Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #392061 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-11 12:43 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-09-14 03:58 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 416 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-11 12:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Normal Human <NH@....> - 2016-09-12 08:01 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-11 15:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-11 16:28 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-09-12 00:06 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 07:31 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-12 12:57 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 05:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 08:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-12 14:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 19:18 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 12:37 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 22:43 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-12 22:18 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 06:45 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 23:56 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 00:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 22:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 20:53 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 20:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 01:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 08:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-15 11:29 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 20:44 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-16 06:34 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 20:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-15 19:05 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 10:25 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 22:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:25 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 22:57 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-17 07:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-17 11:54 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-18 09:55 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 04:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 16:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 11:29 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 09:59 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 03:25 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-18 20:56 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 16:11 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 11:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 12:12 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 03:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 19:14 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 10:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 09:28 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-22 00:12 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 03:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 18:17 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 02:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-22 02:35 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 10:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 12:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-23 14:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 10:35 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 05:55 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 05:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 19:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 17:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 06:44 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-25 22:40 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-26 17:56 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 23:09 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-27 19:02 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 20:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 10:18 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 03:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 11:41 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 20:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 04:48 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-28 18:10 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-29 10:07 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-29 08:04 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:43 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-27 19:06 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-27 05:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-27 20:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 01:17 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 23:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 15:04 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-29 00:03 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 00:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 00:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-29 15:48 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 23:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 11:50 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-27 22:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 14:58 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-27 10:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 16:08 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 08:53 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 17:27 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-20 09:40 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 03:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 12:05 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 04:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 20:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 23:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 00:15 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 11:51 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:14 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 23:38 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 22:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-21 11:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 04:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 21:42 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 16:22 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 10:11 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 08:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-21 23:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 17:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 22:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 12:38 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 02:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 22:11 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-22 22:25 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 04:36 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 16:18 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 02:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 18:20 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 09:30 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 18:17 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-23 02:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 10:47 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-23 18:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-24 04:29 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 17:29 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-23 23:20 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-23 16:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-23 15:05 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:22 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-24 16:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 05:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 15:50 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 21:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-26 01:05 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 15:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-22 18:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-21 17:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 17:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-22 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 04:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 17:41 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 10:18 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 11:26 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 04:51 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 22:53 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 16:35 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:22 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 22:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 09:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-23 03:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 21:08 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-24 12:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-24 16:28 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-25 11:59 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-25 13:58 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-23 12:52 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 21:49 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-25 23:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 10:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 04:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 14:17 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 23:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-27 10:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-27 04:57 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 09:30 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-20 20:12 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 21:47 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:18 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:18 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-17 16:28 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 18:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-18 09:57 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 00:20 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 20:06 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 23:22 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 23:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ted&Alice <sam.m.tedesco@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 00:18 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 12:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 05:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-21 14:15 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 10:13 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 04:03 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-09-22 11:51 -0500
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-22 11:04 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 14:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 04:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 16:04 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 11:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-01 20:26 -0500
To A Atheism The Science Of Language Is Rrelativity "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-19 15:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 07:01 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 22:29 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 08:21 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 00:05 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 18:59 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 00:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-19 17:48 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 08:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 12:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-13 07:49 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 18:03 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 21:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 06:27 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 02:45 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 11:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 06:44 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 12:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 07:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 15:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 03:02 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 15:38 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 03:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 15:29 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 02:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 14:57 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-15 19:37 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-14 01:34 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 11:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 19:45 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 14:43 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 07:01 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 22:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 23:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 03:49 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 08:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 06:40 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-16 18:57 -0500
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:15 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:33 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:37 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:05 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 00:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 00:34 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-14 10:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 14:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-14 12:06 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-14 09:10 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-13 17:21 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 19:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 03:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-13 20:33 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 22:09 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 20:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-14 20:47 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-14 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 22:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-13 21:12 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-15 09:32 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-14 17:38 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 23:32 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-14 23:15 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 23:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 08:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-15 18:01 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 02:50 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 22:48 +0200
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-09-15 15:02 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-09-16 02:58 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-16 01:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-15 23:41 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-18 13:26 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-18 21:01 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 17:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 21:38 -0700
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-19 23:37 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 23:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 09:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 15:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 22:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 18:38 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 15:14 -0400
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-20 13:46 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 20:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-15 22:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 17:45 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-15 17:15 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 21:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 04:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 17:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 16:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:51 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 21:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-17 01:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 08:30 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-17 07:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 16:25 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 16:44 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-17 19:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 06:50 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 20:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 15:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-30 06:33 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-29 23:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:48 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 10:10 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 02:06 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:17 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 14:07 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 23:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-01 08:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 07:39 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 02:24 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 11:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 09:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 18:02 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-02 11:02 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 05:52 +0200
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-10-09 00:09 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Hello Thomas <tsp2opt@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 07:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 07:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-10-08 12:36 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 22:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-10-08 15:33 -0600
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 05:42 +0200
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft A Nony Mouse <abc@cef.ghi> - 2016-10-09 00:14 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 12:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-17 17:26 +0000
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-17 11:48 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-17 12:54 -0500
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-17 12:47 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 20:50 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-17 17:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-18 00:41 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:36 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 12:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-17 17:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 00:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 22:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-18 06:35 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-18 07:49 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-18 06:35 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 03:46 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:53 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 08:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:43 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-20 01:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 08:21 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-20 20:04 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 04:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-22 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 05:03 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:42 +0000
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-23 23:17 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 17:25 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-24 22:06 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 00:36 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 05:18 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 13:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 16:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-25 11:04 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ted&Alice <sam.m.tedesco@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 16:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 18:54 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-26 09:59 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 07:35 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-26 15:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:27 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-27 06:10 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 12:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 21:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-26 01:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-26 15:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 00:39 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 14:07 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 13:09 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-18 00:50 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 20:44 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 17:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:51 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 02:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 03:47 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 05:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 17:12 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 16:22 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 19:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 03:58 -0400
Page 2 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 21 Next page →
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 22:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e3r46iFhtugU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392203 |
Am 13.09.2016 09:07, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >>>> The change from Aramaic language to Arabic changed the title of Jesus >>>> (in Aramaic) 'mahmed' to the name 'Mohammed' in Arabic. >>> >>> What a fucking moron. >> >> The idea stems from a German Islam scientist and historian named >> Karl-Heinz Ohlig. >> >> He wrote this >> >> http://inarah.de/sammelbaende-und-artikel/inarah-band-4/geschichte-rueckwaerts >> -gelesen/ > > > What evidence does he present? And has it been peer-reviewed and found > valid. > Sorry, but I don't know. As far as I can tell he's a honourable scientist. But actually Islam studies are not really my subject. So I have read something he wrote, but I'm not able to estimate how influential he is. Certainly he is far from the mainstream. anyhow: I like his idea. Here is a link to what google.translator made out of his web-page: https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Finarah.de%2Fsammelbaende-und-artikel%2Finarah-band-4%2Fgeschichte-rueckwaerts-gelesen%2F&edit-text=&act=url a few quotes: "First was, as will be seen below, the Quranic movement a special form of Syriac Persian Christianity. She defended aggressively to the accuracy of this sectarian peculiarities, but without separating from the other Christians or to break away from Torah and Gospel." "According to the inscription in the Rock has Abd al-Malik muammad more than Christological predicate understood?. [34] This document the coinage, which he minted during his turn from east to west: point to one side of a MHMT, in the West arrived with the Arab explanation muammad, and on the other a Christian iconographic design. [35] 750 AD ago. But John of Damascus sees in his Liber de haeresibus if this passage is authentic, Mamed (Machmed) as a proper name of the herald of a graphe (writing). [36] Thus should the transition to the conception of Mohammed as a historical figure in the first half of the 8th century to be done." "Even earlier, however, about the year 77 H. (around 701 BC) Can be found far to the east, in Merv coins, bear the marking 'machmatan' one reads this word as Persian vocabulary, it means the attached syllable. means "people of ...", the whole concept it means "people (or followers) of Muhammad". Another possibility would be a Syrian reading in the has an adjective meaning, ie "to Mohammed belonging" - in two versions, consequently, the same statement. But if you also 'machmat 'only translated ( "the Promised" or "the Honorable to"), then it would be to people who belong to the Honorable to (Jesus). However, the latter possibility seems most grammatically possible, but for the intentioned situation too complicated (unless you draw a parallel to the Greek name Christianoi [Christians], which indeed literally also means "people [or trailer] the Messiah" [ Jesus]). Suppose - it is the most simple solution - that is mentioned on the coins of "people of Muhammad"." Certainly a terrible translation. But somehow it should express, that 'mahmed' was a title in Aramaic (for Jesus), which morphed to 'muhammad' (Mohamed) in Arabic. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 20:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-2134B5.20531513092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #392242 |
In article <e3r46iFhtugU1@mid.individual.net>, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 13.09.2016 09:07, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: > > >>>> The change from Aramaic language to Arabic changed the title of Jesus > >>>> (in Aramaic) 'mahmed' to the name 'Mohammed' in Arabic. > >>> > >>> What a fucking moron. > >> > >> The idea stems from a German Islam scientist and historian named > >> Karl-Heinz Ohlig. > >> > >> He wrote this > >> > >> http://inarah.de/sammelbaende-und-artikel/inarah-band-4/geschichte-rueckwae > >> rts > >> -gelesen/ > > > > > > What evidence does he present? And has it been peer-reviewed and found > > valid. > > > Sorry, but I don't know. > > As far as I can tell he's a honourable scientist. But actually Islam > studies are not really my subject. So I have read something he wrote, > but I'm not able to estimate how influential he is. > > Certainly he is far from the mainstream. > > anyhow: I like his idea. I like the idea of the Big Bang resulting from the collision of 2 branes. Doesn't mean I give it any credence in reality. Because there's no evidence to support it. > Here is a link to what google.translator made out of his web-page: > > https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8& > u=http%3A%2F%2Finarah.de%2Fsammelbaende-und-artikel%2Finarah-band-4%2Fgeschich > te-rueckwaerts-gelesen%2F&edit-text=&act=url > > a few quotes: > > "First was, as will be seen below, the Quranic movement a special form > of Syriac Persian Christianity. She defended aggressively to the > accuracy of this sectarian peculiarities, but without separating from > the other Christians or to break away from Torah and Gospel." > > "According to the inscription in the Rock has Abd al-Malik muammad more > than Christological predicate understood?. [34] This document the > coinage, which he minted during his turn from east to west: point to one > side of a MHMT, in the West arrived with the Arab explanation muammad, > and on the other a Christian iconographic design. [35] 750 AD ago. But > John of Damascus sees in his Liber de haeresibus if this passage is > authentic, Mamed (Machmed) as a proper name of the herald of a graphe > (writing). [36] Thus should the transition to the conception of Mohammed > as a historical figure in the first half of the 8th century to be done." > > > "Even earlier, however, about the year 77 H. (around 701 BC) Can be > found far to the east, in Merv coins, bear the marking 'machmatan' one > reads this word as Persian vocabulary, it means the attached syllable. > means "people of ...", the whole concept it means "people (or > followers) of Muhammad". Another possibility would be a Syrian reading > in the has an adjective meaning, ie "to Mohammed belonging" - in two > versions, consequently, the same statement. But if you also 'machmat > 'only translated ( "the Promised" or "the Honorable to"), then it would > be to people who belong to the Honorable to (Jesus). However, the latter > possibility seems most grammatically possible, but for the intentioned > situation too complicated (unless you draw a parallel to the Greek name > Christianoi [Christians], which indeed literally also means "people [or > trailer] the Messiah" [ Jesus]). Suppose - it is the most simple > solution - that is mentioned on the coins of "people of Muhammad"." > > > Certainly a terrible translation. But somehow it should express, that > 'mahmed' was a title in Aramaic (for Jesus), which morphed to 'muhammad' > (Mohamed) in Arabic. Why, since it's nonsense? -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-14 20:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e3tiefF58puU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392279 |
Am 14.09.2016 05:53, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> Certainly a terrible translation. But somehow it should express, that >> > 'mahmed' was a title in Aramaic (for Jesus), which morphed to 'muhammad' >> > (Mohamed) in Arabic. > Why, since it's nonsense? For me the story of Karl-Heinz Ohlig does make sense! To understand the idea, you need to understand the economy of that time. most profitable was the far-East trade. Now there have been several ways, how you could get from Europe to India and China. You could sail from the Mediterranean Sea past Gibraltar and around Africa, across the Indian ocean and would reach India. But this route has a lot of disadvantages. At first it was very long and people of that time did not like to sail on the Atlantic. But most likely Phoenician and Chinese sailors went along this route. You could walk along the Silk Road and send goods with camels to China. This route was controlled by the Sassanides. The Romans controlled a route over the Nile, a little bit of desert and the Red Sea. The disadvantages of that route: the Romans wanted high taxes (about 25%). Since the goods from the East had enormous value, the Empires fought constantly over control of these trade routes. And the Romans wanted a monopoly and tried to wipe out all competitors. For this purpose they hired the Arabs as associated forces. So the Arabs went east and conquered the Empire of the Sassanides. The 'hub' of the trade along the Silk Road was the city Merv. This city was kind of metropolis, because besides trade, there was a lot of information coming from all parts of the World. Among these influences were Christian sects, like the 'Arians'. Now the Arabs conquered this city and kept most of the intellectual resources. The trade hub was relocated to the west and wisdom was taken with the occupants to the capital of the Sarazens. And once the Roman Empire had disappeared the Arabs wanted their own religion (different from the Roma Christianity). And the Arians could actually deliver. So their believes were fused with the culture of the Sarazens and out came Islam. This is roughly the concept of Karl-Heinz Ohlig and to me it makes sense. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 01:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e3u552F9mjmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392335 |
Am 14.09.2016 20:15, schrieb Thomas Heger: > The 'hub' of the trade along the Silk Road was the city Merv. > This city was kind of metropolis, because besides trade, there was a lot > of information coming from all parts of the World. > > Among these influences were Christian sects, like the 'Arians'. > > Now the Arabs conquered this city and kept most of the intellectual > resources. > > The trade hub was relocated to the west and wisdom was taken with the > occupants to the capital of the Sarazens. > > And once the Roman Empire had disappeared the Arabs wanted their own > religion (different from the Roma Christianity). > > And the Arians could actually deliver. So their believes were fused with > the culture of the Sarazens and out came Islam. > > This is roughly the concept of Karl-Heinz Ohlig and to me it makes sense. It is actually possible to prove, that this had actually happened in reality. The idea is, that the wars for control of trade routes also changed the streams of wealth associated with this trade. The wealthy cities also attracted a variety of of ancient intellectuals and among them were the people who influenced religion. If now the ruling powers changed, the predominant believe system also changed. And most likely it changes towards the culture of the then ruling powers - at the expense of former and defeated cultures. In this case we have a couple of cities involved in a complex story of the migration and changes of a certain believe system (monotheism). The believers usually do not see this long story, since they assume eternal and unaltered existence of what was there, when they were born. So the believers in the Koran assume, it is original and had no forerunners. But in fact everything is based on something older - usually. Since the Koran mentions names and stories from the bible, it is obvious to assume, that the Koran evolved from a Christian sect, which itself evolved from Judaism. Also Judaism will most likely have earlier traditions (and so forth). Now the present believers of something new do not regard believers in the earlier versions as authority, but as moronic traditionalists. And on occasion, they want to break free of such traditions and start something 'modern'. Now they would certainly not support traditionalist, who point to the earlier versions of what appears to be new. And traditionalist would get in conflict with the new ruling powers, since the earlier traditions included also other people in power than currently ruling. Depending on the political system, the heresy of accepting other rulers could eventually be punished in some societies. But historians, theologians and other scientists have other objectives and can search for traces of roots in earlier cultures. This would result in theories, which violate the demand for exclusive truth of the own interpretation of history, maintained by a certain believe systems. In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in trouble in some cases. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 08:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e3ut39FemcbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392378 |
Am 15.09.2016 01:34, schrieb Thomas Heger: > Now the present believers of something new do not regard believers in > the earlier versions as authority, but as moronic traditionalists. > > And on occasion, they want to break free of such traditions and start > something 'modern'. > > Now they would certainly not support traditionalist, who point to the > earlier versions of what appears to be new. > > And traditionalist would get in conflict with the new ruling powers, > since the earlier traditions included also other people in power than > currently ruling. > > Depending on the political system, the heresy of accepting other rulers > could eventually be punished in some societies. > > But historians, theologians and other scientists have other objectives > and can search for traces of roots in earlier cultures. > > This would result in theories, which violate the demand for exclusive > truth of the own interpretation of history, maintained by a certain > believe systems. > > In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in > trouble in some cases. What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an objectives sense. This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and what is not. So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite directions. Scientists want truth and rulers want (more) power. If the scientists eventually threaten current ideology, then the ruling classes regard this as heresy. We have seen this in a variety of forms in many authoritarians societies, like ancient Rome, medieval Spain or the former Soviet Union. But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is not the aim of science, but truth. If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, we would research similarities and historic developments over many millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. So Judaism, Christianity and Islam could have similarities, which were not seen as such. E.g. all three religions created a unique era, after which they number the years. But there was history before and the new era was not the beginning of the world. Only this fact is rejected, without obvious reason and against simple logic. This was done, because the people of that new era saw themselves in the centre of the universe (at least of the Earth) and this had to be always there, where they are. So further history was removed from the records and mentioning of older cultures was threatened with punishment. And this is so until the present day. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1cjktb1pjlt1vu94n860jiq4tmfiii8rou@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #392413 |
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:23:28 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e3ut39FemcbU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 15.09.2016 01:34, schrieb Thomas Heger: > >> Now the present believers of something new do not regard believers in >> the earlier versions as authority, but as moronic traditionalists. >> >> And on occasion, they want to break free of such traditions and start >> something 'modern'. >> >> Now they would certainly not support traditionalist, who point to the >> earlier versions of what appears to be new. >> >> And traditionalist would get in conflict with the new ruling powers, >> since the earlier traditions included also other people in power than >> currently ruling. >> >> Depending on the political system, the heresy of accepting other rulers >> could eventually be punished in some societies. >> >> But historians, theologians and other scientists have other objectives >> and can search for traces of roots in earlier cultures. >> >> This would result in theories, which violate the demand for exclusive >> truth of the own interpretation of history, maintained by a certain >> believe systems. >> >> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >> trouble in some cases. > >What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >objectives sense. Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. > >This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in >control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and >what is not. That is called political pressure. > >So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite >directions. Not power - politics. > >Scientists want truth and rulers want (more) power. If the scientists >eventually threaten current ideology, then the ruling classes regard >this as heresy. > >We have seen this in a variety of forms in many authoritarians >societies, like ancient Rome, medieval Spain or the former Soviet Union. Political influence and pressure exists under every system. > >But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether >or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology >are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is >not the aim of science, but truth. > >If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, >we would research similarities and historic developments over many >millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not fact. > >So Judaism, Christianity and Islam could have similarities, which were >not seen as such. Until one or more is validated that is irrelevant. > >E.g. all three religions created a unique era, after which they number >the years. > >But there was history before and the new era was not the beginning of >the world. > >Only this fact is rejected, without obvious reason and against simple >logic. This was done, because the people of that new era saw themselves >in the centre of the universe (at least of the Earth) and this had to be >always there, where they are. > >So further history was removed from the records and mentioning of older >cultures was threatened with punishment. > >And this is so until the present day. > > >TH -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 11:29 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Theism is Witchcraft |
| Message-ID | <aaa-DF1254.11291115092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #392419 |
Theism is Witchcraft, atheism is science!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 20:44 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392419 |
Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: >>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >>> trouble in some cases. >> >> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >> objectives sense. > > Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. Scientists can believe in whatever they like. It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with religion. >> >> This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in >> control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and >> what is not. > > That is called political pressure. > >> >> So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite >> directions. > > Not power - politics. Wealth, position, personal relations, strength, knowledge, fame and a few other features could make a person influential. The set of influential people are now named 'power'. Politicians often have power, but not necessarily they alone. E.g. the Pope is not a politician, but is certainly influential. >> >> Scientists want truth and rulers want (more) power. If the scientists >> eventually threaten current ideology, then the ruling classes regard >> this as heresy. >> >> We have seen this in a variety of forms in many authoritarians >> societies, like ancient Rome, medieval Spain or the former Soviet Union. > > Political influence and pressure exists under every system. Well, no. Political pressure on science about historical questions is by no means acceptable. >> >> But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether >> or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology >> are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is >> not the aim of science, but truth. >> >> If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, >> we would research similarities and historic developments over many >> millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. > > No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not > fact. The subject in question was a hypothesis of the German Islam scientist Karl-Heinz Ohlig. He had researched history of the early Islam. He found out something interesting: that the Islam was derived from a certain form of early Christianity, which was common the region, which today is Syria. This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. They spoke Aramaic and they used the title 'mahmed' (in Aramaic) for Jesus. With translation to Arabic, this title was changed to the Arabic name 'Mohamed', but still meant Jesus. So 'Jesus' and 'Mohamed' are different names for the same person. Whether or not a real person existed, that is not really important in this context, but only the identity of the person. And THAT is a really big deal today, since in case of Ohlig is correct, then Islam and Christianity are not two different religions, but only different forms of the same believe. This has far reaching implications, since then Christians could not be treated as non-believers by Muslims. >> So Judaism, Christianity and Islam could have similarities, which were >> not seen as such. > > Until one or more is validated that is irrelevant. No. Since religion and politics are often mixed, the question of the boarders between one belief and the other has influence on politics, too. And this would influence the life of billions of people. So it is precisely not irrelevant. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-16 06:34 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nrf0ka$bj4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #392474 |
On 16/09/16 04:44, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: > > This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. > > Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. > > They spoke Aramaic and they used the title 'mahmed' (in Aramaic) for > Jesus. With translation to Arabic, this title was changed to the Arabic > name 'Mohamed', but still meant Jesus. > > So 'Jesus' and 'Mohamed' are different names for the same person. > > Whether or not a real person existed, that is not really important in > this context, but only the identity of the person. > > And THAT is a really big deal today, since in case of Ohlig is correct, > then Islam and Christianity are not two different religions, but only > different forms of the same believe. Who gives a hoot? All religions exist for one purpose. To give great power to a handful of evil people over the minds of whole populations. Until all forms of religion are seen for what they are and eradicated, there can be no civilized peace on this planet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 20:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <d8dmtbd3jjtaabahg86d46qb779q9i29fq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #392474 |
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:44:09 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: > >>>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >>>> trouble in some cases. >>> >>> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >>> objectives sense. >> >> Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. > >Scientists can believe in whatever they like. True. > >It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with >religion. Science does not address religion. > > >>> >>> This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in >>> control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and >>> what is not. >> >> That is called political pressure. >> >>> >>> So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite >>> directions. >> >> Not power - politics. > > >Wealth, position, personal relations, strength, knowledge, fame and a >few other features could make a person influential. > >The set of influential people are now named 'power'. > >Politicians often have power, but not necessarily they alone. > >E.g. the Pope is not a politician, but is certainly influential. Within limits. For example, I could not care less what he thinks about anything. > >>> >>> Scientists want truth and rulers want (more) power. If the scientists >>> eventually threaten current ideology, then the ruling classes regard >>> this as heresy. >>> >>> We have seen this in a variety of forms in many authoritarians >>> societies, like ancient Rome, medieval Spain or the former Soviet Union. >> >> Political influence and pressure exists under every system. > > >Well, no. Well, yes. > >Political pressure on science about historical questions is by no means >acceptable. Agreed. Political pressure on science about anything is unacceptable. It is still attempted. > >>> >>> But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether >>> or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology >>> are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is >>> not the aim of science, but truth. >>> >>> If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, >>> we would research similarities and historic developments over many >>> millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. >> >> No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not >> fact. > > >The subject in question was a hypothesis of the German Islam scientist >Karl-Heinz Ohlig. > >He had researched history of the early Islam. > >He found out something interesting: that the Islam was derived from a >certain form of early Christianity, which was common the region, which >today is Syria. > >This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. > >Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. > >They spoke Aramaic and they used the title 'mahmed' (in Aramaic) for >Jesus. With translation to Arabic, this title was changed to the Arabic >name 'Mohamed', but still meant Jesus. > >So 'Jesus' and 'Mohamed' are different names for the same person. > >Whether or not a real person existed, that is not really important in >this context, but only the identity of the person. > >And THAT is a really big deal today, since in case of Ohlig is correct, >then Islam and Christianity are not two different religions, but only >different forms of the same believe. > >This has far reaching implications, since then Christians could not be >treated as non-believers by Muslims. > >>> So Judaism, Christianity and Islam could have similarities, which were >>> not seen as such. >> >> Until one or more is validated that is irrelevant. > >No. > >Since religion and politics are often mixed, the question of the >boarders between one belief and the other has influence on politics, >too. And this would influence the life of billions of people. > >So it is precisely not irrelevant. Nothing involving religion can be part of a sane discussion. > > >TH -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 19:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <aodmtbdcupv37l0g1eooiqukbg4594gvhd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #392514 |
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:02:45 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote: >On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:44:09 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >alt.atheism with message-id <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: >> >>>>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >>>>> trouble in some cases. >>>> >>>> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >>>> objectives sense. >>> >>> Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. >> >>Scientists can believe in whatever they like. > > >True. > >> >>It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with >>religion. > >Science does not address religion. Apart from cultural anthropology and psychology. Although it addresses religious claims made in the real world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-16 10:25 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e40sf6FtlimU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392515 |
On 16/09/2016 10:05, Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:02:45 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> > wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:44:09 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: >>> >>>>>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >>>>>> trouble in some cases. >>>>> >>>>> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >>>>> objectives sense. >>>> >>>> Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. >>> >>> Scientists can believe in whatever they like. >> >> >> True. >> >>> >>> It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with >>> religion. >> >> Science does not address religion. > > Apart from cultural anthropology and psychology. > > Although it addresses religious claims made in the real world. > Also sociology. Neuropsychology (if that can be called a separate science). Economics, in some respects.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 22:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <p5lmtbp52888kulb5o6jggj67knautcssb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #392515 |
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 19:05:48 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> in alt.atheism with message-id <aodmtbdcupv37l0g1eooiqukbg4594gvhd@4ax.com> wrote: >On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:02:45 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:44:09 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>alt.atheism with message-id <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>>Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: >>> >>>>>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in >>>>>> trouble in some cases. >>>>> >>>>> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an >>>>> objectives sense. >>>> >>>> Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. >>> >>>Scientists can believe in whatever they like. >> >> >>True. >> >>> >>>It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with >>>religion. >> >>Science does not address religion. > >Apart from cultural anthropology and psychology. > >Although it addresses religious claims made in the real world. I don't consider those as sciences. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 19:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-19C207.19253015092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #392474 |
In article <e408g2Fp3v5U1@mid.individual.net>, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 15.09.2016 09:33, schrieb Attila <: > > >>> In other words: historians are not always welcomed and can get in > >>> trouble in some cases. > >> > >> What historians and scientists try to deliver, should be correct in an > >> objectives sense. > > > > Correct and should not include any personal beliefs. > > Scientists can believe in whatever they like. > > It the scientific finding is correct, than there is no problem with > religion. > > > >> > >> This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in > >> control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and > >> what is not. > > > > That is called political pressure. > > > >> > >> So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite > >> directions. > > > > Not power - politics. > > > Wealth, position, personal relations, strength, knowledge, fame and a > few other features could make a person influential. > > The set of influential people are now named 'power'. > > Politicians often have power, but not necessarily they alone. > > E.g. the Pope is not a politician, but is certainly influential. Of course he's a politician. He's the head of state of a nation. > >> But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether > >> or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology > >> are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is > >> not the aim of science, but truth. > >> > >> If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, > >> we would research similarities and historic developments over many > >> millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. > > > > No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not > > fact. > > > The subject in question was a hypothesis of the German Islam scientist > Karl-Heinz Ohlig. > > He had researched history of the early Islam. > > He found out something interesting: that the Islam was derived from a > certain form of early Christianity, which was common the region, which > today is Syria. > > This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. > > Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. Do you have any other source confirming this hypothesis? > They spoke Aramaic and they used the title 'mahmed' (in Aramaic) for > Jesus. With translation to Arabic, this title was changed to the Arabic > name 'Mohamed', but still meant Jesus. > > So 'Jesus' and 'Mohamed' are different names for the same person. Wrong again. -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-16 06:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e41a9jF1uggU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392524 |
Am 16.09.2016 04:25, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >>>> >>>> This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in >>>> control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and >>>> what is not. >>> >>> That is called political pressure. >>> >>>> >>>> So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite >>>> directions. >>> >>> Not power - politics. >> >> >> Wealth, position, personal relations, strength, knowledge, fame and a >> few other features could make a person influential. >> >> The set of influential people are now named 'power'. >> >> Politicians often have power, but not necessarily they alone. >> >> E.g. the Pope is not a politician, but is certainly influential. > > Of course he's a politician. He's the head of state of a nation. Yes, in a way he's also head of a state. But that is a rather small country, since you can walk around it in five minutes. His main purpose is being the head of the Catholic Church. And this church is not a state and the believers in this particular faith do not build a nation. Since a few centuries the political power of the Vatican is reduced to spiritual advise. So I would not call the Pope a political leader. > >>>> But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether >>>> or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology >>>> are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is >>>> not the aim of science, but truth. >>>> >>>> If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, >>>> we would research similarities and historic developments over many >>>> millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. >>> >>> No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not >>> fact. >> >> >> The subject in question was a hypothesis of the German Islam scientist >> Karl-Heinz Ohlig. >> >> He had researched history of the early Islam. >> >> He found out something interesting: that the Islam was derived from a >> certain form of early Christianity, which was common the region, which >> today is Syria. >> >> This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. >> >> Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. > > Do you have any other source confirming this hypothesis? > Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of the Koran in a 19th century translation. I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient Arabic. Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different meanings. And that could allow different translations. Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment called 'stoning'. Another stream of observations was related to the question, to where the 'Children of Israel' went after the passage through the Red Sea. Actually Palestine was not an obvious target, since not located on the other side of the Red Sea. But how about Saudi Arabia? TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-15 22:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-C1A7D0.22575415092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #392538 |
In article <e41a9jF1uggU1@mid.individual.net>, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 16.09.2016 04:25, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: > > >>>> > >>>> This would be in many cases in conflict with propaganda of the powers in > >>>> control, since those powers usually want to decide, what is correct and > >>>> what is not. > >>> > >>> That is called political pressure. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> So science and power are acting on the same subject, but in opposite > >>>> directions. > >>> > >>> Not power - politics. > >> > >> > >> Wealth, position, personal relations, strength, knowledge, fame and a > >> few other features could make a person influential. > >> > >> The set of influential people are now named 'power'. > >> > >> Politicians often have power, but not necessarily they alone. > >> > >> E.g. the Pope is not a politician, but is certainly influential. > > > > Of course he's a politician. He's the head of state of a nation. > > > Yes, in a way he's also head of a state. > > But that is a rather small country, since you can walk around it in five > minutes. > > His main purpose is being the head of the Catholic Church. > > And this church is not a state and the believers in this particular > faith do not build a nation. > > Since a few centuries the political power of the Vatican is reduced to > spiritual advise. > > So I would not call the Pope a political leader. If you choose to be wrong, I can't stop you. > >>>> But history is science and science tries to find true stories, whether > >>>> or not the politicians like them. Power, money, influence and ideology > >>>> are not scientific categories, hence usefulness of a certain finding is > >>>> not the aim of science, but truth. > >>>> > >>>> If we apply scientific methods to the history of monotheistic religions, > >>>> we would research similarities and historic developments over many > >>>> millennia and over different regions, countries, cultures and languages. > >>> > >>> No such study could be made because it would be a study of belief, not > >>> fact. > >> > >> > >> The subject in question was a hypothesis of the German Islam scientist > >> Karl-Heinz Ohlig. > >> > >> He had researched history of the early Islam. > >> > >> He found out something interesting: that the Islam was derived from a > >> certain form of early Christianity, which was common the region, which > >> today is Syria. > >> > >> This was kind of sect, which is called now 'Arians' or 'Nestorians'. > >> > >> Their holy scripts were later the foundation for the Koran. > > > > Do you have any other source confirming this hypothesis? > > > > > Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of > the Koran in a 19th century translation. > > I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which > are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the > Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the Bible. So fucking what? > Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient > Arabic. > > Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not > written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different > meanings. And that could allow different translations. > > Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any > interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid > translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. > > So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. > > Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. > > For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. So what? > Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. So what? > They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment > called 'stoning'. How is stoning "obsure"? > Another stream of observations was related to the question, to where the > 'Children of Israel' went after the passage through the Red Sea. You mean the fictional journey that took 40 years in an area about the same size as small state West Virginia? And that left not one shred of evidence of millions of alleged Jews living for 40 years. > Actually Palestine was not an obvious target, since not located on the > other side of the Red Sea. > > But how about Saudi Arabia? What the fuck are you talking about? -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-17 08:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e445djFmdedU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392545 |
Am 16.09.2016 07:57, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of >> the Koran in a 19th century translation. >> >> I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which >> are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the >> Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. > > So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the > Bible. So fucking what? > > >> Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient >> Arabic. >> >> Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not >> written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different >> meanings. And that could allow different translations. >> >> Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any >> interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid >> translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. >> >> So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. >> >> Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. >> >> For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. > > So what? > > >> Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. > > So what? Well, history is a science and somehow similar to crime scene investigation. If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) guesses and try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing minuscule hints. The Islam and the Jews have both a set of scripts, they regard as holy. The overall structure of this set is quite similar, only the names and the content is different. > >> They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment >> called 'stoning'. > > How is stoning "obsure"? > 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. It has also the disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. >> Another stream of observations was related to the question, to where the >> 'Children of Israel' went after the passage through the Red Sea. > > You mean the fictional journey that took 40 years in an area about the > same size as small state West Virginia? And that left not one shred of > evidence of millions of alleged Jews living for 40 years. I mean the question, who these people are, which the Koran calls 'Children of Israel'. > >> Actually Palestine was not an obvious target, since not located on the >> other side of the Red Sea. >> >> But how about Saudi Arabia? > > What the fuck are you talking about? > "The Real Mount Sinai Found! " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOLnXkP5i2c "Forbbiden Pictures Revealed Saudi Arabia Mt. Sinai " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSuKgz3LweE And if you think about it, than Saudi Arabia was way more profitable than Palestine was. The Arabs also conquered the Persian empire and subsequently half of the world. So how about locating the 'promised land' in Arabia ? And how about assuming, that the Arabs have descended from the biblical Jews? 'Semite' would fit to Arabs, but actually not to 'Ashenazim'. Also the Arabic language and the way of writing is quite close to Hebrew. And, last but not least, there are similarities in the Koran and the bible, which would be a hint, that the Koran is actually based on older traditions. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-17 07:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s48qtb5q4tociqmagts191v4rrasac3pia@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #392674 |
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:16:16 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e445djFmdedU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 16.09.2016 07:57, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: > >>> Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of >>> the Koran in a 19th century translation. >>> >>> I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which >>> are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the >>> Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. >> >> So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the >> Bible. So fucking what? >> >> >>> Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient >>> Arabic. >>> >>> Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not >>> written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different >>> meanings. And that could allow different translations. >>> >>> Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any >>> interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid >>> translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. >>> >>> So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. >>> >>> Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. >>> >>> For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. >> >> So what? >> >> >>> Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. >> >> So what? > >Well, history is a science and somehow similar to crime scene >investigation. History is not a science and CSI is a profession involving a number of different sciences among other things. > >If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) guesses and >try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing minuscule hints. But those deductions are never presented as being factual. > >The Islam and the Jews have both a set of scripts, they regard as holy. That is common to most religions. >The overall structure of this set is quite similar, only the names and >the content is different. Again, quite common to a lot of religions. > >> >>> They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment >>> called 'stoning'. Unless properly prepared pork can cause more disease than beef or mutton. Stoning is a common primitive punishment, being both cheap and easy. >> >> How is stoning "obsure"? >> > >'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. No more than many others that have been used. > It has also the >disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? Murder requires an illegal component. > > > >>> Another stream of observations was related to the question, to where the >>> 'Children of Israel' went after the passage through the Red Sea. >> >> You mean the fictional journey that took 40 years in an area about the >> same size as small state West Virginia? And that left not one shred of >> evidence of millions of alleged Jews living for 40 years. > >I mean the question, who these people are, which the Koran calls >'Children of Israel'. Does it really matter what calls them what of there is no evidence they ever existed? > >> >>> Actually Palestine was not an obvious target, since not located on the >>> other side of the Red Sea. >>> >>> But how about Saudi Arabia? >> >> What the fuck are you talking about? >> > >"The Real Mount Sinai Found! " > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOLnXkP5i2c > >"Forbbiden Pictures Revealed Saudi Arabia Mt. Sinai " > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSuKgz3LweE > >And if you think about it, than Saudi Arabia was way more profitable >than Palestine was. > >The Arabs also conquered the Persian empire and subsequently half of the >world. > >So how about locating the 'promised land' in Arabia ? > >And how about assuming, that the Arabs have descended from the biblical >Jews? Based upon what evidence? > >'Semite' would fit to Arabs, but actually not to 'Ashenazim'. > >Also the Arabic language and the way of writing is quite close to Hebrew. In what way? > >And, last but not least, there are similarities in the Koran and the >bible, which would be a hint, that the Koran is actually based on older >traditions. > >TH Or they both stole from the same sources. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-17 11:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnntqboe.lqn.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #392679 |
Attila wrote: > Thomas Heger wrote: ----snip---- > > If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) > > guesses and try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing > < minuscule hints. > > But those deductions are never presented as being factual. False. It is deduced from sites such as Athens and Mykenai that Proto-geometric Ware is from a later time tnan Late Helladic III C Ware, the basis of the deduction being that it is found in a higher layer than the LH III C War. That deduction is presented to students and the public alike as fact. It is further deduced that the Proto-geometric Ware found mingled with LH III c Ware at Pylos is "intrusions", the basis of the deduction being the "known fact" that Proto-geometric is later than LH III C. That deduction too is presented to students and the public alike as fact. ----snip---- Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 09:55 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e463fjF6edaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #392679 |
On 17/09/2016 21:01, Attila wrote: > On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:16:16 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e445djFmdedU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> Am 16.09.2016 07:57, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> >>>> Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of >>>> the Koran in a 19th century translation. >>>> >>>> I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which >>>> are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the >>>> Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. >>> >>> So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the >>> Bible. So fucking what? >>> >>> >>>> Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient >>>> Arabic. >>>> >>>> Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not >>>> written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different >>>> meanings. And that could allow different translations. >>>> >>>> Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any >>>> interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid >>>> translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. >>>> >>>> So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. >>>> >>>> Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. >>>> >>>> For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. >>> >>> So what? >>> >>> >>>> Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. >>> >>> So what? >> >> Well, history is a science and somehow similar to crime scene >> investigation. > > History is not a science and CSI is a profession involving a number of > different sciences among other things. History is very much a science. Just because it is not a material science does not mean it is not a science. Historians are utterly reliant on hard evidence. They use all manner of scientific techniques, from carbon dating to statistics. > >> >> If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) guesses and >> try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing minuscule hints. > > But those deductions are never presented as being factual. > >> >> The Islam and the Jews have both a set of scripts, they regard as holy. > > That is common to most religions. As is the fact that they disagree -- often violently -- on the exact composition and meaning of their sacred scripts. > >> The overall structure of this set is quite similar, only the names and >> the content is different. > > Again, quite common to a lot of religions. > >> >>> >>>> They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment >>>> called 'stoning'. > > Unless properly prepared pork can cause more disease than beef or > mutton. Stoning is a common primitive punishment, being both cheap > and easy. And communal. Executing a transgressor is one thing, but making the entire community participate takes it to a whole other level. Concerning pork, while there is a risk of disease, the same applies to all foodstuffs. Unlike other domesticated animals, though, pigs do have the serious advantage that they turn refuse into meat. > >>> >>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>> >> >> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. > > No more than many others that have been used. > >> It has also the >> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. > > If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? > Murder requires an illegal component. People so often fail to understand this...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web