Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.atheism > #2227329 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-10 22:59 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-01-12 02:49 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 133 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism
'i don't know' The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 22:59 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2017-01-11 08:38 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-01-11 14:09 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2017-01-11 08:33 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2017-01-11 08:46 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> - 2017-01-11 09:46 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 11:26 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-12 01:38 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:47 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-12 02:09 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-13 02:22 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-12 23:01 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Roselia Holder <vomit-inducing.hurry-whore@rec.arts.female.ejaculation> - 2017-01-13 05:16 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-14 01:33 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-13 17:39 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-14 05:41 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-14 04:50 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 07:16 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Jørgen Farum Jensen <farumjensen@mailme.dk> - 2017-01-11 14:08 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> - 2017-01-11 09:50 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-12 01:43 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-12 10:58 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Jørgen Farum Jensen <farumjensen@mailme.dk> - 2017-01-12 21:37 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-13 11:42 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Jørgen Farum Jensen <farumjensen@mailme.dk> - 2017-01-13 08:52 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-13 04:54 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2017-01-13 06:43 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-13 19:11 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-14 01:37 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-13 17:48 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:35 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-14 19:03 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:37 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-15 15:42 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' hhyapster@gmail.com - 2017-01-13 18:11 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-14 19:08 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-14 05:45 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-15 01:26 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:46 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 03:34 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-15 10:33 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2017-01-15 13:03 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-15 12:56 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Hope Simmers <Hope_Simmers@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-12 13:17 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-13 11:54 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-14 01:43 +0000
Atheists do not understand science Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 03:39 +0000
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2017-01-13 19:52 -0800
Re: Atheists do not understand science Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 04:29 +0000
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2017-01-13 20:53 -0800
Re: Atheists do not understand science "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 22:00 -0700
Re: Atheists do not understand science Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 05:10 +0000
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2017-01-13 21:15 -0800
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2017-01-14 13:34 -0500
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2017-01-14 10:39 -0800
Re: Atheists do not understand science "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2017-01-14 13:58 -0500
Re: Atheists do not understand science pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2017-01-14 13:42 -0600
Re: Atheists do not understand science Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-15 02:26 +0000
Re: Atheists do not understand science Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-14 05:46 -0600
Re: Atheists do not understand science Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 11:50 +0000
Re: Atheists do not understand science & <ampersand.the.great@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 11:48 -0500
Re: Atheists do not understand science Fakey's Dog Whistle Holder Emeritus <root@127.0.0.1> - 2017-01-14 10:54 -0600
Re: Atheists do not understand science & <ampersand.the.great@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 12:22 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Irreverend Dave <reverend_dave@ministerpants.com> - 2017-01-14 05:30 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 08:43 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Irreverend Dave <reverend_dave@ministerpants.com> - 2017-01-14 15:48 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 14:37 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 01:52 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 01:58 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-15 10:33 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 01:40 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-14 19:43 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:01 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-15 16:00 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Mitchell Holman <noemail@verizont.net> - 2017-01-15 09:52 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-15 10:03 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-16 02:06 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Mitchell Holman <noemail@verizont.net> - 2017-01-15 12:21 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2017-01-12 13:27 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-13 12:01 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-14 01:49 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-13 22:01 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:13 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2017-01-15 10:33 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-14 19:54 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2017-01-15 02:25 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> - 2017-01-15 22:30 +0800
Re: 'i don't know' SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2017-01-11 08:45 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 03:39 -0700
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-12 15:02 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-12 08:51 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Malcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:29 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-12 08:52 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' hhyapster@gmail.com - 2017-01-12 18:36 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 20:21 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-14 06:28 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2017-01-13 09:09 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-13 09:26 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-13 22:35 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 17:42 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-13 19:06 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-14 05:59 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 15:13 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 11:45 -0500
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 20:58 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-14 09:11 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 21:10 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 22:34 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-15 10:54 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 00:04 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 15:17 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 22:26 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-15 10:35 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 10:43 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-15 11:20 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 11:27 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-13 18:43 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Malcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-11 06:35 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' MarkA <someone@somewhere.invalid> - 2017-01-11 15:49 +0000
Re: 'i don't know' Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2017-01-11 10:08 -0600
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 21:14 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 22:43 -0700
Re: 'i don't know' Davej <galt_57@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:27 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 10:33 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2017-01-11 19:36 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 11:13 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2017-01-11 20:27 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 11:55 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2017-01-11 21:06 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 12:31 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2017-01-11 21:55 +0100
Re: 'i don't know' hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 21:25 -0800
Re: 'i don't know' hhyapster@gmail.com - 2017-01-12 02:49 -0800
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-10 22:59 -0800 |
| Subject | 'i don't know' |
| Message-ID | <5875D7CC.6B8B@ix.netcom.com> |
Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with some sort of answer Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' ask a religious person is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' is there a difference between all three? i don't know. i don't see any difference... except ..the atheist is fuckin lying! no offence intended... just observation.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 08:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <i6ob7c966mjq1teb0fatoa7q7qt769i41t@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2227329 |
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:59:24 -0800, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with some sort of answer > >Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' > >ask a religious person is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' > > >is there a difference between all three? i don't know. > >i don't see any difference... > > >except ..the atheist is fuckin lying! > > >no offence intended... > >just observation. Everyone who drops his jaw saying "G A W D" is a liar, atheist or believer. w.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 14:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oJMCno.o8F@kithrup.com> |
| In reply to | #2227337 |
In article <i6ob7c966mjq1teb0fatoa7q7qt769i41t@4ax.com>, Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote: >On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:59:24 -0800, The Starmaker ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >>Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with >some sort of answer >> >>Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' No, no, that's an agnostic. My husband has a badge that he wears to cons, reading "MILITANT AGNOSTIC: I DON'T KNOW AND YOU DON'T EITHER." The atheist says, "No, there isn't." >> >>ask a religious person is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' Ho, he says "Yes, there is," and if you persist, they'll start telling you some of the things they believe about him. [further silliness snipped] -- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 08:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4729d576-f718-4aab-8362-928805472ba6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2227464 |
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 9:30:08 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > In article <i6ob7c966mjq1teb0fatoa7q7qt769i41t@4ax.com>, > Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote: > >On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:59:24 -0800, The Starmaker > ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > >>Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with > >some sort of answer > >> > >>Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' > > No, no, that's an agnostic. My husband has a badge that he wears > to cons, reading "MILITANT AGNOSTIC: I DON'T KNOW AND YOU DON'T > EITHER." > > The atheist says, "No, there isn't." > >> > >>ask a religious person is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' > > Ho, he says "Yes, there is," and if you persist, they'll start > telling you some of the things they believe about him. > > [further silliness snipped] All it takes to be an atheist is this: when the question about ghod's existence is asked, the answer is 'We have no sufficient evidence for that." If one wants to parse that as "I don't know," one could. What's important is, does the unconvinced person act as if there isn't a ghod-thing or not? Some agnostics say, not only that they don't know, but that it isn't possible to come to a conclusion on the matter. It is an interesting conundrum that, a theoretically all-powerful being, or one so much more powerful than humans that it is near to no difference, could have created the universe and us for who knows what reason, and totally covered its tracks, so that no conclusive evidence is available, and faith would be the only way to really believe in it. But I'm getting into Oolong Coluphid territory. Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" is logically impossible. Definitions of the supposed beings are equivocal, anyway. So "I don't know" is a perfectly cromulent response to the question, if one has no faith. Kevin R
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 08:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <199edc38-dd67-47f4-a7d2-b66654df8441@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2227517 |
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 11:33:11 AM UTC-5, Kevrob wrote: > But I'm getting into Oolong Coluphid territory. sp error: Oolon, not Oolong. If there were Oolong in h2g2, Arthur wouldn't have been put through as much fuss after Terra was demolished. http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Oolon_Colluphid Kevin R
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 09:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2227517 |
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 5:33:11 PM UTC+1, Kevrob wrote: > All it takes to be an atheist is this: when the question about > ghod's existence is asked, the answer is 'We have no sufficient > evidence for that." If one wants to parse that as "I don't know," > one could. What's important is, does the unconvinced person act > as if there isn't a ghod-thing or not? > > Some agnostics say, not only that they don't know, but that it > isn't possible to come to a conclusion on the matter. It is > an interesting conundrum that, a theoretically all-powerful > being, or one so much more powerful than humans that it is near > to no difference, could have created the universe and us for who > knows what reason, and totally covered its tracks, so that no > conclusive evidence is available, and faith would be the only > way to really believe in it. But I'm getting into Oolong > Coluphid territory. > > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" > is logically impossible. Definitions of the supposed beings are > equivocal, anyway. So "I don't know" is a perfectly cromulent response > to the question, if one has no faith. > > Kevin R Agreed, but for me it is more like this: - If there is no suspicion a deed has been done, I will not look for evidence about an alledged perpetrator. Why look for an answer with no question for it? - Anyway no question is answered best by "godditit". - Does the assumption of a god`s existence make any difference to someone´s life? If not, the question is irrelevant anyway. If yes, I would consider that someone biased, and in need of a god.(as Mr Keuner said) - Since no one can define any property of said god, and cant even agree with any other person about anything concerning god, "existence" sounds like too materialistic a word anyway for some hazy personal phantasy. It is like the question:Do you believe the life i´m dreaming of exists? regards, ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 11:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <chine.bleu-D97D3A.11262211012017@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #2227554 |
In article <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com>,
ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> wrote:
> > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod"
> Agreed, but for me it is more like this:
So you're both fuckwits. I can prove no triangle in a hyperbolic plane has
interior angles summing to π. It proven no map in a plane exists that requires
more than four colours. It was proven entangled particles have no hidden state.
Also note that any quantified statement can be turned into a so-called negative.
(all x)(px) = not (some x)(not px)
(some x)(px) = not (all x)(not px)
This is a consequence of deMorgan:
(not p and not q) = not (p or q)
(not p or not q) = not (p and q)
Your fallacy about can't prove a negative is just your lame rationalistion to
introduce the law of constructed inconsistency
(not |- p) implies (not p)
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 01:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o56mnh$1ndu$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2227610 |
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:26:52 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: > In article <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com>, > ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> wrote: > >> > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" > >> Agreed, but for me it is more like this: > > So you're both fuckwits. I can prove no triangle in a hyperbolic plane > has interior angles summing to π. It proven no map in a plane exists > that requires more than four colours. It was proven entangled particles > have no hidden state. > > Also note that any quantified statement can be turned into a so-called > negative. > > (all x)(px) = not (some x)(not px) > > (some x)(px) = not (all x)(not px) > > This is a consequence of deMorgan: > > (not p and not q) = not (p or q) > > (not p or not q) = not (p and q) Agreed, I can prove I don't have three legs and two heads, but nobody can prove a _universal_ negative. Can you, for instance, prove that there are no leprechauns? Have you looked under every rock on every planet in the universe? Your supposed god character is supposedly everywhere, so is universal, and there is, therefore, no way to prove it doesn't exist. > Your fallacy about can't prove a negative is just your lame > rationalistion to introduce the law of constructed inconsistency > > (not |- p) implies (not p) Implication is not proof, as any law enforcement officer will tell you. -- Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279 All gods are tailored to order. They're made to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 08:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <F7894763.EED243DB@Enterovibrio.Garryana.Azurea> |
| In reply to | #2227780 |
Smiler, hoy doy, what a sweep of vanity comes this way. Ye dish-eared rudeliest welcome to this world, ye scrawled: > Your supposed god character Siri never mentianed any kind of "god character". Like she said, you're a fuckwit. Just because people tell you you're a fuckwit it does not follow that they are theists, you fuckwit. Did I tell you you're a fuckwit? You're a fuckwit. -- Consciousness is one - it does not exist in the plural. - Erwin Schrödinger
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 02:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <chine.bleu-538FA7.02093612012017@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #2227780 |
In article <o56mnh$1ndu$3@gioia.aioe.org>, Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:26:52 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: > > > In article <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com>, > > ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" > > > >> Agreed, but for me it is more like this: > > > > So you're both fuckwits. I can prove no triangle in a hyperbolic plane > > has interior angles summing to π. It proven no map in a plane exists > > that requires more than four colours. It was proven entangled particles > > have no hidden state. > > > > Also note that any quantified statement can be turned into a so-called > > negative. > > > > (all x)(px) = not (some x)(not px) > > > > (some x)(px) = not (all x)(not px) > > > > This is a consequence of deMorgan: > > > > (not p and not q) = not (p or q) > > > > (not p or not q) = not (p and q) > > Agreed, I can prove I don't have three legs and two heads, but nobody can > prove a _universal_ negative. If by 'universal negative', you mean (all x)(not px), that's what the experiment of Bell's inequality showed: all entangled particles do not have a shared hidden state. Or the scientific method is invalid. > Can you, for instance, prove that there are no leprechauns? I have neither the need nor interest in disproving leprechauns. Since this is important to you, devote your own energy to the question. > Your supposed god character is supposedly everywhere, so is universal, and > there is, therefore, no way to prove it doesn't exist. Then why assert there is no god when you acknowledge you can't prove that. Real world atheists I know don't say there is no god; rather the question is irrelevant to them. They don't have the need or interest in disproving them. > > Your fallacy about can't prove a negative is just your lame > > rationalistion to introduce the law of constructed inconsistency > > > > (not |- p) implies (not p) > > Implication is not proof, as any law enforcement officer will tell you. |- is the proves operator. implies is a different logical connective. -- :-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' Free the Amos Yee one. Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-13 02:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o59dlm$1tn5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2227898 |
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 02:09:45 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: > In article <o56mnh$1ndu$3@gioia.aioe.org>, Smiler <smiler@jo.king> > wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:26:52 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: >> >> > In article <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com>, >> > ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> wrote: >> > >> >> > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" >> > >> >> Agreed, but for me it is more like this: >> > >> > So you're both fuckwits. I can prove no triangle in a hyperbolic >> > plane has interior angles summing to π. It proven no map in a plane >> > exists that requires more than four colours. It was proven entangled >> > particles have no hidden state. >> > >> > Also note that any quantified statement can be turned into a >> > so-called negative. >> > >> > (all x)(px) = not (some x)(not px) >> > >> > (some x)(px) = not (all x)(not px) >> > >> > This is a consequence of deMorgan: >> > >> > (not p and not q) = not (p or q) >> > >> > (not p or not q) = not (p and q) >> >> Agreed, I can prove I don't have three legs and two heads, but nobody >> can prove a _universal_ negative. > > If by 'universal negative', you mean (all x)(not px), that's what the > experiment of Bell's inequality showed: all entangled particles do not > have a shared hidden state. Or the scientific method is invalid. > >> Can you, for instance, prove that there are no leprechauns? > > I have neither the need nor interest in disproving leprechauns. Since > this is important to you, devote your own energy to the question. > >> Your supposed god character is supposedly everywhere, so is universal, >> and there is, therefore, no way to prove it doesn't exist. > > Then why assert there is no god when you acknowledge you can't prove > that. Where did I assert that there is no god, liar? I only claim that I don't believe in any god(s) and until you provide evidence that you supposed god exists, there is no need for me to claim it doesn't. > Real world atheists I know don't say there is no god; rather the > question is irrelevant to them. They don't have the need or interest in > disproving them. Most real world theists I know don't say there are gods. They don't have the need or interest in proving them. -- Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279 All gods are tailored to order. They're made to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 23:01 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <18ng7cp690vs9g93pif07k9iqpe5vupgra@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2228358 |
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 02:22:46 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 02:09:45 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: > >> In article <o56mnh$1ndu$3@gioia.aioe.org>, Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:26:52 -0800, Siri Cruise wrote: >>> >>> > In article <056ffde7-5b89-42ea-bcc0-f382b0217c74@googlegroups.com>, >>> > ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> wrote: >>> > >>> >> > Since one can't prove a negative, proving that "there is no ghod" >>> > >>> >> Agreed, but for me it is more like this: >>> > >>> > So you're both fuckwits. I can prove no triangle in a hyperbolic >>> > plane has interior angles summing to ?. It proven no map in a plane >>> > exists that requires more than four colours. It was proven entangled >>> > particles have no hidden state. >>> > >>> > Also note that any quantified statement can be turned into a >>> > so-called negative. >>> > >>> > (all x)(px) = not (some x)(not px) >>> > >>> > (some x)(px) = not (all x)(not px) >>> > >>> > This is a consequence of deMorgan: >>> > >>> > (not p and not q) = not (p or q) >>> > >>> > (not p or not q) = not (p and q) >>> >>> Agreed, I can prove I don't have three legs and two heads, but nobody >>> can prove a _universal_ negative. >> >> If by 'universal negative', you mean (all x)(not px), that's what the >> experiment of Bell's inequality showed: all entangled particles do not >> have a shared hidden state. Or the scientific method is invalid. >> >>> Can you, for instance, prove that there are no leprechauns? >> >> I have neither the need nor interest in disproving leprechauns. Since >> this is important to you, devote your own energy to the question. >> >>> Your supposed god character is supposedly everywhere, so is universal, >>> and there is, therefore, no way to prove it doesn't exist. >> >> Then why assert there is no god when you acknowledge you can't prove >> that. > >Where did I assert that there is no god, liar? >I only claim that I don't believe in any god(s) and until you provide >evidence that you supposed god exists, there is no need for me to claim it >doesn't. These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. . >> Real world atheists I know don't say there is no god; rather the >> question is irrelevant to them. They don't have the need or interest in >> disproving them. > >Most real world theists I know don't say there are gods. They don't have >the need or interest in proving them. Or in disproving them. If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose their beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative reaction they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what they're actually seeing is "push us and we push back". And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and act on them, repeat them to us, etc. Their religion has made them stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roselia Holder <vomit-inducing.hurry-whore@rec.arts.female.ejaculation> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-13 05:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <58a1fo$53e$7@talk.origins.waterless-wormy-mcjuicemaker> |
| In reply to | #2228440 |
Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: > These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't > - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let > atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually > is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. > . > Or in disproving them. > > If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose > their beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative > reaction they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what > they're actually seeing is "push us and we push back". > > And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and > act on them, repeat them to us, etc. > > Their religion has made them stupid. <cue violin concerto in D major, Opus 35, Tchaikovsky> -- Choose your friends carefully. Your enemies will choose you; Yasser Arafat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-14 01:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o5bv5f$1rec$6@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2228448 |
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:16:54 +0000, Roselia Holder wrote: > Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: > >> These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't >> - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let >> atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually >> is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. >> . >> Or in disproving them. >> >> If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose their >> beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative reaction >> they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what they're >> actually seeing is "push us and we push back". >> >> And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and act >> on them, repeat them to us, etc. >> >> Their religion has made them stupid. > > <cue violin concerto in D major, Opus 35, Tchaikovsky> Just another Dizum troll. Ignored. -- Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279 All gods are tailored to order. They're made to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-13 17:39 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dbabc179-be30-4dea-885c-a23d6a9c55d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2228448 |
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 12:17:11 AM UTC-5, Roselia Holder wrote: > Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: > > > These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't > > - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let > > atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually > > is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. > > . > > Or in disproving them. > > > > If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose > > their beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative > > reaction they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what > > they're actually seeing is "push us and we push back". > > > > And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and > > act on them, repeat them to us, etc. > > > > Their religion has made them stupid. > > <cue violin concerto in D major, Opus 35, Tchaikovsky> I wonder how many of these women suddenly and mysteriously appearing are really a male troll or trolls. They all sound the same. This one sounds like Siri.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-14 05:41 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <5f3k7c5ar5d45i7ndpq6o04q1jb88mvsa4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2228925 |
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:39:40 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote: >On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 12:17:11 AM UTC-5, Roselia Holder wrote: >> Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: >> >> > These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't >> > - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let >> > atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually >> > is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. >> > . >> > Or in disproving them. >> > >> > If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose >> > their beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative >> > reaction they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what >> > they're actually seeing is "push us and we push back". >> > >> > And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and >> > act on them, repeat them to us, etc. >> > >> > Their religion has made them stupid. >> >> <cue violin concerto in D major, Opus 35, Tchaikovsky> The troll couldn't address valid points. >I wonder how many of these women suddenly and mysteriously appearing are >really a male troll or trolls. They all sound the same. This one sounds >like Siri. Either way, they're mentally ill, because normal people don't act that way towards others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-14 04:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <chine.bleu-D2B22A.04501514012017@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #2229090 |
In article <5f3k7c5ar5d45i7ndpq6o04q1jb88mvsa4@4ax.com>, Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:39:40 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7 > <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote: > > >On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 12:17:11 AM UTC-5, Roselia Holder wrote: > >> Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: > >> > >> > These morons imagine that their god is real _and_ that we say it isn't > >> > - because they're stupid, simplistic binary thinkers who don't let > >> > atheists and others outside their religion see it for what it actually > >> > is - somebody else's religious belief, that is neither true nor false. > >> > . > >> > Or in disproving them. > >> > > >> > If theists could only live and let live, and didn't try to impose > >> > their beliefs on everybody else, there would not be the negative > >> > reaction they lie to themselves that atheism is all about - when what > >> > they're actually seeing is "push us and we push back". > >> > > >> > And having lied to themselves about us, they believe these lies and > >> > act on them, repeat them to us, etc. > >> > > >> > Their religion has made them stupid. > >> > >> <cue violin concerto in D major, Opus 35, Tchaikovsky> > > The troll couldn't address valid points. > > >I wonder how many of these women suddenly and mysteriously appearing are > >really a male troll or trolls. They all sound the same. This one sounds > >like Siri. > > Either way, they're mentally ill, because normal people don't act that > way towards others. [dances across floor] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzCTh60xohM [twirls tophat] So long, and thanks for all the salmon teriyaki. -- :-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' Free the Amos Yee one. Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 07:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7D8F6D0A.A3084C33@Steccherinum.Carlylei.Antibiotica> |
| In reply to | #2227517 |
Kevrob, wretched, balloon-headed, dull, toilet-scrubbing scullion. Ye mangled lord of folded arms, ye bootlicked: > Since one can't prove a negative I don't have three legs. HTH, fucktard. -- Consciousness is one - it does not exist in the plural. - Erwin Shrödinger
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jørgen Farum Jensen <farumjensen@mailme.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 14:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o55ala$622$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2227329 |
Den 11-01-2017 kl. 07:59 skrev The Starmaker: > Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with some sort of answer > > Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' Wrong. The atheist says NO. -- Jørgen Farum Jensen "Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof." — Ashley Montagu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ed wolf <eduartwolf@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 09:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3161bc1e-e4dd-42fc-87bc-4131d66bad82@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2227422 |
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 2:08:27 PM UTC+1, Jørgen Farum Jensen wrote: > Den 11-01-2017 kl. 07:59 skrev The Starmaker: > > Most scientist don't say...'i don't know', they usually come up with some sort of answer > > > > Ask atheist is there a God, they don't say 'i don't know' > > Wrong. The atheist says NO. this atheist says: now just what do you mean by that question? ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism
csiph-web