Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.atheism > #2126582 > unrolled thread

FAITH

Started byThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
First post2016-06-17 00:33 -0700
Last post2016-06-21 14:06 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 117 — 19 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism


Contents

  FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-17 00:33 -0700
    Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-17 11:47 +0000
      Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-17 08:14 -0400
        Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-17 05:23 -0700
          Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-17 08:33 -0400
            Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-17 05:41 -0700
              Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-17 09:04 -0400
                Re: FAITH bilgat@m.nu - 2016-06-17 10:36 -0500
                Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-17 18:26 -0700
                  Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-17 23:17 -0400
                    Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-17 20:42 -0700
                      Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-17 23:47 -0400
                        Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-17 20:58 -0700
                          Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 08:30 -0400
                            Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 06:23 -0700
                              Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 09:48 -0400
                                Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 12:17 -0700
                                Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:01 -0700
                                  Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 20:08 -0400
                                    Re: FAITH Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-06-18 18:21 -0600
                                      Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 20:38 -0400
                                        Re: FAITH Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-06-18 21:11 -0600
                                          Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 03:03 -0400
                                        Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 20:16 -0700
                                          Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 03:06 -0400
                                            Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-19 00:53 -0700
                                              Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 03:57 -0400
                                      Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 20:16 -0700
                                        Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 20:24 -0700
                                          Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 23:14 -0700
                                            Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-19 08:37 +0100
                                            Re: FAITH hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-06-19 01:47 -0700
                                            Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 00:57 -0700
                                              Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:04 -0700
                                                Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:02 -0700
                                                  Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-21 22:07 -0700
                                              Re: FAITH Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:58 -0700
                                                Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:59 -0700
                                          Re: FAITH hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-06-19 01:40 -0700
                                          Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 00:50 -0700
                                        Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 03:11 -0400
                                          Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-19 00:57 -0700
                                            Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 04:03 -0400
                                              Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 01:03 -0700
                                    Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 18:03 -0700
                                    Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 20:15 -0700
                                      Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 03:25 -0400
                                        Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-19 00:58 -0700
                                          Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-19 04:05 -0400
                                  Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 17:33 -0700
                                    Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-18 20:10 -0700
                                      Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 23:05 -0700
                                Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:50 -0700
                            Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:46 -0700
              Re: FAITH Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-17 13:54 -0500
                Re: FAITH hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-18 03:16 -0700
                  Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-18 13:02 +0000
              Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-17 19:46 +0000
            Re: FAITH bilgat@m.nu - 2016-06-17 10:34 -0500
            Re: FAITH Mike Duffy <mqduffy001@bell.net> - 2016-06-17 23:28 -0400
        Re: FAITH hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 05:36 -0700
        Re: FAITH bilgat@m.nu - 2016-06-17 10:33 -0500
      Re: FAITH duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-06-17 17:41 -0500
        Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-18 02:03 +0000
          Re: FAITH duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-06-18 11:10 -0500
        Re: FAITH hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-18 03:18 -0700
          Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 17:07 -0700
            Re: FAITH duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-06-19 12:29 -0500
              Re: FAITH Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-19 12:49 -0500
              Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-19 23:46 +0000
        Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 07:30 -0700
          Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 09:19 -0700
            Re: FAITH duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-06-19 12:30 -0500
              Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 11:45 -0700
                Re: FAITH duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-06-21 12:54 -0500
                  Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 11:25 -0700
    Re: FAITH hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 05:34 -0700
    Re: FAITH Ted&Alice <sam.m.tedesco@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 02:54 +0000
      Re: FAITH djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-06-18 03:12 +0000
    Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 12:51 -0700
      Re: FAITH Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 17:31 -0700
    Re: FAITH Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 13:36 -0700
      Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 09:21 -0700
        Re: FAITH Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 10:54 -0700
          Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-20 00:01 +0000
            Re: FAITH Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 17:13 -0700
          Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 11:51 -0700
            Re: FAITH Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 20:17 -0700
              Re: FAITH Tim <cyfur12345@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 02:01 -0700
    Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-20 07:14 -0700
      Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-20 19:51 +0000
        Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-20 21:59 +0100
          Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-21 00:55 +0000
            Re: FAITH Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-20 20:26 -0500
              Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-21 08:08 +0100
              Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-21 11:01 +0000
        Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-20 17:53 -0700
          Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-21 08:05 +0100
            Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-22 00:51 -0700
              Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-22 10:56 +0100
      Re: FAITH WangoTango <Asgard24@mindspring.com> - 2016-06-21 14:10 -0400
        Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-21 15:09 -0700
          Re: FAITH Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-21 20:57 -0500
            Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-21 19:21 -0700
          Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-22 08:09 +0100
          Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-22 01:07 -0700
    Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-20 11:09 -0700
      Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-20 19:55 +0000
        Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-20 18:16 -0700
          Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-21 11:04 +0000
            Re: FAITH Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-21 05:10 -0700
              Re: FAITH Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-21 22:00 -0400
              Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-22 00:56 -0700
            Re: FAITH The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-22 00:54 -0700
              Re: FAITH Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-22 10:58 +0100
                Re: FAITH Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-22 12:29 +0000
    Re: FAITH WangoTango <Asgard24@mindspring.com> - 2016-06-21 14:06 -0400

Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →


#2127859

FromWally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
Date2016-06-19 03:11 -0400
Message-ID<34hcmb5nkn28n9lju6tri61tn5ealihv3i@4ax.com>
In reply to#2127803
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:16:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

>In article <aaa-12F1E7.18215518062016@news.giganews.com>,
> Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> wrote:
>
>> In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
>>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> > >> You're desperate.
>> > >
>> > >About what?
>> > 
>> > For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
>>  
>> That is the question that we keep asking, to which you lot have no 
>> satisfactory answers.
>
>
>Somehow he seems to be equating finding one's keys, which actually 
>exist, to finding his god????? Which, of course, has never been shown to 
>exist.

Where did I mention any god?

You seem to have an allergic reaction to the word "faith."

>Or is he even crazier than that?

Is calling your opponent "crazy" your standard reaction to being
bettered in an argument?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127872

FromJeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Date2016-06-19 00:57 -0700
Message-ID<hlwdjsd2-B4CD9A.00573119062016@news.giganews.com>
In reply to#2127859
In article <34hcmb5nkn28n9lju6tri61tn5ealihv3i@4ax.com>,
 Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:16:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <aaa-12F1E7.18215518062016@news.giganews.com>,
> > Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
> >>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> > >> You're desperate.
> >> > >
> >> > >About what?
> >> > 
> >> > For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
> >>  
> >> That is the question that we keep asking, to which you lot have no 
> >> satisfactory answers.
> >
> >
> >Somehow he seems to be equating finding one's keys, which actually 
> >exist, to finding his god????? Which, of course, has never been shown to 
> >exist.
> 
> Where did I mention any god?
> 
> You seem to have an allergic reaction to the word "faith."

Yes. Yes, I do.

Because faith is a very serious character flaw.

-- 

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream 
up a God superior to themselves. Most 
Gods have the manners and morals of a 
spoiled child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127876

FromWally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
Date2016-06-19 04:03 -0400
Message-ID<c6kcmb5j39dllnaevdt8lbsup01or90gue@4ax.com>
In reply to#2127872
On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:57:31 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

>In article <34hcmb5nkn28n9lju6tri61tn5ealihv3i@4ax.com>,
> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:16:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <aaa-12F1E7.18215518062016@news.giganews.com>,
>> > Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
>> >>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > >> You're desperate.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >About what?
>> >> > 
>> >> > For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
>> >>  
>> >> That is the question that we keep asking, to which you lot have no 
>> >> satisfactory answers.
>> >
>> >
>> >Somehow he seems to be equating finding one's keys, which actually 
>> >exist, to finding his god????? Which, of course, has never been shown to 
>> >exist.
>> 
>> Where did I mention any god?
>> 
>> You seem to have an allergic reaction to the word "faith."
>
>Yes. Yes, I do.
>
>Because faith is a very serious character flaw.

Well, I won't accuse you of being faithful to consistency and
rationality in arguments.

There is no character flaw behind declaring opponents to be crazy, is
there?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2129060

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-21 01:03 -0700
Message-ID<25277fe3-fe88-4ae0-a671-7bf6a63c5fb5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2127876
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 1:03:54 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:57:31 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <34hcmb5nkn28n9lju6tri61tn5ealihv3i@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:16:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <aaa-12F1E7.18215518062016@news.giganews.com>,
> >> > Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
> >> >>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > >> You're desperate.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >About what?
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
> >> >>  
> >> >> That is the question that we keep asking, to which you lot have no 
> >> >> satisfactory answers.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Somehow he seems to be equating finding one's keys, which actually 
> >> >exist, to finding his god????? Which, of course, has never been shown to 
> >> >exist.
> >> 
> >> Where did I mention any god?
> >> 
> >> You seem to have an allergic reaction to the word "faith."
> >
> >Yes. Yes, I do.
> >
> >Because faith is a very serious character flaw.
> 
> Well, I won't accuse you of being faithful to consistency and
> rationality in arguments.
> 
> There is no character flaw behind declaring opponents to be crazy, is
> there?

Not when there is overwhelming evidence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127719

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 18:03 -0700
Message-ID<db1ceba8-90f2-434b-b5da-fc5a4c5b51a3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2127693
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 5:08:35 PM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> than
> >> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
> >> >> >> >> >> >direction 
> >> >> >> >> >> >you 
> >> >> >> >> >> >try.
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
> >> >> >> >> >> basement
> >> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >What "weakness"?
> >> >> >> >\
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> >> >> >> didn't run off with them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> >> >> 
> >> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> >> >> take some new approach aren't you?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> >> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> >> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> >> >> 
> >> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> >> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> :>>> basement?
> >> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >> >> :>>try.
> >> >> :>What evidence?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> >> >> bullshit claim.
> >> >> 
> >> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> >> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> >> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> >> >
> >> >Finding them there.
> >> 
> >> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> >> a raccoon.
> >> 
> >> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> >> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> >> 
> >> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> >> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> >> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> >> you might find them there?
> >
> >Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> 
> So you looked other places first.
> 
> What happened to your "evidence" here when I asked about where to
> *start* the search?
> 
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> basement?
> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >try.
> 
> So you acted contrary to your "evidence" and started your search
> elsewhere. And you call me insane.
> 

What evidence?  People look in the places they remember having the thing they are looking for.  Nobody looks on the roof if they have not been there.  

> You are not acquitting yourself well.
> 
I think she's bee acquitted. You on the other hand are guilty as sin.


> Maybe you should admit defeat and quit.
> 
Maybe you should realize we don't play your game.s

> "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."
> 
> 
> >> Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> >> only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> >> as you decide where to start looking for them.
> >
> >You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely 
> >places.
> 
> So the most likely place was *not* the basement ... because?
> 
> >Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
> 
> Why have you turned the request for a simple answer into further
> embarrassment for yourself?
> 
> I asked "what evidence" and you have spewed irrelevancies.
> 
> You didn't have "evidence" did you? You only had faith concerning the
> most likely place to find the keys; and you denied even that faith by
> starting your search somewhere else.
> 
> >> >You're insane.
> >> 
> >> You're desperate.
> >
> >About what?
> 
> For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
> 
> 
> >> The word despicable might occur to some.
> >
> >For what?
> 
> Ask them.
> 
> You do want to know, don't you?

Unless you are talking about yourself, I got nothin'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127800

FromJeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 20:15 -0700
Message-ID<hlwdjsd2-625FD3.20150218062016@news.giganews.com>
In reply to#2127693
In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
 Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> faith 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> than
> >> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
> >> >> >> >> >> >direction 
> >> >> >> >> >> >you 
> >> >> >> >> >> >try.
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
> >> >> >> >> >> basement
> >> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >What "weakness"?
> >> >> >> >\
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> >> >> >> didn't run off with them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> >> >> 
> >> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> >> >> take some new approach aren't you?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> >> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> >> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> >> >> 
> >> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> >> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> :>>> basement?
> >> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
> >> >> :>>you 
> >> >> :>>try.
> >> >> :>What evidence?
> >> >> 
> >> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> >> >> bullshit claim.
> >> >> 
> >> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> >> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> >> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> >> >
> >> >Finding them there.
> >> 
> >> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> >> a raccoon.
> >> 
> >> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> >> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> >> 
> >> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> >> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> >> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> >> you might find them there?
> >
> >Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> 
> So you looked other places first.
> 
> What happened to your "evidence" here when I asked about where to
> *start* the search?

What the fuck are you talking about? You start the search where you 
remember being with the keys, then you move on to places you don't; 
remember but make sense, then on to crazy places.

I really don't have a clue what evidence has to do with finding my keys 
(which I never lose because they go right on the doorknob when I walk in 
the door) or what you're trying to prove.


> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> basement?
> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >try.
> 
> So you acted contrary to your "evidence" and started your search
> elsewhere. And you call me insane.

What evidence is necessary to find one's keys? What the fuck are you 
talking about?


> You are not acquitting yourself well.
> 
> Maybe you should admit defeat and quit.

Defeat for what?


> "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."

What hole?



> >> Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> >> only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> >> as you decide where to start looking for them.
> >
> >You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely 
> >places.
> 
> So the most likely place was *not* the basement ... because?

Because I don't have a basement. What the fuck are you trying to prove?


> >Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
> 
> Why have you turned the request for a simple answer into further
> embarrassment for yourself?
> 
> I asked "what evidence" and you have spewed irrelevancies.
> 
> Yo0u didn't have "evidence" did you? You only had faith concerning the
> most likely place to find the keys; and you denied even that faith by
> starting your search somewhere else.

What evidence is necessary to find one's keys? What faith is necessary 
to find one's keys? You make absolutely no sense.


> >> >You're insane.
> >> 
> >> You're desperate.
> >
> >About what?
> 
> For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"

You still haven't explained why evidence is necessary to find one's own 
keys.


> >> The word despicable might occur to some.
> >
> >For what?
> 
> Ask them.
> 
> You do want to know, don't you?

I'd like to know what the fuck you're doing and what you think you're 
proving.

-- 

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream 
up a God superior to themselves. Most 
Gods have the manners and morals of a 
spoiled child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127861

FromWally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
Date2016-06-19 03:25 -0400
Message-ID<6ehcmb9picdfgrsqssl05ptf147h3lv6nf@4ax.com>
In reply to#2127800
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:15:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

>In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
>> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> faith 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> than
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >direction 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >you 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >try.
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
>> >> >> >> >> >> basement
>> >> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >What "weakness"?
>> >> >> >> >\
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
>> >> >> >> didn't run off with them.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
>> >> >> take some new approach aren't you?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
>> >> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
>> >> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
>> >> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>> >> >> :>>> basement?
>> >> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>> >> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>> >> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
>> >> >> :>>you 
>> >> >> :>>try.
>> >> >> :>What evidence?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
>> >> >> bullshit claim.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
>> >> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
>> >> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
>> >> >
>> >> >Finding them there.
>> >> 
>> >> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
>> >> a raccoon.
>> >> 
>> >> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
>> >> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
>> >> 
>> >> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
>> >> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
>> >> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
>> >> you might find them there?
>> >
>> >Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
>> 
>> So you looked other places first.
>> 
>> What happened to your "evidence" here when I asked about where to
>> *start* the search?
>
>What the fuck are you talking about? You start the search where you 
>remember being with the keys, then you move on to places you don't; 
>remember but make sense, then on to crazy places.

If that isn't taking action based on **faith** in your fallible memory
of where you might have left your keys, then what is it?


>I really don't have a clue what evidence has to do with finding my keys 
>(which I never lose because they go right on the doorknob when I walk in 
>the door) or what you're trying to prove.

Then why did you claim there was evidence here?
:On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
:>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
:>try.

Now you say evidence has nothing to do with it.

How many more sides of your mouth will you be speaking from? 


>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>> >> basement?
>> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
>> >try.
>> 
>> So you acted contrary to your "evidence" and started your search
>> elsewhere. And you call me insane.
>
>What evidence is necessary to find one's keys? What the fuck are you 
>talking about?

Again, **you** said there was evidence. Go argue that point with
yourself.

I claim **faith** in one's fallible memory informs the selection of a
place to start looking for one's keys.

Are you **so** allergic to the existence of **faith** that you want to
take issue with that?


>> You are not acquitting yourself well.
>> 
>> Maybe you should admit defeat and quit.
>
>Defeat for what?

Prepositions aren't your strong suit, are they?

>> "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."
>
>What hole?
>
>
>
>> >> Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
>> >> only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
>> >> as you decide where to start looking for them.
>> >
>> >You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely 
>> >places.
>> 
>> So the most likely place was *not* the basement ... because?
>
>Because I don't have a basement. What the fuck are you trying to prove?
>
>
>> >Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
>> 
>> Why have you turned the request for a simple answer into further
>> embarrassment for yourself?
>> 
>> I asked "what evidence" and you have spewed irrelevancies.
>> 
>> Yo0u didn't have "evidence" did you? You only had faith concerning the
>> most likely place to find the keys; and you denied even that faith by
>> starting your search somewhere else.
>
>What evidence is necessary to find one's keys? What faith is necessary 
>to find one's keys? You make absolutely no sense.

Why would you **start** looking in one place rather than another if
you didn't have **faith** that it was a very likely place to find
them.

Maybe I should rephrase that: Why would a rational person **start**
...

... because you seem to be spun up in some frenzy over the notion of
**faith**.

>> >> >You're insane.
>> >> 
>> >> You're desperate.
>> >
>> >About what?
>> 
>> For one, to deflect attention from the question, "what evidence?"
>
>You still haven't explained why evidence is necessary to find one's own 
>keys.

I didn't say it was ... that was you.

I said:
:On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
:>What evidence?
:>
:>If you had evidence, you would have the keys.


>> >> The word despicable might occur to some.
>> >
>> >For what?
>> 
>> Ask them.
>> 
>> You do want to know, don't you?
>
>I'd like to know what the fuck you're doing and what you think you're 
>proving.

I think your behaviour is doing the "proving."

This seem to set you off:
:On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:14:04 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
:>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
:>>Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
:>Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
:>evidence might be found? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127874

FromJeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Date2016-06-19 00:58 -0700
Message-ID<hlwdjsd2-8A0322.00585319062016@news.giganews.com>
In reply to#2127861
In article <6ehcmb9picdfgrsqssl05ptf147h3lv6nf@4ax.com>,
 Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:15:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ><77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> faith 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> in 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> place 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> than
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> search?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >direction 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >you 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >try.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement
> >> >> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >What "weakness"?
> >> >> >> >> >\
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a 
> >> >> >> >> raccoon
> >> >> >> >> didn't run off with them.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> >> >> >> take some new approach aren't you?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying 
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with 
> >> >> >> at
> >> >> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> >> >> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> >> :>>> basement?
> >> >> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
> >> >> >> :>>> than
> >> >> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
> >> >> >> :>>you 
> >> >> >> :>>try.
> >> >> >> :>What evidence?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> >> >> >> bullshit claim.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> >> >> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> >> >> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Finding them there.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> >> >> a raccoon.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> >> >> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> >> >> 
> >> >> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> >> >> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> >> >> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> >> >> you might find them there?
> >> >
> >> >Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> >> 
> >> So you looked other places first.
> >> 
> >> What happened to your "evidence" here when I asked about where to
> >> *start* the search?
> >
> >What the fuck are you talking about? You start the search where you 
> >remember being with the keys, then you move on to places you don't; 
> >remember but make sense, then on to crazy places.
> 
> If that isn't taking action based on **faith** in your fallible memory
> of where you might have left your keys, then what is it?

What faith?

You're playing stupid word games. Bored.

-- 

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream 
up a God superior to themselves. Most 
Gods have the manners and morals of a 
spoiled child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127877

FromWally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
Date2016-06-19 04:05 -0400
Message-ID<bgkcmblndclve9rfl1d13ja0aaoqovpf0d@4ax.com>
In reply to#2127874
On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:58:53 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

>In article <6ehcmb9picdfgrsqssl05ptf147h3lv6nf@4ax.com>,
> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:15:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <crnbmb9eldnjtid012bts7bgvb6biorfta@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:01:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
>> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ><77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> faith 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> in 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> place 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> than
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> search?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >direction 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >you 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >try.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> basement
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
>> >> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >What "weakness"?
>> >> >> >> >> >\
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a 
>> >> >> >> >> raccoon
>> >> >> >> >> didn't run off with them.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
>> >> >> >> take some new approach aren't you?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying 
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with 
>> >> >> >> at
>> >> >> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
>> >> >> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> >> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>> >> >> >> :>>> basement?
>> >> >> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
>> >> >> >> :>>> than
>> >> >> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>> >> >> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
>> >> >> >> :>>you 
>> >> >> >> :>>try.
>> >> >> >> :>What evidence?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
>> >> >> >> bullshit claim.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
>> >> >> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
>> >> >> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Finding them there.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
>> >> >> a raccoon.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
>> >> >> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
>> >> >> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
>> >> >> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
>> >> >> you might find them there?
>> >> >
>> >> >Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
>> >> 
>> >> So you looked other places first.
>> >> 
>> >> What happened to your "evidence" here when I asked about where to
>> >> *start* the search?
>> >
>> >What the fuck are you talking about? You start the search where you 
>> >remember being with the keys, then you move on to places you don't; 
>> >remember but make sense, then on to crazy places.
>> 
>> If that isn't taking action based on **faith** in your fallible memory
>> of where you might have left your keys, then what is it?
>
>What faith?
>
>You're playing stupid word games. Bored.

You're pwnd.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127708

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 17:33 -0700
Message-ID<2614689e-20ad-4277-88e4-2af7e7c9e22d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2127624
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 3:01:48 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > 
> > >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> > > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> > >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> > >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> > >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> > >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith 
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> > >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> > >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place 
> > >> >> >> >> >> than
> > >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
> > >> >> >> >> >direction 
> > >> >> >> >> >you 
> > >> >> >> >> >try.
> > >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> > >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> > >> >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
> > >> >> >> >> basement
> > >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> > >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >What "weakness"?
> > >> >> >\
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> > >> >> didn't run off with them.
> > >> >
> > >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> > >> 
> > >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> > >> 
> > >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> > >> take some new approach aren't you?
> > >> 
> > >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> > >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> > >> 
> > >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> > >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> > >> 
> > >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> > >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> > >> :>>> basement?
> > >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> > >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> > >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> > >> :>>try.
> > >> :>What evidence?
> > >> 
> > >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> > >> bullshit claim.
> > >> 
> > >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> > >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> > >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> > >
> > >Finding them there.
> > 
> > Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> > a raccoon.
> > 
> > Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> > and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> > 
> > 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> > you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> > 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> > you might find them there?
> 
> Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> 
> 
> > Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> > only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> > as you decide where to start looking for them.
> 
> You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely 
> places.
> 
> Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
> 

Because he's bat shit crazy.  In a category all his own.


> > >You're insane.
> > 
> > You're desperate.
> 
> About what?
> 
> 
> > The word despicable might occur to some.
> 

It does to me.  Not for the reason you would like.  Because reality.

> For what?
> 
> -- 
> 
> JD
> 
> Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream 
> up a God superior to themselves. Most 
> Gods have the manners and morals of a 
> spoiled child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127793

FromJeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 20:10 -0700
Message-ID<hlwdjsd2-FC6A6B.20102618062016@news.giganews.com>
In reply to#2127708
In article <2614689e-20ad-4277-88e4-2af7e7c9e22d@googlegroups.com>,
 Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 3:01:48 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
> >  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > 
> > > >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> > > > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> 
> > > >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> > > >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> >> 
> > > >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> > > >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> > > >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > > >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> > > >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> faith 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> > > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> > > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> the
> > > >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> > > >> >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> place 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> than
> > > >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the 
> > > >> >> >> >> >> search?
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the 
> > > >> >> >> >> >direction 
> > > >> >> >> >> >you 
> > > >> >> >> >> >try.
> > > >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> > > >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> > > >> >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your 
> > > >> >> >> >> basement
> > > >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> > > >> >> >> 
> > > >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >What "weakness"?
> > > >> >> >\
> > > >> >> 
> > > >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> > > >> >> 
> > > >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> > > >> >> 
> > > >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> > > >> >> didn't run off with them.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> > > >> 
> > > >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> > > >> 
> > > >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> > > >> take some new approach aren't you?
> > > >> 
> > > >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> > > >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> > > >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> > > >> 
> > > >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> > > >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > > >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> > > >> :>>> basement?
> > > >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> > > >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> > > >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
> > > >> :>>you 
> > > >> :>>try.
> > > >> :>What evidence?
> > > >> 
> > > >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> > > >> bullshit claim.
> > > >> 
> > > >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> > > >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> > > >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> > > >
> > > >Finding them there.
> > > 
> > > Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> > > a raccoon.
> > > 
> > > Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> > > and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> > > 
> > > 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> > > you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> > > 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> > > you might find them there?
> > 
> > Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> > 
> > 
> > > Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> > > only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> > > as you decide where to start looking for them.
> > 
> > You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely 
> > places.
> > 
> > Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
> > 
> 
> Because he's bat shit crazy.  In a category all his own.

That's true. This keys, roofs, and raccoon thing is way too weird, even 
for our regular trolls.

Does anyone know what he was trying to prove?


> > > >You're insane.
> > > 
> > > You're desperate.
> > 
> > About what?
> > 
> > 
> > > The word despicable might occur to some.
> > 
> 
> It does to me.  Not for the reason you would like.  Because reality.
> 
> > For what?

-- 

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream 
up a God superior to themselves. Most 
Gods have the manners and morals of a 
spoiled child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127847

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-06-18 23:05 -0700
Message-ID<57663626.1477@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#2127793
Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> In article <2614689e-20ad-4277-88e4-2af7e7c9e22d@googlegroups.com>,
>  Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 3:01:48 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > In article <edjambls903qn3lefph0tcgg9qmnc1t6kg@4ax.com>,
> > >  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> > > > > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> faith
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> that
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found?
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> > > > >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> > > > >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> the
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> > > > >> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> place
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> than
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the
> > > > >> >> >> >> >> search?
> > > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the
> > > > >> >> >> >> >direction
> > > > >> >> >> >> >you
> > > > >> >> >> >> >try.
> > > > >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> > > > >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> > > > >> >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your
> > > > >> >> >> >> basement
> > > > >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> > > > >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >What "weakness"?
> > > > >> >> >\
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> > > > >> >> didn't run off with them.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> > > > >> take some new approach aren't you?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> > > > >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> > > > >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> > > > >>
> > > > >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> > > > >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > > > >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > > > >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> > > > >> :>>> basement?
> > > > >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> > > > >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> > > > >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction
> > > > >> :>>you
> > > > >> :>>try.
> > > > >> :>What evidence?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> > > > >> bullshit claim.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> > > > >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> > > > >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> > > > >
> > > > >Finding them there.
> > > >
> > > > Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> > > > a raccoon.
> > > >
> > > > Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> > > > and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> > > >
> > > > 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> > > > you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> > > > 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> > > > you might find them there?
> > >
> > > Because I didn't find them anywhere else I looked.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> > > > only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> > > > as you decide where to start looking for them.
> > >
> > > You start with the most likely places and then you move to the unlikely
> > > places.
> > >
> > > Why have you turned this basic activity into insanity?
> > >
> >
> > Because he's bat shit crazy.  In a category all his own.
> 
> That's true. This keys, roofs, and raccoon thing is way too weird, even
> for our regular trolls.
> 
> Does anyone know what he was trying to prove?



That women don't know what they are talking about.


Every guy knows that...


we just...pretend.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127681

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 16:50 -0700
Message-ID<db9df7ec-3eed-47a0-b687-94649a125d5c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2127389
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 6:48:10 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:23:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <22eambddcqj1lmhrl33dj4hltj9cjef5sh@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> >> >> >> basement?
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction 
> >> >> >> >> >you 
> >> >> >> >> >try.
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> What evidence?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your basement
> >> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> The weakness of your position
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What "weakness"?
> >> >> >\
> >> >> 
> >> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> >> >> 
> >> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> >> >> didn't run off with them.
> >> >
> >> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> >> 
> >> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> >> 
> >> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> >> take some new approach aren't you?
> >> 
> >> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> >> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> >> 
> >> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> >> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> >> 
> >> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> >> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> :>>> basement?
> >> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >> :>>try.
> >> :>What evidence?
> >> 
> >> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> >> bullshit claim.
> >> 
> >> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> >> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> >> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> >
> >Finding them there.
> 
> Now you're time traveling. And you called me desperate for mentioning
> a raccoon.
> 
> Taking things a step at a time for those among us who are the slow,
> and in chronological order for those without a time machine:
> 
> 1. You lost your keys (for the exceptionally slow among us, that means
> you don't know where they are -- in the present).
> 2. Why would you look for your keys in the basement without faith that
> you might find them there?
> 
> Again, for the slow among those of us who experience time moving in
> only one direction, you haven't found them yet -- they are still lost
> as you decide where to start looking for them.
> 
> >You're insane.
> 
> You're desperate.
> 
> The word despicable might occur to some.

Faith has nothing to with it. Ones looks for lost things in the places they have been. Having not been on the roof, nobody would look there.  Having someone say to you:  "Why not look on the roof?" and then you doing it would be an act of faith, since there is no reason to look there at all.

Is there some point to you being such a dickhead?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127679

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 16:46 -0700
Message-ID<4011ec7e-a899-4def-b28c-866af7f40828@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2127365
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 5:29:58 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:58:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> 
> >In article <mvg9mblh6am7abrcqf1tf77h7p8p0p4vb2@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:42:20 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <70f9mb17ob4o2n51j7rkutlhrq4c53hkq3@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:26:17 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >In article <16t7mb1ce8o3c938ske7lchbsket5og8rl@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
> >> >> >> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Who says they don't?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> >> >> >> basement?
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> >> >> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >> >> >> >try.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> What evidence?
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> If you had evidence, you would have the keys.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> How do you know a raccoon hasn't carried the keys from your basement
> >> >> >> to your neighbor's roof?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Wow, you're really desperate, aren't you?
> >> >> 
> >> >> The weakness of your position
> >> >
> >> >What "weakness"?
> >> >\
> >> 
> >> It was illustrated in the parts of the post you snipped.
> >> 
> >> Why did you snip the parts you didn't like?
> >> 
> >> If you don't know where the keys are, you don't know that a raccoon
> >> didn't run off with them.
> >
> >What is your obsession with raccoons?
> 
> What is your obsession with trying to deflect?
> 
> You are desperate to reset the conversation to a point where you can
> take some new approach aren't you?
> 
> You got pwnd in the argument as it unfolded and now you are trying to
> run away with attempts to to make light of irrelevant minutia.
> 
> Here is where you started running in earnest (after the warmup with at
> least one previous wannabe-deflecting question):
> 
> :On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:04:28 -0400, Wally W. wrote:
> :>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> :>>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> :>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> :>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> :>>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> :>>> basement?
> :>>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> :>>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> :>>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> :>>try.
> :>What evidence?
> 
> You didn't answer that question. Why not? Maybe because it was a
> bullshit claim.
> 
> If your faith in your reconstruction of events from your fallible
> memory points you to searching in the basement, what is your
> "evidence" that the keys are still there?
> 
> >> But a weasel would never admit that.

The evidence for most people wold be the fact that they haven't been on the roof and they shuld look in the places whee they remember having them.  Having a Raccoon take them is not an ordinary occurrence.  Next time after exhausting the usual places where one might have left one's keys, they might think to look on the roof.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2126813

FromChristopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net>
Date2016-06-17 13:54 -0500
Message-ID<kqh8mb1acbd7n965ku6m63q6ocu5askghk@4ax.com>
In reply to#2126664
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>> >> 
>> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
>> >> evidence might be found? 
>> >
>> >Who says they have any such faith?
>> 
>> Who says they don't?
>> 
>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>> basement?
>> 
>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>
>Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
>try.

Whoooosh....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127294

Fromhypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net>
Date2016-06-18 03:16 -0700
Message-ID<4029b8e5-4ca1-4773-a0b5-1f5c6ccf7b72@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2126813
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 2:55:06 PM UTC-4, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
> >> >> evidence might be found? 
> >> >
> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
> >> 
> >> Who says they don't?
> >> 
> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
> >> basement?
> >> 
> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> >
> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you 
> >try.
> 
> Whoooosh....

Some people go places just to say hello and join in a conversation. 
Other's join a conversation to show others how wonderful they are. 
This guy is the latter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127373

FromSmiler <smiler@jo.king>
Date2016-06-18 13:02 +0000
Message-ID<nk3goi$1ibh$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#2127294
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 03:16:24 -0700, hypatiab7 wrote:

> On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 2:55:06 PM UTC-4, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>> <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> >> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
>> >> >> evidence might be found?
>> >> >
>> >> >Who says they have any such faith?
>> >> 
>> >> Who says they don't?
>> >> 
>> >> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>> >> basement?
>> >> 
>> >> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>> >> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
>> >
>> >Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you
>> >try.
>> 
>> Whoooosh....
> 
> Some people go places just to say hello and join in a conversation.
> Other's join a conversation to show others how wonderful they are. This
> guy is the latter.

Unfortunately, he has failed in that endeavour.

-- 
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made 
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2126856

FromSmiler <smiler@jo.king>
Date2016-06-17 19:46 +0000
Message-ID<nk1k23$1a1n$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#2126664
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:41:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

> In article <ccr7mb5l74dv2f295oh28l7lg0on1iq324@4ax.com>,
>  Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> > Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>> >> 
>> >> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
>> >> evidence might be found?
>> >
>> >Who says they have any such faith?
>> 
>> Who says they don't?
>> 
>> Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the basement?
>> 
>> Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>> another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?
> 
> Because the evidence you already have points you in the direction you
> try.

It's a "Where's Wally" ["Where's Waldo" in the US] puzzle.

-- 
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made 
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2126716

Frombilgat@m.nu
Date2016-06-17 10:34 -0500
Message-ID<d368mbl3ob0ilufs312aib0jolpr50ul1r@4ax.com>
In reply to#2126658
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:33:05 -0400, Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:23:07 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>
>>In article <77q7mb5dlj4lg60vgb84g3at41j6l863eq@4ax.com>,
>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:47:44 +0000 (UTC), Smiler wrote:
>>> 
>>> >Science doesn't need faith, it has ....evidence.
>>> 
>>> Why would one look for evidence if they didn't have faith that
>>> evidence might be found? 
>>
>>Who says they have any such faith?
>
>Who says they don't?
>
>Do you look for your keys on the roof if you lost them in the
>basement?
>
>Without faith that the results might be better in one place than
>another, why not pick a spot at random to start the search?

as I was saying retarded...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2127194

FromMike Duffy <mqduffy001@bell.net>
Date2016-06-17 23:28 -0400
Message-ID<1ky1k5ajgsl1u.1ar95q1347zuj$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#2126658
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:33:05 -0400, Wally W. wrote:

> Do you look for your keys on the roof 

Co-incidentally enough, I did once find the key to a house on its roof.

I was doing a roofing job on the house that had belonged to my grandfather.
The strange thing is that it was a fairly steep roof, (~45°) and I'm
surprised that the key had not been moved off by by snow & windblown
debris. It was probably there for several decades. It was an old-style
(sometimes incorrectly called 'skeleton' key), and it fit the front door.

I still carry the key with me at all times, although I eventually sold the
house and the new owner tore it down. (That's a long story not really
interesting to anyone else.)

-- 
http://mduffy.x10host.com/index.htm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism


csiph-web