Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #360325 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-11 09:58 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-08-12 12:35 +0800 |
| Articles | 11 on this page of 231 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-11 09:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-11 10:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-11 13:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-11 23:26 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 00:24 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-08-11 13:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 07:58 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 19:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 08:48 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 04:13 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 20:57 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 12:39 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 15:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 15:26 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-13 07:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-12 20:03 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-12 17:49 -0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-12 18:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-13 00:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 22:25 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-12 20:55 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-12 19:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-12 20:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-12 19:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 10:53 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 23:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 15:56 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 07:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 20:25 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-13 06:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-13 14:20 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 10:39 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 23:59 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 16:15 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 07:44 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 20:30 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 09:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:30 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-14 14:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-15 05:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-15 18:25 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 19:46 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 11:45 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 10:48 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 22:04 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 11:15 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-08-16 22:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 15:15 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-08-17 00:38 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 20:22 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-08-17 10:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 20:28 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 18:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 13:00 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:24 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 06:45 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 20:35 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-19 17:22 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 12:47 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 01:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 22:36 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-20 14:10 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 04:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 14:29 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-16 15:04 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:53 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 22:30 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 10:08 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-19 17:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 04:56 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-20 14:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-16 01:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 19:53 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-16 14:58 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 10:52 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:56 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 19:49 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 18:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 13:33 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 07:26 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:35 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 20:41 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 04:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 22:44 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 05:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 22:51 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 08:48 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-18 18:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-17 13:21 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 19:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-17 13:40 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-17 12:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 00:51 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-17 14:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 21:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 00:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 01:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 01:23 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:32 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 01:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 23:38 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 20:12 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 19:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 13:45 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 07:43 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-13 15:53 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:24 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-14 12:08 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-14 14:17 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-14 04:50 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-14 12:53 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-14 06:54 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-14 14:16 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-15 07:51 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Mike M <mike@xenocyte.com> - 2015-08-15 06:41 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-15 16:11 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-15 03:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-15 18:48 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-15 07:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-15 12:05 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-15 18:36 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 00:56 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 01:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 01:09 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 14:06 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 06:04 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 12:12 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 03:37 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 21:25 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 02:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-18 14:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 18:47 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:30 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-18 10:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 16:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-19 00:44 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:43 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-19 09:45 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 05:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-21 00:25 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 04:52 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 10:28 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 20:04 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 06:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 20:16 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 19:27 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 13:51 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 07:55 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 20:59 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 05:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 22:30 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 04:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-21 19:58 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-18 00:51 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 16:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-15 15:17 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 10:31 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-15 12:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 10:36 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 03:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 20:11 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 11:48 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 10:58 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-15 12:02 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-12 19:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 10:33 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 07:47 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 20:34 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 09:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-08-13 13:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 13:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:49 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-16 01:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 20:24 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-16 10:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 11:01 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2015-08-16 16:55 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 11:11 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-17 13:39 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 01:10 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 18:00 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-11 21:41 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 15:08 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-12 20:04 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-11 15:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 14:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-12 07:29 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-11 21:44 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-08-11 20:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 04:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 14:55 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 16:00 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 07:51 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-13 20:49 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-13 09:46 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 18:18 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-14 03:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-14 18:25 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-15 05:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-11 12:30 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-11 12:59 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 15:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 19:30 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 04:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-12 12:36 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-12 20:53 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 21:20 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> - 2015-08-12 10:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 21:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-11 20:22 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-11 21:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 14:53 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-11 14:51 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2015-08-12 12:35 +0800
Page 12 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12]
| From | bilgat@m.nu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-12 04:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vk3msat1lgfiqshu8m13ihgq2o2u4gsilq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360408 |
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:32:46 -0700, Rudy Canoza <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote: >On 8/11/2015 5:30 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:08:33 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >> >>> On 8/11/2015 1:03 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:48:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>>>>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>>>>>> science. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong >>>>>>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any >>>>>>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>>>>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there was no >>>>>>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, they >>>>>>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to get out >>>>>>>> of an awkward position. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>>>>>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, lacking >>>>>>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>>>>>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they wrongly >>>>>>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant atheists who >>>>>>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >>>>>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >>>>>>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>>>>>> religion" bullshit. >>>>>>> >>>>>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >>>>>> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? >>>>> >>>>> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a >>>> >>>> huh? >>>> >>>> >>>>> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't invalid. >>>>> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively >>>>> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of pure >>>>> faith. >>>> >>>> >>>> since positively believing in something would mean they do believe in >>>> something then that statement is totally wrong, >>> >>> It's not wrong. They positively believe that something does not, >>> cannot, exist. They positively believe in the non-existence of >>> something. That's not so hard to understand - well, maybe it is for you. >> >> >> well as an atheist I more closely relate to what YOU would call a >> strong atheist... > >In other words, yours is a faith-based position. You believe, >positively, that there is no god - not only that, but that there *can >be* no god. You believe that as a matter of pure faith. you really are an idiot . I K N O W there is no god, I know for sure, without a doubt > > >> but you see the thing is I am a strong ATHEIST not >> strong agnostic.... >> >> I am an A-theist <without belief in a god or gods> > >No, you believe something stronger than that. *I* am the one without a >belief in any god; you have a firm belief, an absolute faith-based >conviction, in "no god." You believe there *cannot* be any god. I for those with hearing problems I know there is no god, I dont believe there isnt I K N O W there isnt >don't believe that; I just don't believe in any representation of god >that has ever been presented to me. I am open to the (slim) possibility >that some representation of god may be made to me some day that I might >find convincing. You reject that out of hand. > yup cause I know there is no god > >> I am firmly opposed to the belief in any gods > >There! You admitted your faith. No I admit that Others should NOT BELIEVE in faries > >>>>> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, >>>>> as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking >>>>> about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those >>>> >>>> I think you need help with the english language, >>> >>> No, I'm highly proficient in it, as well as logic and rhetoric. You, on >>> the other hand...not so good. >> >> >> as a theist you > >No. I am not a theist. Once again, you fucked up. Whatever
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bilgat@m.nu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-12 12:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <301nsa9r6i6bi582sks9cdlou89ee9d1pi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360441 |
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:16:51 -0700, Rudy Canoza <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote: >On 8/12/2015 2:19 AM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:32:46 -0700, Rudy Canoza >> <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote: >> >>> On 8/11/2015 5:30 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:08:33 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/11/2015 1:03 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:48:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>>>>>>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>>>>>>>> science. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong >>>>>>>>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any >>>>>>>>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>>>>>>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there was no >>>>>>>>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, they >>>>>>>>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to get out >>>>>>>>>> of an awkward position. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>>>>>>>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, lacking >>>>>>>>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>>>>>>>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they wrongly >>>>>>>>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant atheists who >>>>>>>>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >>>>>>>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >>>>>>>>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>>>>>>>> religion" bullshit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >>>>>>>> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a >>>>>> >>>>>> huh? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't invalid. >>>>>>> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively >>>>>>> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of pure >>>>>>> faith. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> since positively believing in something would mean they do believe in >>>>>> something then that statement is totally wrong, >>>>> >>>>> It's not wrong. They positively believe that something does not, >>>>> cannot, exist. They positively believe in the non-existence of >>>>> something. That's not so hard to understand - well, maybe it is for you. >>>> >>>> >>>> well as an atheist I more closely relate to what YOU would call a >>>> strong atheist... >>> >>> In other words, yours is a faith-based position. You believe, >>> positively, that there is no god - not only that, but that there *can >>> be* no god. You believe that as a matter of pure faith. >> >> >> you really are an idiot > >Not in the least, and you don't even believe that. > >< I K N O W there is no god, I know for sure, >> without a doubt > >No, you don't. You couldn't possibly know it. You *believe* it - as a >matter of pure faith. > I am done with you troll PLONK! >>> >>> >>>> but you see the thing is I am a strong ATHEIST not >>>> strong agnostic.... >>>> >>>> I am an A-theist <without belief in a god or gods> >>> >>> No, you believe something stronger than that. *I* am the one without a >>> belief in any god; you have a firm belief, an absolute faith-based >>> conviction, in "no god." You believe there *cannot* be any god. I >> >> for those with hearing problems I know there is no god > >You don't know that. You can't. > >>> don't believe that; I just don't believe in any representation of god >>> that has ever been presented to me. I am open to the (slim) possibility >>> that some representation of god may be made to me some day that I might >>> find convincing. You reject that out of hand. >>> >> >> yup cause I know there is no god > >That's a lie. > >>> >>>> I am firmly opposed to the belief in any gods >>> >>> There! You admitted your faith. >> >> No I admit that > >No, you *did* admit your faith. Good job! What took you so long? > >>> >>>>>>> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, >>>>>>> as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking >>>>>>> about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those >>>>>> >>>>>> I think you need help with the english language, >>>>> >>>>> No, I'm highly proficient in it, as well as logic and rhetoric. You, on >>>>> the other hand...not so good. >>>> >>>> >>>> as a theist you >>> >>> No. I am not a theist. Once again, you fucked up. >> >> Whatever > >Concession of defeat noted and accepted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "W.TS." <m14m@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-12 20:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA4F4D46DE43B2m14mearthlinknet@216.168.4.170> |
| In reply to | #360486 |
Rudy Canoza <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote in news:mqg48i$975$9@dont-email.me: > On 8/12/2015 10:36 AM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >> On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:16:51 -0700, Rudy Canoza >> <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote: >> >>> On 8/12/2015 2:19 AM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:32:46 -0700, Rudy Canoza >>>> <LaLaLaLaLaLa@philhendrie.con> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/11/2015 5:30 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:08:33 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>> LaBourgeois <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 1:03 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:48:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>>>> LaBourgeois <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therese LaBourgeois <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting >>>>>>>>>>>>>> between alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs nor science. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or >>>>>>>>>>>>> negative. Strong atheists believe there is no god. Weak >>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists don't believe in any god (a negative belief - >>>>>>>>>>>>> they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>>>>>>>>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed >>>>>>>>>>>> there was no God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God >>>>>>>>>>>> in case there is one, they believe they have no belief. >>>>>>>>>>>> It's a kind of self denial logic to get out of an awkward >>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are >>>>>>>>>>> "strong" atheists, believing there is no god; others are >>>>>>>>>>> "weak" atheists, lacking a belief *in* any god. It's still >>>>>>>>>>> *about* belief, generally, and at least for the weak >>>>>>>>>>> atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans >>>>>>>>>>> they wrongly consider to be catchy and witty, and that >>>>>>>>>>> includes militant atheists who repeatedly toss off the >>>>>>>>>>> three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >>>>>>>>>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who >>>>>>>>>>> brainlessly repeat the marginally less snarky "atheism is >>>>>>>>>>> just another faith-based religion" bullshit. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to >>>>>>>>>> not collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a >>>>>>>>>> religion or such? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case >>>>>>>>> of a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> huh? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't >>>>>>>>> invalid. >>>>>>>>> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She >>>>>>>>> positively >>>>>>>>> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a >>>>>>>>> matter of pure faith. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> since positively believing in something would mean they do >>>>>>>> believe in something then that statement is totally wrong, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's not wrong. They positively believe that something does >>>>>>> not, cannot, exist. They positively believe in the >>>>>>> non-existence of something. That's not so hard to understand - >>>>>>> well, maybe it is for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> well as an atheist I more closely relate to what YOU would call a >>>>>> strong atheist... >>>>> >>>>> In other words, yours is a faith-based position. You believe, >>>>> positively, that there is no god - not only that, but that there >>>>> *can be* no god. You believe that as a matter of pure faith. >>>> >>>> >>>> you really are an idiot >>> >>> Not in the least, and you don't even believe that. >>> >>> < I K N O W there is no god, I know for sure, >>>> without a doubt >>> >>> No, you don't. You couldn't possibly know it. You *believe* it - >>> as a matter of pure faith. >>> >> >> I am done with you troll PLONK! > > Concession of defeat noted and accepted, and mocked as well. > >>>>> >>>>>> but you see the thing is I am a strong ATHEIST not >>>>>> strong agnostic.... >>>>>> >>>>>> I am an A-theist <without belief in a god or gods> >>>>> >>>>> No, you believe something stronger than that. *I* am the one >>>>> without a belief in any god; you have a firm belief, an absolute >>>>> faith-based conviction, in "no god." You believe there *cannot* >>>>> be any god. I >>>> >>>> for those with hearing problems I know there is no god >>> >>> You don't know that. You can't. >>> >>>>> don't believe that; I just don't believe in any representation of >>>>> god that has ever been presented to me. I am open to the (slim) >>>>> possibility that some representation of god may be made to me some >>>>> day that I might find convincing. You reject that out of hand. >>>>> >>>> >>>> yup cause I know there is no god >>> >>> That's a lie. >>> >>>>> >>>>>> I am firmly opposed to the belief in any gods >>>>> >>>>> There! You admitted your faith. >>>> >>>> No I admit that >>> >>> No, you *did* admit your faith. Good job! What took you so long? >>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief >>>>>>>>> in god, as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're >>>>>>>>> still talking about belief generally. Your beliefs in general >>>>>>>>> are not merely those >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think you need help with the english language, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I'm highly proficient in it, as well as logic and rhetoric. >>>>>>> You, on the other hand...not so good. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> as a theist you >>>>> >>>>> No. I am not a theist. Once again, you fucked up. >>>> >>>> Whatever >>> >>> Concession of defeat noted and accepted. The next time you break a bone, avoid Doctors, pray instead. See how far it gets you. No prayer has ever been answered, not a one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 21:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mqe6tc$tqr$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #360378 |
On 2015-08-11 16:08, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: > On 8/11/2015 1:03 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:48:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >> >>> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>>>> LaBourgeois >>>>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>>>> science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. >>>>>>> Strong >>>>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in >>>>>>> any >>>>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them >>>>>>> is a >>>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>>> >>>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there >>>>>> was no >>>>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, >>>>>> they >>>>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to >>>>>> get out >>>>>> of an awkward position. >>>>> >>>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>>>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, >>>>> lacking >>>>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>>>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>>> >>>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they >>>>> wrongly >>>>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant >>>>> atheists who >>>>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not >>>>> collecting >>>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >>>>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>>>> religion" bullshit. >>>>> >>>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >>>> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? >>> >>> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a >> >> huh? >> >> >>> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't invalid. >>> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively >>> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of pure >>> faith. >> >> >> since positively believing in something would mean they do believe in >> something then that statement is totally wrong, > > It's not wrong. They positively believe that something does not, > cannot, exist. They positively believe in the non-existence of > something. That's not so hard to understand - well, maybe it is for you. > >>> >>> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, >>> as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking >>> about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those >> >> I think you need help with the english language, > > No, I'm highly proficient in it, as well as logic and rhetoric. You, on > the other hand...not so good. Do you have an external authority for the above opinion?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-12 10:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mqfjhf$62i$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #360412 |
On 2015-08-12 01:35, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: > On 8/11/2015 6:20 PM, Carl Kaufmann wrote: >> On 2015-08-11 16:08, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>> On 8/11/2015 1:03 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:48:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>>>>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>>>>>> LaBourgeois >>>>>>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>>>>>> science. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. >>>>>>>>> Strong >>>>>>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in >>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them >>>>>>>>> is a >>>>>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there >>>>>>>> was no >>>>>>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to >>>>>>>> get out >>>>>>>> of an awkward position. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>>>>>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, >>>>>>> lacking >>>>>>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>>>>>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they >>>>>>> wrongly >>>>>>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant >>>>>>> atheists who >>>>>>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not >>>>>>> collecting >>>>>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly >>>>>>> repeat >>>>>>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>>>>>> religion" bullshit. >>>>>>> >>>>>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >>>>>> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? >>>>> >>>>> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a >>>> >>>> huh? >>>> >>>> >>>>> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't >>>>> invalid. >>>>> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively >>>>> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of >>>>> pure >>>>> faith. >>>> >>>> >>>> since positively believing in something would mean they do believe in >>>> something then that statement is totally wrong, >>> >>> It's not wrong. They positively believe that something does not, >>> cannot, exist. They positively believe in the non-existence of >>> something. That's not so hard to understand - well, maybe it is for >>> you. >>> >>>>> >>>>> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, >>>>> as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking >>>>> about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those >>>> >>>> I think you need help with the english language, >>> >>> No, I'm highly proficient in it, as well as logic and rhetoric. You, on >>> the other hand...not so good. >> >> Do you have an external authority for the above opinion? > > LOL! You're another never-serious posters, in a long and inglorious > line of them. Too funny. That may be so, but it doesn't nothing to verify your proficiency with English, logic, or rhetoric. See, I can be just as dismissive as you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Kaufmann <cwkaufmann@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 21:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mqe6mb$tqr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #360349 |
On 2015-08-11 13:48, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: > On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>> LaBourgeois >>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>> science. >>>>> >>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong >>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any >>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>> >>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>> >>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there was no >>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, they >>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to get >>>> out >>>> of an awkward position. >>> >>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, lacking >>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>> >>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they wrongly >>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant atheists who >>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>> religion" bullshit. >>> >> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? > > Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a > "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't invalid. > For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively > believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of pure > faith. > > For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, > as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking > about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those > things in which you positively believe; we can talk about beliefs that > are in your set of (positive) beliefs, and those that aren't. > > The reason the shopworn "not collecting stamps" snark is so shitty is > that it doesn't mean you don't have *any* hobby. And being an atheist doesn't mean you don't have *any* beliefs, although I have seen plenty of theists who stupidly ask "Don't you believe in anything?" Using your paragraph above: For the "weak" aphilatelist, we can talk about a *lack* of a hobby of stamp collecting, as opposed to a positive hobby of "not stamp collecting" [avoiding stamps whenever/however possible and encouraging others to do the same], but we're still talking about hobbies generally. >> Seems pretty pithy, accurate, and > > It's pure snark, and the analogy collapses in failure. What, in fact, is so snarky about it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 20:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mqe714$lre$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #360411 |
On 8/11/2015 8:16 PM, Carl Kaufmann wrote: > On 2015-08-11 13:48, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >> On 8/11/2015 10:30 AM, Tom McDonald wrote: >>> On 8/11/2015 10:43 AM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>> On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >>>>> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>>>>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese >>>>>>> LaBourgeois >>>>>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>>>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>>>>> science. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. >>>>>> Strong >>>>>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any >>>>>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>>>>> belief in a god.) >>>>>> >>>>>> Stop spewing nonsense. >>>>> >>>>> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there >>>>> was no >>>>> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, >>>>> they >>>>> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to get >>>>> out >>>>> of an awkward position. >>>> >>>> Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >>>> atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, >>>> lacking >>>> a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >>>> least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. >>>> >>>> I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they wrongly >>>> consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant atheists >>>> who >>>> repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >>>> stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >>>> the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >>>> religion" bullshit. >>>> >>> What's the problem, in your view, with comparing atheism to not >>> collecting stamps when the theist says atheism is a religion or such? >> >> Because in addition to the falsity of the analogy, in the case of a >> "strong" atheist, the analogy wouldn't hold even if it weren't invalid. >> For the strong atheist, atheism *is* a religion. She positively >> believes, but cannot prove, that there is no god. It's a matter of pure >> faith. >> >> For the "weak" atheist, we can talk about a *lack* of a belief in god, >> as opposed to a positive belief in "no god," but we're still talking >> about belief generally. Your beliefs in general are not merely those >> things in which you positively believe; we can talk about beliefs that >> are in your set of (positive) beliefs, and those that aren't. >> >> The reason the shopworn "not collecting stamps" snark is so shitty is >> that it doesn't mean you don't have *any* hobby. > > And being an atheist doesn't mean you don't have *any* beliefs, although > I have seen plenty of theists who stupidly ask "Don't you believe in > anything?" > > Using your paragraph above: > > For the "weak" aphilatelist, we can talk about a *lack* of a hobby of > stamp collecting, as opposed to a positive hobby of "not stamp > collecting" [avoiding stamps whenever/however possible and encouraging > others to do the same], but we're still talking about hobbies generally. > >>> Seems pretty pithy, accurate, and >> >> It's pure snark, and the analogy collapses in failure. > > What, in fact, is so snarky about it? > Interestingly, what she cut was my observation that the idea of talking about the analogy of non-stamp-collecting was devised as a conversation starter, not a conversation stopper. So she stopped the conversation by snipping that part of my reply. So I shitcanned the bitch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 21:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mqe8mg$n8o$1@panix2.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #360413 |
In article <mqe714$lre$1@dont-email.me>, Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> said: [ re "the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois" ] > Interestingly, what she cut was my observation that the idea of > talking about the analogy of non-stamp-collecting was devised as a > conversation starter, not a conversation stopper. So she stopped > the conversation by snipping that part of my reply. > > So I shitcanned the bitch. What makes you think it's a she? Not that trolling assholes like this one are _never_ female, but I think that statistically they're a lot more likely to turn out to me males. -- wds
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bilgat@m.nu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 14:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lkkksa5ne35chtq7l1ogjd8d7jme0sdr63@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360333 |
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:43:09 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >On 8/11/2015 8:26 AM, niunian wrote: >> On 2015-08-11 11:06 PM, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: >>> On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >>>> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>>>> >>>>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >>>> >>>> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >>>> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >>>> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >>>> science. >>> >>> Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong >>> atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any >>> god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >>> belief in a god.) >>> >>> Stop spewing nonsense. >> >> Atheism has been improving. In the old days, they believed there was no >> God. Nowadays, in order to avoid denying God in case there is one, they >> believe they have no belief. It's a kind of self denial logic to get out >> of an awkward position. > >Partly. As I have earlier elaborated, some atheists are "strong" >atheists, believing there is no god; others are "weak" atheists, lacking >a belief *in* any god. It's still *about* belief, generally, and at >least for the weak atheists, there's nothing pejorative about it. I am sure this strong weak crap was crafted by theists to be able to feel better about themselves > >I dislike people who try to argue this using stale slogans they wrongly >consider to be catchy and witty, and that includes militant atheists who >repeatedly toss off the three-second bit of snark about "not collecting >stamps", as well as the militant anti-atheists who brainlessly repeat >the marginally less snarky "atheism is just another faith-based >religion" bullshit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bilgat@m.nu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-11 14:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pekksadprb2m3qm2ue757320g8tvumvvtb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360325 |
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:06:39 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >> >>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>> >>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >> >> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >> science. > >Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong >atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any I dont even think that is true, you can not in any way be an atheist and have a belief in any god. Strong or weak doest matter, if you are an atheist you have no belief in god weather strong or weak >god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a >belief in a god.) > >Stop spewing nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-12 12:35 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <d300okFd3vfU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #360325 |
On 11/08/2015 11:06 pm, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois wrote: > On 8/11/2015 7:58 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:29:15 -0700, the late Marie Therese LaBourgeois >> <barack@dewey_cheatham_and_howe.com> wrote: >> >>> On 4/24/2015 10:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. >>> >>> In what way is that a criticism? Explain. >> >> Ignoring, for the moment, the inappropriate cross-posting between >> alt.atheism, rec.arts.sf.written, sci.physics and >> sci.physics.relativity - atheism is based on neither beliefs nor >> science. > > Of course it's based on beliefs, whether positive or negative. Strong > atheists believe there is no god. Weak atheists don't believe in any > god (a negative belief - they have beliefs, but absent from them is a > belief in a god.) > > Stop spewing nonsense. > What absolute rubbish. Not believing is not the same as believing in something. -- Robert Bannister Perth, Western Australia
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 12 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web