The hard problem

Users can’t be deleted if they have posts. Delete all posts before trying to delete a user. (Posts older than 60 days old can’t be deleted.)

You can remove all your posts and then I’ll try for you.

I can just block you as well, then you wind up in the “ether”. :woman_shrugging:t2:

1 Like

Isn’t is absolutely fucking amazing how a member who requested his account be deleted several weeks ago JUST HAPPENED TO BE hanging around at just the right moment to see a post directed to him? And that same individual who would have KNOWN WITHOUT A DOUBT his account had not been deactivated (Otherwise, how could he possibly receive the directed post notice and then respond to it?) just happens to pick NOW to respond with legal threats toward the AR. Not to mention the fact that our newest self-proclaimed super-sleuth JUST HAPPENED TO CHOOSE that one other individual to reach out to as an alli, despite that individual expressedly claiming he would no longer be involved with the AR. Oh, and I won’t even bother to mention the similarities in their “debate” styles. Things that make you go, “Hmmmmm…” :thinking:

(Edit for duplicity.)

1 Like

That is wildly inaccurate.


Here’s a response for you. Considering one of the links you posted, it implies you want to have no other dealings with the AR or any of its members. Plus, it suggests you would prefer to have folks here to forget you ever existed. (Which is fine with me, by the way. I had already forgotten about you, if that makes you feel any better.) YET!.. Here you are all of a sudden replying to a post directed to you, as if you’ve been hanging around this whole time WAITING for a chance to jump in and happily REMIND everybody of who you are. I swear, this kind of shit can’t be made up. Am I the only one here who finds this to be hilarious? :joy::joy::joy::joy::joy:

(Edit for social etiquette.)


Absolutely not shocking in the least little bit, Good Lady. Apparently, you have failed to realize that our dear Sherlock is far above having to answer questions presented by the soulless god-forsaking heathen simpletons within these forums. He is a god unto himself, and thus he answers to nobody but himself, as he himself already has all the answers to our questions, but it is OUR responsility to find those answers for ourselves. He is here simply to help us find those answers by asking US questions so as to motivate US to search for the answers he already has. See? It’s elementary, Watson.

(Edit for seeking enlightenment.)

@Tin-Man, his settings indicate he wants to be notified by email if anyone responds to one of his posts.

Ahhhh… Okay, makes sense. Fair enough. Nevertheless, for somebody who claims he wants to be forgotten and stated he was no longer interested in participating in AR activity, he sure as shit has a funny way of going about doing that. Just an observation. Personally, I would have simply ignored and deleted the notice. But, hey, that’s just me… (shrugging shoulders)…

@Nnnnnn, no personal information about you is available. I’m happy to disable your account. Let me know if you would like us to do so.

Atheism is not a belief, and does it really need to be explained again that you are the one who sought atheists out, in order to peddle your vapid superstitious wares?

1 Like

Yea, Tin! What’s your problem? Opening doors and being all nice and shit. See what happens! Shut the door and go away. No one invited you to this party! LOL!!!

1 Like

Frankly that statement is itself a belief. I disagree with you @Sheldon I do not think one can honestly be an atheist unless holding some beliefs first, some assumptions, axioms.

I do not, I really do not understand the need you and some others here seem to have to be so rude, why can’t we disagree? What is so hard about interacting with someone who disagrees with you?

Why say of me “peddle your vapid superstitious wares” when I am just disagreeing with atheism and the arguments and claims put forward by atheists?

Why the hostility, the vitriol? I’m not your mortal enemy, I mean no harm to anyone here, I am simply disagreeing and trying to explain why I disagree, the reasons that I do not agree.

I suggest some of you listen to this debate about the existence of God between two highly respected though somewhat dated, intellectuals, at no point is an insult hurled, Russell (an atheist) would (I suspect) be appalled at the tone and hostility some of you use here.

This particular recording has only recently been uploaded, originally recorded by the BBC in 1948.

Has anyone here said we cannot disagree?
Rude is far from objective. For instance, I think it’s rude that you refuse to answer so many questions, particularly when the question is attempting to get more info about what you think and why.
It’s not hard, at least for me, to interact with someone with whom I disagree. That should be evident in the amount of interaction that’s taken place over the years here in these forums.


Suspect all you like about how they would think. Frankly, I don’t care if they would be appalled. I, however, am appalled at what I perceive to be a thinly veiled attempt at shaming some of the posters here.

Is someone trying to play the victim role now? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ah … I just want information* You can’t tell me why… therefore God!*** What in the hell is the matter with you folks! Quit picking on the theists. You know how sensitive they are!


You keep saying this as if beliefs can’t also be well supported by objective evidence or be factual? You have also failed to address the fact that framing atheism as belief would firstly contradict the commonly understood definition found in any dictionary, and secondly mean I was not an atheist, despite the fact I don’t believe in any deity.

This has already been refuted. You refused to accept the refutation that we remain insentient until birth, ipso facto we are bron without beliefs, I asked you if you had beliefs when you were born, you never answered. Though this is moot anyway, as holding beliefs does not make atheism itself a belief.

You used the word vacuous but when I reciprocate it’s vitriolic? You might want to read your posts from he start and ask yourself if you think you were showing any respect or courtesy to the atheists here, but I was actually just being factual, but if you had been respectful and debated in good faith I might be less inclined to be so blunt about it.

What vitriol, what hostility? If you had showed some courtesy and respect yourself the tone might be different perhaps, but telling others what their atheism must mean is not my idea of respect, nor is being dishonest, and you have done both. You have from the very start adopted an attitude of sneering intellectual superiority, so playing the victim now isn’t going to fly sorry. Respect requires reciprocity, and of course while I respect anyone’s right to believe whatever they want, no one can demand I respect the belief itself, that’s frankly absurd.

Did the theist intellectual in that debate open by telling Russel his lack of belief was a vacuous non position, that his notion of his own atheism was wrong, and that he denied the accuracy of the biblical claims in the gospels because he was simply biased with no epistemological grasp of what constituted evidence? Did he dishonestly accuse him of scientism just for declaring the existence of scientific facts that contradict biblical claims?

No I don’t think you can honestly try to play the victim now sorry, and I’ve been pretty patient as well. Respect requires reciprocity, and it can never be demanded for a belief.

My sentiment precisely.

Is that a respectful way to open a discourse with atheists? Now I know he qualified it, but it was an inauspicious start, and there has been more of course?

Belief. You’d think there wasn’t another word out there. Frankly, I rarely use it.
Belief: trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

Perhaps :thinking: it’s @Sherlock-Holmes opinion that when we state we have no confidence in unevidenced claims, it’s an “ideology”?

Perhaps addition synonyms to belief ( Synonyms: faith, principles, doctrine, ideology More Synonyms of belief

it’s @Sherlock-Holmes belief that when we state we have no belief in unevidenced claims, it’s a “belief”.


You could just logout without any intention of ever returning. No one said you had to be here.

It is a lack of belief in the existence of deities.

That’s because you’re a Christian and can’t comprehend Atheism. Sounds like a personal problem.

Because you’re wanting people to agree with your personal definition of what you believe it is and reality just doesn’t work that way. You can’t argue facts.

While you reserve the right to disagree with everyone here, we also reserve the right to remind you of the fact of what Atheism is. There is no “Christian definition” of Atheism. There is only THE definition. You’ve been reminded politely multiple times. How many times must a child sit in the back seat and ask 80 different times: “are we there yet” before the parents tell them to stop?

There is no hostility. You just don’t listen.

You can try to rationalize it however you want, but it falls under the concept of preaching.

1 Like

A teenager? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like