You yourself said, that agnostics should defend their position, then you said you’re best described as such.
“Sure, why not? Agnosticism, BTW, isn’t a lack of a position. Agnosticism is itself a position.”
So why aren’t you doing so? Not following your own advice?
You admitted this site is “not affirming or defending your own position.”

How can you not see the double standard (at least admit it’s a double standard but it’s justified for a good reason)?

But it’s impossible to point out your argumentative fallacy without addressing YOUR lack of openness and honesty. Your blatant inability to present your own argument, alternative, and position IS exactly what’s wrong with your arguments.

It’s not red herring, or irrelevant or ad hominem (though it’s obviously personal, and it’s about you). I understand this site isn’t about YOUR beliefs, but this thread, and your messages, is what I am addressing.

I’ll put it this way (and I can repeat it if you ask for it again): YOU place the burden of atheists that their “lack of belief” isn’t a belief, or a position, that their self ID has to be defined by you or others, that they NEED to have a position, and defend it. But YOU do not do that for yourself, so it’s IMPOSSIBLE to defend a position to your satisfaction (short of agreeing with you), you never define what you’re asking for or demanding, all you say is “you’re wrong”.

You can’t even say “I’m right, or I think this is more correct”. THAT is your problem. If you don’t see it, you’re the one who needs help and can’t have a rational discussion. I’d be lying if I said I’m not attacking you, but your (lack of logical) argument IS all you got, so attacking your argument WOULD be attacking you (and it’s relevant, as I’ve just explained).

I do not attack you for your race, gender, height, sexual orientation, I attack you for your lack of explanation, hypocrisy and inconsistency.

You yourself said, that agnostics should defend their position, then you said you’re best described as such.
“Sure, why not? Agnosticism, BTW, isn’t a lack of a position. Agnosticism is itself a position.”
So why aren’t you doing so? Not following your own advice?

This site isn’t about admitting and defending what I’m “for”. It’s about exposing what’s wrong with atheism.

I’ve already told you what I believe. If that doesn’t suffice then that’s your issue not mine. This site is about refuting atheism, not sharing my beliefs. What I believe, outside of my beliefs about atheism, is irrelevant. If you want to engage me in discussions then make it about the information on the site instead of me.

Subsequent comments from you that attack me, try to pressure/manipulate me for personal information or attempt to distract from the issues presented in the related post will be ignored.

If you want to continue the discussion then offer some type of argument rather then ad hominem attacks. Subsequent comments from you that attack me, try to pressure/manipulate me for personal information or attempt to distract from the issues presented in the related post will be ignored.

I couldn’t disagree more.
Thanks for admitting that’s how you put words in people’s mouths.

And no, your beliefs are not irrelevant, because holding people to a standard you won’t hold yourself to shows your hypocrisy and chops at your credibility.

I’m not sure what gravity and babies have to do with the origins of the universe. How convenient, when you can’t see a connection, you claim it’s non-sequitar, red herring, or irrelevant. So as soon as somebody points out you are wrong, your excuse is “yea, but that’s irrelevant, I still win”

For you, anything that has a beginning is “produced”.

And you’re right, just because you don’t give me the answer I want doesn’t mean you don’t have it. So every argument you have against atheism and atheists is the same, they just don’t want you to have more fuel against them.

But you’re wrong, I DO want to change my mind about you (not that you care). I DO want to know what your views are and how they’re better (but you can’t show them).

What I think is really happening here is that you’ve made your judgments about me and closed your mind to what I’m saying. You’re frustrated because I won’t give you more fuel for your ad hominem attacks. You have no idea how to have a rational discussion on atheism so you focus on me and try to squeeze me for more information so that we stay distracted from the topics presented.

Just because I’m not providing the answer YOU want doesn’t mean that I’m avoiding, unable or unwilling to answer your questions.

This site isn’t about admitting and defending what I’m “for”. It’s about exposing what’s wrong with atheism.

Whether or not I hold the “same standards” to my personal beliefs is of no consequence to the issues discussed on this site. Whether I’m right or wrong about my personal beliefs has no bearing on the topics discussed. Whether I’m hypocritically focusing on what’s wrong about atheism and ignoring what’s wrong with my personal beliefs doesn’t change the beliefs I have about atheism.

Point to me what word was used that can be interpreted as “produce”, perhaps I don’t speak your language.

For the third time I will repeat what YOU said: “They are thinking in terms of a Quantum Genesis (emphasis mine) at the beginning. This would be a place where space would shrink to nothing.” Genesis: an origin, creation, or beginning, Produce: to bring into existence; give rise to; cause. Even if the definitions didn’t clue you into what I’m talking about, logic would dictate that if the universe began (“genesis”) then it was “produced”. It logically follows that that which began was produced. If there was nothing before there was something then there are only two options, something just popped into existence on its own (i.e., something was produced from nothing) or it was created by a being that is outside of what we know of as time and space. Since you are arguing the side of atheism then it also logically follows that you are arguing the former, hence my rebuttal.

I’m not sure what gravity and babies have to do with the origins of the universe. That’s what we call a non-sequitur fallacy – it doesn’t follow.

do you have the balls to say what your alternative belief or position is? Can you word it in a way that can’t be misconstrued as UNBELIEVABLE? What IS believable if that’s NOT?

I dare you to say what you DO believe, but I know you won’t (prove me wrong), because you know it’s indefensible and probably retarded, so you try to avoid answering the question that’ll break down your ego.

This is nothing more then an ad hominem. I’ve already told you what I believe. If that doesn’t suffice then that’s your issue not mine. This site is about refuting atheism, not sharing my beliefs. What I believe, outside of my beliefs about atheism, is irrelevant.

Does anybody say gravity “produced” falling objects?
Does a baby “produce” himself 30 years later as a grown adult?

But let’s for the sake of argument say that somebody DID stupidly say “nothing produced something”, instead of saying they’re wrong, do you have the balls to say what your alternative belief or position is? Can you word it in a way that can’t be misconstrued as UNBELIEVABLE? What IS believable if that’s NOT?

I dare you to say what you DO believe, but I know you won’t (prove me wrong), because you know it’s indefensible and probably retarded, so you try to avoid answering the question that’ll break down your ego.

Exactly the double standard and hypocrisy, your inability and unwillingness to admit and defend what you are FOR, because you know in your heart your alternative to atheism isn’t any better when you hold the same standards to your own beliefs.

What you say is “wrong” about atheism, will likely be wrong about your position, that’s why you’re afraid to bring it up. You don’t even want to give yourself a label, so you can’t complain if people call you an agnostic or an idiot, because you won’t correct them.

Why can’t I just discuss atheism? Because using your standards, everybody can be considered wrong, and unless you show what IS acceptable and non-fallacious to you, you’re not making any point.

Why am I so interested in what you’re for? Because from my experience debating with theists, Christians (I dare you say you’re none of these) and non-atheists, as soon as they say what their position is, their arguments fall apart because they’re exposed that they’re applying a different standard to themselves (dishonesty).

If you want a rational discussion, be open and honest and don’t dodge questions. The fact you keep saying “THAT’S IRRELEVANT!” means you know there’s relevance you’re trying to hide from.