Where is your Evidence for no God

This is the type of question designed to deflect responsibility to explain a claim something exist one has no proof for.

I stated — “Atheism is a lack of belief. ”

His response — True, but you stated that you believe something. you stated: “the reality that there is no god”. Where is your evidence of no God?

What answer will suffice to demonstrate to a believer that the “evidences” that claim for a god are strictly emotions and feelings or spectral evidences that are not valid for proof in any setting—but religion? The mere fact that he has to use that particular question, is evidence there is no gods out yonder in the heavens that tinkers in the lives of humans.

Ben-Life after religion is a fantastic and thoughtful blog. If you haven’t stumbled into it yet, take a look.

Author: jimoeba

Alternatives to big box religions and dogmas

90 thoughts on “Where is your Evidence for no God”

            1. Obviously you annoyed God, you heathen atheistic (SFX: insert naughty names here, please) and had better pray for rain and/or forgiveness, Pronto!

              Like

            3. Then on your own head be it. Or shall I try to do it for you? Here, hold the line a moment—

              “Hey, God!”
              “Argus. How nice. Yes?”
              “How about cutting those guys in the northern hemisphere some slack, and cool ’em down a bit?”
              “Okay. For you, Argie old son, anything—”
              “Wow. Just like that? There’s power in prayer after all?”
              “My efforts will take some weeks to kick in, but tell ’em that thanks to my might and power and infinite mercies they’ll start cooling off a bit soon.”
              “Sir, thank Yo—”
              “But there’s a catch, Dog … someone’s gotta cook, so I’ll transfer my wrath to your end of the world. Soon.”
              “Bast—”
              “Be nice, Dog, or I’ll forget you’re an anagram and get a bit vengeful … you know I’m allowed to, the precedent’s been set all over the place right through time!”

              Okay. I tried. Brrrr …

              Liked by 2 people

  3. Last I checked there was no need to prove that something that does not exist actually does not exist. 50 years ago a bunch of us sat around and invented a new bird that does not exist–we called it a quat. To this day no one has ever seen one. Neither has anyone proved they do not exist. I guess that means they do exist. We gave them a name, thetefore they are real…
    Yeah, sure!

    Liked by 10 people

    Reply

    1. I thought so. Whew! they think it’s so “gotcha” but really it’s just too stupid to deal with, but, no more warped than thinking in tandem with the incomrehen-sinility (yes, my new word) defending what is not there

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. My personal favourite is Why does the universe exist? To an apologist this question makes perfect sense. It makes sense because they’ve forgotten (or were simply never told) that the notion that the universe once didn’t exist is nothing but a religious presupposition; an antiquated philosophical notion repeated so often inside apologetics circles that apologists today take the idea that the universe once didn’t exist as some sort of established fact.

        It’s not a fact.

        It’s a presupposition.

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

        3. An innocent might ask in passing (with or without the tongue-in-cheek) … “Was that before or after the Big Bang?”

          As a devout atheist I’m glad I don’t have to answer that question myself. Brrrrr.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

            1. Thanks for these links. I had great fun ploughing through and wishing I understood it. In the end I am impressed but realise that I shall simply have to run with the balls I have—basic logic based on empirical observation.

              I have seen god.
              Okay, I’ve seen lots of gods, some of ’em covered in honey and/or flowers … and very nice they are too (but not the nasty ones).

              I could ask an Abrahamic to show me his God so that it (oops—It) can compete but I shan’t; wee kiddies are happy with their fairies and Santa Clauses, Abrahamics are happy with the Jehovahs and Allahs and stuff—who would I be to rain on their parade (other than in self-defense)?

              And self-defense is entirely my own motivation. Brrrr …

              Liked by 4 people

          2. One of the differences between astronomers and TrueBelievers is that when we (astronomers) find out we (I’m the amateur variety) were wrong about something, we get all excited and delighted about it because it means we learned something new and immediately start to try to figure out what went wrong with our thinking and start gathering evidence to discover what’s really going on.

            The most fun and exciting thing to happen in astronomy in the last few decades was the discovery that we didn’t know what the hell most of the universe was made of! When we discovered through mass calculations of galaxy clusters, rotation rates of galaxies, and very odd results when calculating the expansion rate of the universe, we discovered that we that we didn’t know what the hell 85% or more of the universe was made of. The vast majority of the universe was made of dark matter, stuff we couldn’t see, and dark energy, energy we couldn’t detect. The only reason we knew it was there at all was by its gravitational effects on galaxies and its effects on the acceleration of the expansion of the universe. That discovery launched whole new branches of astronomy and physics.

            A TB, when confronted with something that doesn’t fit in with his or her world view, cannot adjust their belief system to accommodate new evidence because that would undermine the foundation of their whole system of belief. Therefore they attempt to deny that the new evidence exists, or claim that the new evidence is some kind of conspiracy intended to undermine their faith.

            There are rumors, by the way, that the late Sir Patrick Moore, upon learning of the first evidence of dark matter, squealed like a little girl, did a small dance, and a little wee came out he was so excited. I’m sure these are apocryphal.

            Liked by 3 people

            Reply

            1. That is a great point Grouchy. TB’s like to say that science gets proven wrong all the time, but no, it is just a system that becomes more correct over time. and that will be the death of religion the impossibility to change because of their ultimate truth.

              Liked by 2 people

            2. JIM:

              a nice dream. But the ‘death of religion’ will never occur until (oh God, please help me here) (boom boom!) we start getting our kids and upcoming generations to think for themselves.

              They’ll need the freedom to think for themselves, though, but I don’t see that ever happening. So it will be an uphill slog for free minds. A painful one too, in many cases and places.

              Liked by 1 person

    2. The answer to that question is a crash course of a crash course of a crash course on Logical fallacies

      Which for the most part would be a waste of time as the “believer” would just repeat that question later to you or someone else

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  5. Yes, I hate that question, too. Without mentioning God, I’ve been telling my children lately that we “can’t prove that something does not exist.” They give me examples–centaurs, etc… and we make a game of it.

    I also agree with you on Ben’s blog: thoughtful, balanced, and well-written.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply

  6. It was 1971, the first week of June, about 7 in the evening, hotter than the blazes, and I was taking my first college class, on logic, of all things. I rather resented being there because all of my friends just out of high school were going to be spending the summer partying, while I’d signed up for 16 credits over the summer. It was a class in Logic, and I was sure I was going to hate it. Only it turned out I didn’t. I rather liked the class and it’s served me well over the decades.

    One of the things I learned in those classes is that you can’t “prove” something does not exist. There is no proof of nonexistence because, well, if that thing does not exist, there is no way to prove anything at all about it because it has no existence. It is a logical fallacy, a question that makes no sense.

    When someone makes a claim that something does exist, the burden of proof is on the person who made the claim, not on the person who questions that claim. Demanding that the questioner provide proof that the nonexistent thing doesn’t exist means simply that the claimant *has no proof* (how do you guys do italics here anyway?) and is attempting to shift the burden of proof from himself to the questioner because he knows he cannot prove his claim.

    Now that that’s over with, I sincerely hope you guys out West and South get some relief from the heat soon! I complain up here when it gets above 90, I can’t imagine what it must be like out west with the drought, the heat, the fires… Be careful out there!

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

    2. I guess if there is that much debate over whether something exists or not, raise your antennae because most likely we’ll be arguing speculation for the next 2018 years (+/-) 8 years, or 5… Wait, when was he born again? We’ll talk about it for centuries because it most likely never happened.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    3. In one of Jim’s recent post, a comment was left asking Jim to proof that the god that exist isn’t love

      There is no proof of nonexistence because, well, if that thing does not exist, there is no way to prove anything at all about it because it has no existence.

      Truer words were never spoken. How can someone proof that the invisible, intangible unicorn in my house does not exist

      Religion: A free ticket to avoid treatment for a hallucination Jonathan

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

            2. Actually I did do HTML programming ages ago. I was a web designer for a few companies when I ran my own consulting firm back in the day. But it’s been so long since I dabbled and there have been so many changes since then that I generally just rely on the built in tools to deal with the control character insertions.

              Liked by 1 person

    5. Grouch:

      to opine on whether something exists or not I look at the evidence and the claims made by ‘witnesses’. I do my own sums, use my own scales. I think the evidence in the cases of gods has to be evaluated by weighing claims against evidence. and stir in some probabilities while we’re at it.

      But before we even start we have to know what is meant by ‘god’ … all the many thousands of them, or any one in particular? I like the ages-old English legal saying that “He who alleges, must prove.” Which could be a toughie either way.

      Aside: to italicise—

      type

      and immediately write in whatever you are wanting to be italicised, then when satisfied close off the italicisation by typing in

      —like I just done. Did …

      Bugger … I have the feeling I’ve just fallen into a wormhole … cute …

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

        1. If serious (and not just trapping innocent well-meaning old dogs) … type one of these

          then everything that follows will be in italics.

          Once you reach the end of your desire italics bit, type in

          —and you should revert to normal. (And now to post, to see wot happened …)

          Like

          Reply

          1. I never knew that, those uppercase commas and fullstops (Americans, read periods) are invisible when published in comments.

            Okaaaaay … (this has ‘long day’ written all over it …)

            begin your italicised statement with an uppercase comma (looks like a left pointing arrowhead) followed be the letters em (wow!) then say your piece, and to finish the italicky bit type an uppercase comma followed immediately by a slanty thing (under the query/question mark) then the em and close the lot with an uppercase fullstop/period.

            If that doesn’t make sense, or work, there’s always Pussers Rum for consolation …

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

  7. I believe bigfoot lives on the dark side of the moon. He’s furry, wears a big-ass coat, and is a Chicago Bears fan. He’s also invisible. Where’s your proof this isn’t true?! HA!!! Gotcha there, didn’t I!

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

          1. I think this Mitch Trubisky is going to be good. Will he remain intact and not get sacked 45 times a game? Um, I’m taking the 5th. New coach, too. That usually means, like, 9 losses at least just based on that. So, season’s gonna be rough. But, with the NFL these days, teams can turn around pretty fast. So, I’m hopin’. Prayin’ too, but that hasn’t worked since 85.

            Liked by 4 people

            Reply

            2. Free agency has really changed the game. This is what makes New England so friggin’ amazing. Love ’em or hate ’em, what that team has done or the past 20 years, in THIS era, is amazing and will never be duplicated again. That being said, I hope the bastards go 0 and 16 this year. Bastards. 🙂

              Liked by 5 people

            4. 😀 Yeah, I hate ’em. But, damn, what they’ve done is incredible. And Brady is the best to ever play, even though I HATE the SOB. He’s a MAGA guy. I wonder just what it is about America to Brady that’s hurt him so much Trump needs to fix it? I’d say he’s been treated pretty effing well here. The bum.

              Liked by 4 people

            9. If you want to learn HOW to build an NFL dynasty in today’s free-agency game, you mimic the Krafts. If you want to build a multi-billion dollar-valued authoritarian franchise BRAND — i.e. the owner can be whatever he wants, even the cheerleaders or quarterback — but no product on the field, staying mediocre (at best) for 20+ seasons then construct a monstrosity of a gazillion-dollar stadium, then you mimic the Jerry Jones model. 🤣

              Liked by 3 people

            11. Hahahahaha! Go ask all the brain-dead season ticket Cowboys fans who’ve been selling out those AT&T stadium seats the last 10-years and the final 15-20 years at Texas Stadium. THEY seem to have a shitload of money to throw away. 😉

              Liked by 4 people

    2. My proof is that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has not mentioned your belief and so it must be a fallacy. Your belief just doesn’t fit mine so you must be evil and punished forever for it. I love you though.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

    3. Don’t you hog yore invisible Bigfoot none, Insp~! Ya wanna sell shares and make a bundle (don’t knock the thought, it’s been done before … the prospectus is called ‘Holey Burble’) (or was it ‘holey Babble’? Damn—something like that …)

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  8. Apparently, it’s over the top, difficult to define what a god is. Sure there are volumes of attributions but that gets you no closer to the “is” part of the equation. In the abstract is has no know provenance, location, time nor function. Heck, it is so nebulous of a concept all efforts to flesh it out fall short of the mark. The reasoned conclusion would be that god is by definition an imagined something “?” one must mold into a natural paradigm for its existence to manifest. I believe it’s where the expression “it’s all in your head comes from.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Perfectly stated—I believe there is “something” so I need to explain what I feel might be, now you must prove my feelings are not truth because I’m really convinced that my spectral, Hypnagogic experience seemed real so to me.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  13. Before reading the post itself the first thought that sprang to mind as a response to such an intelligent question is … in the box along with the evidence for no little green men from the Atlantis under Antartica, the flying purple people eaters, the reptilian Bigfoots, all the Adolf Hitlers seen by impeccable witnesses in Patagonia, Ecuador, Argentina and Brussels …

    You want evidence of nothing? Look around you, Dude, you won’t find it ‘cos it’s everywhere but to find nothing you need to know what you’re not looking for.

    And now to read the post and see if I got it right …

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a reply to inspiredbythedivine1 Cancel reply