Sentences with phrase «single shred»

Enough of faith based religion, it is all childish imaginative fantasy without one single shred of evidence to support any of it.

You can't provide one single shred of evidence to prove your god exists, why should we listen to a single thing you have to say?

If you think there is cite on single shred (the bible is not evidence not by a long shot if you think it is look up the definition) of evidence where is it?

Joker, in all of history, there is not one single shred of evidence of any god.

Humans have worshiped literally thousands of gods throughout history, and ever true believer of every one of those gods felt the same conviction that you do, despite the fact that there isn't a single shred of evidence that any of those gods (even yours) actually exists.

I don't have an emotional need to believe in something for which there is not a single shred of proof.

justsayin, you have failed repeatedly to produce any single shred of proof that your drivel is worth the bandwidth it consumes or that prayer achieves anything.

There is not a single shred of contemporary evidence to support the existence of Jesus, let alone his divinity.

Fred, how do you explain the fact that there is not a single shred of evidence outside of the bible that the Jewish people were ever slaves in Egypt?

You claim the existence of a being for which there isn't a single shred of scientifically valid evidence.

There has never been a single shred of evidence to prove the existence of any of the literally thousands of gods worshiped by humans throughout their existence.

There isn't a single shred of evidence even suggesting that to be the case.

There is not a single shred of evidence for the Exodus, or it's Moses character.

Another thing he shares with all those other True Believers ™: Not one of them has a single shred of evidence to support the existence of their god.

And yet there isn't a single shred of evidence that any god exists.

tallulah: «There is, of course, not a single shred of evidence to indicate that anything other than the termination of existence awaits any of us after death.»

Taking into account that in thousands of years of data there isn't a single shred of evidence that supports the existence of any god.

When you make categorical statements like «not a single shred of evidence» it tends to show that you're (a) dogmatic, (b) misinformed, and (c) know nothing about history, philosophy or science.

There is, of course, not a single shred of evidence to indicate that anything other than the termination of existence awaits any of us after death.

Meanwhile, there's not a single shred of evidence that your god (or any god) even exists.

Believers seem to think that these things are welcome (or perhaps they just don't care if they're not welcome) and at the same time they think that their religion should never be criticized, despite the fact that their isn't a single shred of evidence to support the existence of any god.

In fact, there is not a single shred if evidence to indicate that any gods exist.

Actually there isn't a single shred of evidence of any god.

To say that I believe that no god exists is not «dogmatic» because there is not a single shred of evidence that any do or ever have is completely erroneous.

There isn't a single shred of evidence to support the existence of any of the thousands of gods that humans have ever worshiped.

Interesting because to me these people are just as credible (or not) as a god believer... not a single shred of proof, nothing, nada except they all say they «feel» god in them, just as people who claim to have been abducted by aliens «feels» that it truly happened to them.

What matters is that there is not a single shred of verifiable evidence to indicate that he was anything more than a radical rabbi.

However, there is not a single shred of proof that any of the supernatural events of the bible actually took place.

So far, no one in the history of the world has produced a single shred of evidence that such a being exists.

Accepting things for which there is not a single shred of evidence is a hallmark of gullibility.

But, it is simply completely ridiculous to assume there is such a power without so much as a single shred of evidence.

There isn't a single shred of evidence to support the existence of any of the thousands of gods created and worshiped by humanity.

Which is, of course, not supported by even so much as a single shred of evidence.

The reason why some say that there is no god is because there isn't a single shred of evidence to support the existence of any god, and indeed a preponderance of evidence to show that the universe and this world were formed by very natural processes.

Try wrapping your mind around the fact that there isn't a single shred of evidence to support the existence of ANY of the thousands of gods humans have worshiped throughout history.

99 times out of 100, atheism arises from the realization that there isn't a single shred of positive evidence for a god's existence.

Because last I checked there was still not a single shred of tangible, measurable, empirical evidence in support of any form of Theism, let alone something as backwards, corrupt, and atrocious, morally reprehensible (historically), and specific as Catholicism, which isn't even a very accurate form of Christianity when compared to the oldest Biblical scripts we've yet found.

Too bad that there is not one single shred of proof that your god or any god exists, and there is not an ounce of proof that your bible is anything more than a book of fables written by bronze age men.