Z2012-03-19T22:02:24.242ZGrrr. Git some followers, dude --- I have found wh...Grrr. Git some followers, dude --- I have found what few other human mortals on this playing field have yet to discover: a Way Home, past this violence and materialism that has so engulfed, so enveloped our populace on this journey to our demise; because you’re ignorant on how to rise above the whorizontal world and one-outta-one shall croak sometime, somewhere soon, God has set-up this -blessed holy socks, the non-perishable-zealothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00241446130197185049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post-9782157530719130642010-08-28T14:21:53.429Z2010-08-28T14:21:53.429ZHe said evidence, not proof. Christopher Hitchens...He said evidence, not proof. Christopher Hitchens is smart enough to know that assertions are frequently fully justified on the basis of weight of the evidence without meeting the completely impractical and unnecessary standard of being "proved":<br /><br />"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." “Mommie Dearest”, by Christopher Explicit Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05501109533475045969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post-71165646962035799742010-08-26T01:33:03.345Z2010-08-26T01:33:03.345ZChristopher Hitchens said: "That which can be...Christopher Hitchens said: "That which can be asserted without proof can also be dismissed without proof."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post-8806353028149494002010-08-23T02:04:40.924Z2010-08-23T02:04:40.924ZOur disagreement is centered on terminology but I ...Our disagreement is centered on terminology but I think it is a significant disagreement nevertheless. There are three levels of "standards of proof" in legal trials in the U.S.:<br /><br />1) beyond a reasonable doubt -- (highest level of proof, used mainly in criminal trials)<br />2) clear and convincing evidence -- (intermediate level of proof, used mainly in civil trials in the U.SExplicit Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05501109533475045969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36083955.post-20339957770987044002010-08-22T20:58:57.700Z2010-08-22T20:58:57.700ZIt is quite wrong to claim that we cannot prove Go...It is quite wrong to claim that we cannot prove God does not exist and at the same time to accept claims of 'proof' made in legal cases and scientific laboratories. We CAN prove God does not exist to the highest standards of proof used anywhere on this planet for empirical propositions. If the theist thinks that's not enough it is up to them to explain why.Jon Jermeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12802157835972797573noreply@blogger.com