You haven't shown anything.
You've merely strutted around claiming proudly to have read a book once, but have not actually demonstrated any knowledge of it's contents.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 13:39, 2 replies)

"You haven't shown anything."

Try *reading* son. Twice in this exchange I've caught you out on you not actually having read my posts. Perhaps if you did try reading them and attempting to comprehend you may get somewhere, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. You've asked me for a proof which was provided with directions where to find more. I've answered all your objections as concisely (as you requested) as I could. From yourself there have been wondrous claims that agnosticism is the only sensible position and how you're right and so forth and yet you've not attempted to demonstrate why, you seem to merely take it as writ that you are right. You've been similarly unable to answer criticisms of your position. You are, in short, just a shouty wanker desperately trying salvage some sort of draw out of a public bitchslapping.

Good luck with that.
(Dildo Bugger destroyed a ring on, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 13:46, closed)

No you haven't. You've simply made spurious, non-commital references
For example "their existence can be dismissed via a variety of arguments", but not provided those arguments.

But you were telling me how I'm a shouty wanker.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 13:58, closed)

"For example "their existence can be dismissed via a variety of arguments", but not provided those arguments"

I see, so when someone claims belief in a creator god then providing an argument that rules out the possibility of a creator god counts, in your eyes, as "not providing those arguments"? Yessssssssss. I merely meant in the follow-up that there exist other arguments against specific religions and their claims for gods. You now want me to list all these arguments for you, just so your pointy little headed objectionism can be sated? Did you not read (of course you didn't, why am I fucking asking?) above where I mentioned that you risk sounding like the theist going "what about the giraffes neck, eh? eh?" with ever more fervent demands for even more disproofs once one is offered. Well, you've been told where to look, go and educate yourself you silly little ignorant prick. (Cue the "oh you've sworn, clearly you've lost the argument" defence employed by all good ignoramuses online everywhere, ever, in lieu of reason or demonstration.

Still waiting for a reasoned demonstration of why agnosticism is correct from you. So far we've had:

Vagabond: "Agnosticism is sensible, innit? We can't prove nuffink, yeah?"

Others: "Go on"

Vagabond: "Yeah, well, we can't prove nuffink can we? Stands to reason, dunnit?"

Others: "Does it?"

Vagabond: "Yeah, we can't prove nuffink, well, because we can't prove nuffink. All opinions are equal-like"

Others: "Deeply fascinating, now fuck off"
(Dildo Bugger destroyed a ring on, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:07, closed)

Yes I want you to list AND APPLY those arguments.
Simply informing me there are some is absolute, utter tripe.

If not, I simply dismiss you with "Well there are very good arguments against your case. You lose. Next!" which I'm sure you'll agree is not really arguing at all.

But by all means - insult me in lieu of doing so. It would appear very important that you at least have the last word, despite the fact no one's watching, or that my opinion of your online persona is so, in which case you're going to have to do a whole lot better than simply huffing and puffing about your philosolophy degree and how much better you are than anyone with a different opinion.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:14, closed)

sorry dude but reading through all this
your arguments have been soundly routed, you're offering no rebuttals or counterpoints or even giving due consideration to the other side, you just seem to be either being argumentative for the sake of it or waiting for Dildo Bugger to stop posting so that you can have the last word.

You have dropped in my estimation.

I have no doubt that you will reply to this, almost certainly insulting me, casting aspersions on my intellect or sexuality, probably telling me I'm taking it too seriously. Whatever. On the evidence of what I've read above, I'm afraid there's no point trying to engage with you.

That is all.
( kappynitty doubled your entendre on, Wed 1 Sep 2010, 14:10, closed)