this post was submitted on 29 May 2025
1143 points (96.1% liked)
Atheist Memes
6411 readers
105 users here now
About
A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.
Rules
-
No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.
-
No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.
-
No bigotry.
-
Attack ideas not people.
-
Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.
-
No False Reporting
-
NSFW posts must be marked as such.
Resources
International Suicide Hotlines
Non Religious Organizations
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Ex-theist Communities
Other Similar Communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You clearly don’t know what I mean, since I’ve said repeatedly that other people’s claims or beliefs don’t constitute evidence.
I asked for actual evidence. If you have none, you could have said that near the beginning of this conversation rather than whatever you’ve been doing.
You also clearly don’t know what I mean since you’ve been attributing random meanings to me that have been wrong every time. I don’t have nefarious purposes, I actually just want the actual evidence you claimed to have, and I don’t put stock in people’s stories, because people are often mistaken for many reasons. For evidence to be taken seriously , it should not rely on subjective accounts.
So it sounds like you don’t have evidence, you have stories.
I know exactly what you mean. 100% crystal clear.
You asked for physical evidence.
Once I realized you had a radically strict criteria for what types of evidence could be considered "actual evidence" far and beyond what the most serious scholars and historians would apply, I did say that.
https://lemmy.ml/comment/18918021
Right here I said we were done and I had nothing more I could give you.
I gave you the evidence I claimed to have.
You want evidence I never claimed to have, but which you mistakenly think I did.
Are you sure?
Earlier you told me we know Australopithecus existed because we found their bones.
I believe some scientist may have found a bone, but why do you accept its as old as they say it is, why do you accept it belonged to a distinct species called Australopithecus? Where's the physical evidence of that?
In between the Australopithecus and the homo sapien there are quite a few missing links that need stories to fill them in.
Maybe they migrated this way in this period? Maybe the water was lower and there was an ice bridge here? Maybe this was a distinct species and not a direct ancestor?
These are all stories aren't they, opinions of archaeologists and paleontologists and biologists?
Why do you consider finding a weird looking bone evidence of Australopithecus if you don't follow the subjective accounts of evolutionary scientists and archaeologists when they're dating these bones and sequencing genetic material and so forth?