Prove it to me that atheists exist

The proof that atheism exists is its existence as a documented phenomenon with a history, a population of adherents, and a body of philosophical and scientific arguments supporting it. Evidence includes the consistent lack of compelling proof for deities, the problem of evil, and the scientific explanation of natural phenomena that once were attributed to gods. The existence of a large, global population of people who identify as atheist also serves as proof. 

(FLRW raises his hand) Hello!

The proof that atheism exists is its existence

So no proof.

The phrase "existence is proof" can refer to a philosophical concept or a mathematical one. In philosophy, the mere fact that something exists can be used as evidence for its reality, a concept often used to argue for a divine creator. In mathematics, an "existence proof" is a formal argument that demonstrates that a solution or object with a specific property must exist, without necessarily having to construct or explicitly find it. 

I disbelieve in certain labels of gods. Does that count?

Not really a religious debate.

One either subscribes to religious ideas or one doesn't.

One does not need to prove anything.

So philosophically speaking, just another set of Lucyful ramblings that will not prove anything.

Even so, the only appreciable difference between theism and atheism is A.

Associated conjecture is just a variable mish mash of the same type of thing.

For example:

I believe in a GOD, do I not.

Do I believe in a GOD, not I.

You always end with a no and a good reason to be lynched..

Well, no no's, but 5 not's and 1 n't.

Taking off your jacket to prepare to be lynched is a giveaway.

Smiling at what is below the camera.

Do you want that to be separately lynched?

You're not going to really start posting this fundamentalist crap, are you.

Fundamentalist is a slur.

The only thing wrong with fundamentalism is that it isn’t fundamentalism.

That is true.

There was always something previously.

So I ask here, can anyone prove to me that atheism exists?

It’s not our job to.

The way this works is that the burden of proof falls onto the person who makes the claim. Any claim. In this case the claim is “I am an atheist”, which simply means, “I do not believe in a god”.

So the next question is, what amount of evidence would satisfy that claim?

To figure this out we apply a very basic principle of reason: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In other words, the more out of the ordinary a claim is the more evidence one would need to justify it.

”I do not believe in a god” is by no means an extraordinary claim, in fact a statement by an individual regarding what they believe is one of the most mundane claims anyone could possibly make.

In addition, there is also a “default position” principle involved here; you either accept the claim until proven otherwise, or reject the claim until proven. In this case, rejecting someone’s stated beliefs until proven puts you in a situation where essentially nothing can be believed and you accept nothing about what anyone believes. That leads to absurdity.

Therefore, absent any evidence to the contrary, the only rationally defensible position is to accept the claim until you have a reason not to.

Burden satisfied. You’re welcome.

So much for proving that atheism exists.

If anyone wants to present proof that atheism exists, dont be shy!

To say you don’t believe in God is a terrible insult to God. That is why god sent Jesus to restore faith in God. The rest is in the Bible.

Is that why Jesus said,  "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

So much for proving that atheism exists.

If by “prove” you mean “provide a valid and sound justification”, that I did, perhaps you should read it.

If by “prove” you mean “convince me”, then no thanks. There’s nothing more pointless than trying to prove something to someone who has decided ahead of time that they will not be convinced.

If by “prove” you mean “provide a valid and sound justification”, that I did, perhaps you should read it.

I am sure you think so, but all you did was point out other unprovable claims, which isnt absurd because it isnt contradiction.

God resurrected Jesus to make up for his mistake. Jesus even forgave the people who crucified him.

Luke 23:34 Then Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they ...

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they don't know what they are doing.” And the soldiers gambled for his clothes by throwing dice

all you did was point out other unprovable claims

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the default position being that we believe what people tell us regarding their own mental state unless we have reason not to… those aren’t unprovable claims, they’re basic principals of logic and reasoning.

To disregard them is to disregard logic itself, which you have shown more than a willingness to do, making any further attempt to reason with you pointless.

Anyone can sit there and go “nuh uh!”. It’s not impressive nor is it virtuous.

The ultimate proof that atheists exist is the crucifixion of Jesus. The non believers crucified him for claiming he was God.

Your concept of what is extraordinary is subjective, as is your subjective concept of what is mundane. I hear more people believing in God than not, and data shows more people believe in a god more than those who dont.

I propose atheism must then be considered extraordinary, how much more? Depends on how much less people claim it.

If more people believe in God than not, atheism does not have a case.

Hmmm, Albert Einstein or Rev. Jim Bakker? Remember that there are more stupid people than smart people.

No, Albert Einstein was not an atheist; he described himself as an agnostic who believed in a cosmic religion, seeing a divine intelligence in the order of the universe, though he rejected a personal God. He famously said he was "not an atheist" and resented the label, even though he abandoned his childhood religious beliefs at age 13. 

Belief is a ridiculous concept, which by definition, doesn't prove anything.

And atheism by definition doesn't seek to prove anything, nor does atheism need to prove anything.

Whereas a timeless, realmless, bearded magician does require rather of more of an explanation than just, I believe because the old book says so.