On the Quote site, someone posted the question Dear Atheists, what is your whole thoughts about the nephilim giants? Can you debunk it for me? Johannason, a self-identified, “Agnostic Atheist” replied thusly and it lead to a discussion which witnessed his worldview’s utter collapse
You know all that evidence for them?
Yeah, me neither.
I, Ken Ammi, replied
Johannason
You’re kidding, right?
Okay then. I’m god.
If no evidence is necessary, that should be good enough.
Ken Ammi
I’ve no idea what you mean by “no evidence is necessary”:
1) you’re either replying that you realize that on your worldview it’s unnecessary.
2) or, your reply was a non sequitur since you inferred something I didn’t imply.
3) or, you’re playing a typical Atheism 101 level goalpost moving game of distract at all cost so as to hide your worldview’s collapsed failure.
Perhaps I should also ask if there’s anything wrong with committing logical fallacies, on your worldview.
Johannason
If it is necessary to “justify” the expectation that a claim has supporting evidence, then it follows that evidence is not necessary without that justification.
Therefore I’m god. If my word alone isn’t good enough to accept that, then feel free to justify your need for evidence of it.
This is called a “Reducio ad Absurdum”, where a contradiction in your position is exposed by demonstrating that you don’t actually believe your own shit.
Claims require supporting evidence in order to be believable. If that requirement must itself be justified in order to be valid, then the requirement is being declared invalid, which means all claims are automatically true without any expectation of support.
Therefore I’m god, and by my authority I say that you’re wrong anyway.
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
See, if you don’t do that then merely asserting positive affirmations such as, “Claims require supporting evidence in order to be believable” is just merely asserting positive affirmations based on, “Thus saith Johannason.” I understand you’re asserting positive affirmations, that’s the whole problem, so merely doubling down on asserting positive affirmations only digs you a deeper hole.
Johannason
“Thus saith Johannason, who, if claims do not require supporting evidence, is God.”
If you’re going to talk about “justifying worldviews”, this is all you’re going to get.
The goalposts aren’t moving. Either claims require supportive evidence, or they don’t. Introducing this “worldview” [****] is just an attempt to justify Special Pleading.
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
Perfectly said, “Either claims require supportive evidence, or they don’t” and I’ve noted:
“The very first systematic critical thinking step if for you to justify demanding evidence, on your worldview”
And then:
“Now, again, the issue is, ‘The very first systematic critical thinking step if for you to justify demanding evidence, on your worldview’ which I had to ask since you began with a conclusion”
And then:
“it’s…about justifying your demand for evidence and doing so on your worldview. So, just take the very first step”
So, still awaiting for you to take the very first step rather than continuing to play a game of distract, distract, distract from your worldview’s collapsed failure.
Johannason
>Introducing this “worldview” [****] is just an attempt to justify Special Pleading.
Asked and answered.
So do claims require evidence, or am I god?
There’s no third option.
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
Wow, you will literally do anything to keep avoiding the issue.
Okay, let’s try it this way: the first systematic critical thinking logical step is not beginning with the conclusion of demanding evidence but justifying demanding evidence so please do so.
Johannason
Asked and answered.
So do claims require evidence, or am I god?
There’s no third option.
Ken Ammi
Friend, you can’t fool me since I’m the other side of this discussion and I have all of it on an ongoing record on a Word doc.
So, the first systematic critical thinking logical step is not beginning with the conclusion of demanding evidence but justifying demanding evidence which you haven’t even begun to attempt to answer so, please do so now.
Johannason
Asked and answered.
Do claims require evidence, or am I god?
Ken Ammi
Since now your diversionary tactic is to merely assert “answered” then please quote yourself answering it, from this thread.
Johannason
Asked and answered.
AND I QUOTE: “DO CLAIMS REQUIRE EVIDENCE, OR AM I GOD? THERE IS NO THIRD OPTION.”
Ken Ammi
Friend, you don’t seem to be familiar with how to even have this discussion.
To review, I noted, “The very first systematic critical thinking step if for you to justify demanding evidence, on your worldview.”
Thus, a (non) reply of, “DO CLAIMS REQUIRE EVIDENCE, OR AM I GOD? THERE IS NO THIRD OPTION” is utter incoherence. How does asking if claims require evidence or asking if you’re God and asserting there’s no third option a justification for your demand for evidence on your worldview?
So, to simplify this even further: on your worldview, the answer to, “DO CLAIMS REQUIRE EVIDENCE” is, “No.”
Thus, you’ve disqualified yourself from demanding evidence.
And so if you ever demand evidence again you’ll know that you’re a self-discredited, self-debunked dishonest manipulator (even though there’s nothing with being a dishonest manipulator on your worldview).
Plus, of course, you can no longer condemn anyone for (supposedly) lacking evidence.
But, of course, that assumes you’re consistent but the problem is that on your worldview, there’s also no universal imperative to be consistent: which is why Atheists are only ever consistently inconsistent.
A best practice would be to jettison your collapsed failure of a worldview and repent before Jesus.
Johannason
Sorry, besides that you’re desperate to keep evading: what makes you make an incoherent statement such as, “If claims don’t require evidence…?
Ironically, you’re also projecting since you incoherently asserted, “you’re obligated to simply accept that because I said so” when your point, your very premise, all along has been you’re obligated to simply accept that you’re required to provide me evidence because I said so. Please tell me you’re not really literally incapable of realizing that—especially since I’ve pointed it out to you many times.
Johannason
Asked and answered, every time.
Sure would be nice if you could read.
Ken Ammi
Well, you’re literally incapable of even understanding how to have a discussion.
Please do some basic reading into critical thinking or logic or philosophy or anything like that.
Johannason
I have, and I’ve proven I have throughout the course of this discussion, but you still can’t read.
Ken Ammi
Actually, since you’re literally incapable of replying since you’re literally incapable of even understanding the issue no matter how many times I tutor you about it, you’re not even having the same discussion that I’m having: you’ve committed category errors.
Is there anything with committing logical fallacies, on your worldview?
Johannason
“UM ACTUALLY” stop lying.
Ken Ammi
I’ve no idea what that means.
Why are you accusing me of lying?
You ran away from the question, “Is there anything with committing logical fallacies, on your worldview?” so I will just change it a bit now and ask: Is there anything with lying, on your worldview?
Johannason
Asked and answered. Again.
Invoking this “worldview” [****] is inherently dishonest. Again.
If you’re going to continue to lie, at least get some new ones. But it won’t matter, because this discussion WILL NOT PROGRESS until you STOP LYING, which you are being accused of doing BECAUSE YOU ARE LYING.
It really isn’t rocket surgery.
Ken Ammi
Indeed, this really isn’t rocket surgery so why is it literally impossible for you?
Your “Asked and answered. Again” seems to be a fantasy that you actually believe so it’s very simple, just quote where you actually justified the demand for evidence with which you incoherently began.
This is a perfect example of your anachronistic incoherence:
You merely asserted that I’m lying.
Besides that you’ve been playing (failed) mind-reader, I asked what’s wrong with lying, on your worldview.
You merely asserted that I’m lying.
Etc., etc., etc.
And now you assert, “you are being accused of doing BECAUSE YOU ARE LYING.”
Are you really incapable of being coherent enough to understand that systematic critical thinking works?
Since you’re literally incapable of telling me what lying is wrong, on your worldview–how and why it’s wrong—then you’re merely emotively subjectively expressing personal preferences du jour on the level of telling me your favorite ice-cream flavor or making a “Dear diary, today I feel…” entry.
In other words, you’re saying X is wrong because I say X is wrong by beginning with the merely asserted conclusion, based on hidden assumptions, that X is wrong because thus saith Johannason.
Johannason
Asked and answered. In fact, everything you addressed here I have already answered multiple times.
This would be a lot less circular if you could read.
Ken Ammi
It’s astonishing that you literally created a fantasy and talked yourself into believing it.
Yet, when I ask for you to just quote it, you can’t because it doesn’t exist in the real world.
Well, that doesn’t surprise me since on your worldview, the real world is accidental, as is our ability to discern it, there’s no universal imperative to adhere to it, nor to demand that others adhere to it.
So, we’ve come full circle to the utter collapse of your failed worldview.
Johannason
Are you STILL lying?
When you asked me to quote it, I did.
And now you’re lying about what I believe by invoking the word “worldview”, which is used seriously by no-one honest, ever.
Ken Ammi
You clearly don’t know what it means to lie and you certainly have no premise upon which to condemn (supposed) lying.
I mean to quote an actual defeater, an actual justification, not that merely vague assertion that impressed you but is flaccidly incoherent and so impotent.
Let me do your job for you: on your worldview there’s no justification for demanding evidence nor for only basing our views on that which can be evidenced and so you discredited yourself twice over.
Johannason
Are you STILL lying, misrepresenting, telling false stories, spinning fabricated narratives, and sharting out complete horse[****]?
Everything you have just said, I have already answered. Time, and time, and time, and time again, in this very discussion.
If you aren’t going to pay attention, I see no need to repeat myself.
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
Let’s assume that your failed attempts at mind-reading are accurate and I’m doing those thing that you merely imagine and then merely assert I’m doing: on your worldview, there’s literally nothing wrong with, “lying, misrepresenting, telling false stories, spinning fabricated narratives, and sharting out complete” stuff.
In fact, on your worldview those can be very, very good things since they can be Atheist-Evolutionary survival mechanisms.
So, you discredited yourself again, and doubly so.
Johannason
And you’re still spinning yarns, while pearl-clutching about some imaginary “manners” that you yourself do not possess.
No, I will not “mind my manners”. [****] manners, [****]dishonesty, and [****]your “worldview” horse[****] which I have already told you, multiple times, is another lie.
Do you understand? The assertion that I believe there’s nothing wrong with lying IS ITSELF A LIE. You are continuing to lie about what I believe. It’s a lie. You’re lying.
Go on, tell the same [****]ing one again, see what happens. Because if you think my “manners” are going to improve, you’re even more deluded than your existing responses indicate.
But we’ve already established that you can’t or won’t read.
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
You’ve already proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you’re disgusting, very angry, and illogical so you can stop piling on the proof.
You seem to forget that I noted, “You’re moving the goalpost since it’s not about, ‘it is necessary to ‘justify’ the expectation that a claim has supporting evidence’ but about justifying your demand for evidence and doing so on your worldview. So, just take the very first step.”
So, you seem to have confused yourself, you seem to think that you replied with a defeater and yet, you only defeated an argument no one has made.
Now, after ranting like an unruly child, you merely assert that I “lie” but how could you possibly know that—more failed mind-reading attempts—and what, on your worldview, is wrong with lying—especially when it’s a fantastically helpful Atheistic-Evolution survival mechanism?
Again, on your worldview, there’s literally nothing wrong with, “lying, misrepresenting, telling false stories, spinning fabricated narratives, and sharting out complete” stuff because there’s no universal imperatives to do or not do anything within an accidentally (uncreated, un-designed, not the end result of a volitional plan, etc.) existing existence wherein an accidentally existing ape gets angry and pounds cuss words into a keyboard.
And note that you’re so literally incapable of doing anything but being angry that even when it comes down to it, you merely assert, “The assertion that I believe there’s nothing wrong with lying IS ITSELF A LIE. You are continuing to lie about what I believe. It’s a lie. You’re lying” but you never get around to elucidating how mine was a mere assertion nor how it is a lying is wrong within an accidental existence wherein truth is accidental.
“see what happens”? I have been seeing it all along, you instantly collapsed long, long ago when I merely pointed out that you’re literally incapable of taking the very first little step towards systematic critical thinking: just justify your demand for evidence, on your worldview, so we can finally get to step two: even though you also won’t like step so since it’s not what you think it is since you always incoherently begin with conclusions.
Johannason
[****] your imaginary manners, [****]your lies, [****]your “worldview” horse[****], and [****] you.
Ken Ammi
Wow, you appear to be suffering from some psycho-emotional problems.
Maybe stay offline for a while, go out in nature (without your phone), get together with friends and family (in person).
Your worldview tells you that you’re just an accidentally existing ape and so you’re acting like it.
I see that you pulled a very, very typical Quora Atheist missionary move: you opted for censorship by setting this thread to, “Adding comments disabled” so you could run away to your safe-space.
Well, I have kept an up to date record of this discussion on a Word doc and I will now post it on my website.
For anyone else reading this, you can witness Johannason’s utter collapse here:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby.
If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out.
Here is my donate/paypal page.
You can comment here and/or on my Twitter/X page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.