So remaining unconvinced of Bigfoot, in it's truest form, is asserting that Bigfoot does not exist?
Nope, he very well could exsist. The question is as I stated above does the burden of proof required for you to acknowledge that he indeed does exsist meet your requirements? The answer is really simple, your burden of proof is met or it isn't very black and white.
If I speak the loudest about Bigfoot's non-existence, I change the very meaning of the word 'unconvinced'?
No, maybe in your own mind but that doesn't matter to the real world because the deffinition of "unconvinced" remains the same whether you see it that way or not.
How convenient for you to be able to ignore fallacies, it complements your logic well.
Not really that I ignore them they got equal play time I just choose not to prescribe to them after watching them and making my own decision based on my required burden of proof.
If your remarks are aimed at those claiming no god, then fine. I have problems with those people's logic as well. Just as long as you are not trying to contrive that every atheistic stance boils down to claiming there is no god, which you are.
Like I said in my first post on this I spoke directly to no one particular person in this thread, if you feel singled out I am sorry but that wasn't the intention and that also was stated before yet you still come back at me as if I am speaking directly to you.
So that there is no misunderstanding at the core Atheism is the act of believing in NO Diety which God is considered a diety. I can't stand Wikipedia but alot of people on here use it as if were law so here we go.
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of
belief in the
existence of deities.
[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no
deities.
[2] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.
[3] Atheism is contrasted with
theism,
[4][5] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.
[5][6]
The term
atheism originated from the Greek
ἄθεος (
atheos), meaning "without god", which was applied with a negative connotation to those thought to reject the
gods worshipped by the larger society. With the spread of
freethought,
skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in
criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope. The first individuals to identify themselves as "atheist" appeared in the 18th century.
[7]
Atheists tend to be
skeptical of
supernatural claims, citing a lack of
empirical evidence. Atheists have offered various rationales for not believing in any deity. These include the
problem of evil, the
argument from inconsistent revelations, and the
argument from nonbelief. Other arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. Although some atheists have adopted
secular philosophies,
[8][9] there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.
[10]
Makes no sense to me that one can be Atheist but be spiritual, seems to me the Atheists can't even agree on what is acceptable as Atheism
