There is no such thing as an Atheists.

Mopac: the ultimate reality exists.

Secularmerlin: that doesn't mean your claims about it are correct.

Mopac: I agree.

Finally. So you retract your claims then?

Not at all. It doesn't mean my claims are incorrect either.

Then any claim made is an argument from ignorance. 

The Ultimate Reality Is.

Fine but literally any other claim you make about it, any claim at all, is then an argument from ignorance.

Not at all.

For example, I can say that when I say "God", this is what I am refering to.

So you accept that God exists?

I accept that some reality most probably exists and I don't care what you call it. When you start making claims beyond this however, for example that you know nothing could be eternal or that you know something is eternal, you are making an argument from ignorance. 

Not at all making an argument from ignorance. I am not using ignorance as a proof of anything.

I certainly can state that ignorance is proof of sin, and I can state this with knowledge.

The Ultimate Reality Exists.

You can't say this?

We've been over this. Ive been very clear about what I am able to accept and what I am not.

You can't confess The Ultimate Reality?

It's not reality I reject Mopac it is your claims about reality that I remain dubious of.

I'm not talking about my claims.

Cann you say The Ultimate Reality exists or what?

I can say that I accept that some reality most probably exists. 

The Ultimate Reality?

If there is a difference between reality and the ultimate reality then I do not accept the ultimate reality until it can be demonstrated in the same way reality can be. I await your demonstration.

You don't believe in Reality as it truly is? Reality in the truest sense of what it is to be real?

 I honestly do not believe, that you, would know reality, if it slapped you around the head with a barrow full of very heavy  bibles.

What does that have to do with it existing?

What about you? Can you say The Ultimate Reality exists?

The Ultimate Reality

 What do you believe is the difference between reality and what you term "The Ultimate Reality". 

Ultimate Reality

Meaning reality in the absolute truest sense.

 But you haven't explained what the difference is between reality and what you call "the Ultimate Reality". Explain the difference and we can take it from there.

What does actual reality have to do with your unsubstantiated claims?

I'd say that "existence" is probably not the best word to describe noumenon (mainly because the definition of "exists" requires empirical verifiability).  I believe it is a mistake to imagine noumenon (THE ULTIMATE REALITY) as some sort of "thing" when it is merely an amorphous concept that acts as a place-holder for both "what we don't currently know" (Mysterium Invisus) and "what may be fundamentally unknowable" (Magnum Mysterium).  For example, noumenon (THE ULTIMATE REALITY) might be eleventy-trillion layers of sci-fi multiverse, noumenon (THE ULTIMATE REALITY) might be an elaborate alien computer simulation, noumenon might be Brahma's dream, noumenon might be a single super-intelligent (but not omniscient) demiurge that we humans are merely appendages of.  In all likelihood, it is conceptually, literally, ultimately and completely beyond our ability to comprehend.  All of this makes it very very very difficult for me to believe that we can consider (with any degree of confidence whatsoever) that noumenon (THE ULTIMATE REALITY) is itself comprised of 100% pure, uncut, "objective reality".  I mean since noumenon (THE ULTIMATE REALITY) may involve a great many (likely) possibly subjective layers (simulation/dream/multiverse) below our primitive perceptions, although we can deduce with the confidence afforded us by our logic, that there must be, at some level, "real" and "true" and "objective" "reality", we cannot have any confidence that what we are able to perceive has anything-at-all to do with the-hypothetical-objective-essence directly.  It's like the old story of the princess and the pea.  Clearly there is "something" under the bed, but what are the chances that a normal person would be able to detect it through nine-hundred-ninety-nine high-quality mattresses(?).

The Ultimate Reality is not "noumenon", that implies it is contingent on mind.

The definition of existence does not imply empirical verifiability at all, this is simply a false statement.

The Ultimate Reality Exists whether you can make sense of it or not.

Neither of you can comfess The Ultimate Reality, which is very telling.

You can't admit That Which Is Ultimately Real exists.

Everybody agrees that "Ultimate Reality" "exists".

Nobody agrees on what the practical implications are.

I doubt you know what is ultimately real. You are just saying words. You have no idea.

Ok.

So now you can say God exists.

That is the only point I am making.

The Ultimate Reality is what God means.

Practical implications is something else entirely.