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

Groups > sci.physics > #500034 > unrolled thread

Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-14 15:49 -0500
    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Tim" <me@rsabc.com> - 2015-06-15 07:06 -0400
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-15 08:56 -0500
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-15 13:58 -0500
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-15 21:43 +0000
    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-15 23:48 +0200
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-16 12:52 -0500
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 14:36 -0400
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 00:05 -0400
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-17 19:20 +0000
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-17 15:15 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-17 21:33 +0000
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:00 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-19 19:37 +0000
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-20 07:17 +1000
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:16 -0500
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:15 -0500
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-17 00:12 +0200
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-16 18:48 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-17 19:27 +0000
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-17 14:33 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-17 23:41 +0200
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-06-17 23:00 -0700
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Mattb. <Trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 23:03 -0700
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-06-18 02:35 -0500
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:02 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-06-18 11:23 -0700
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 12:35 -0400
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-06-22 09:56 -0700
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-17 15:17 -0500
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-17 19:28 +0200
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-18 06:12 +1000
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-17 22:36 +0200
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-17 15:42 -0500
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-18 22:43 +1000
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:21 -0500
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-19 20:10 +1000
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-19 13:39 -0500
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-20 06:57 +1000
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:24 -0500
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-21 09:14 +1000
                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 14:58 -0500
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-22 09:27 +1000
                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 16:56 -0500
                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-24 08:50 +1000
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Sesiom <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-06-23 20:20 -0500
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-06-24 03:11 -0700
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-24 14:14 -0500
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-25 07:55 +1000
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-25 13:37 -0500
                                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-26 08:50 +1000
                                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-26 17:14 -0500
                                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-27 08:21 +1000
                                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-27 11:50 -0500
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-24 19:27 +0000
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-24 14:32 -0500
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 22:06 -0400
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 05:12 -0400
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 12:15 -0400
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 05:55 -0400
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-24 14:15 -0500
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-24 14:12 -0500
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-25 07:58 +1000
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-25 13:38 -0500
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-26 08:51 +1000
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-26 17:15 -0500
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:15 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-19 19:31 +0000
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:27 -0500
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-20 20:16 +0000
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 14:59 -0500
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-21 21:59 +0000
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 16:57 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 13:55 +0200
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:30 -0500
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 17:05 +0200
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 15:00 -0500
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-22 19:38 +1000
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 16:58 -0500
                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-24 08:54 +1000
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 22:07 -0400
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-24 14:17 -0500
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-22 21:57 +0200
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 16:59 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:14 -0500
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-19 20:13 +1000
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-19 06:31 -0500
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-19 13:42 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-19 13:41 -0500
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-20 07:03 +1000
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:33 -0500
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> - 2015-06-21 09:18 +1000
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 15:00 -0500
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-21 22:02 +0000
                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 17:00 -0500
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-24 19:31 +0000
                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-25 13:41 -0500
                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-25 21:13 +0000
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-26 17:17 -0500
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-06-26 16:39 -0700
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-27 11:52 -0500
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-06-27 10:47 -0700
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-27 20:06 +0000
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-28 09:23 -0500
                                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-06-28 08:03 -0700
                                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-28 17:06 -0500
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-27 20:04 +0000
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-28 09:27 -0500
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-28 19:55 +0000
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-28 17:09 -0500
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 14:01 +0200
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:36 -0500
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-17 15:23 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-17 21:30 +0000
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:24 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-19 19:25 +0000
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 14:10 +0200
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:44 -0500
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-20 20:10 +0000
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 15:07 -0500
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2015-06-21 21:57 +0000
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 17:06 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-18 01:30 +0200
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-18 16:39 -0500
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 02:29 +0200
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-06-19 21:18 -0500
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:54 -0500
                  Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 00:23 -0400
                    Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 06:24 -0400
                      Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. Jane@home.. - 2015-06-20 21:05 +1000
                        Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 07:31 -0400
                          Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-06-20 05:50 -0700
                            Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 09:41 -0400
                            Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. Jane@home.. - 2015-06-21 09:46 +1000
                              Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 07:05 -0400
                        Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-06-20 05:24 -0700
                          Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 08:29 -0400
                      Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 12:07 -0400
                        Re: The Pope is ruthless and inhumane. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-06-22 07:56 -0700
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-20 09:51 -0500
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-20 21:18 +0200
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-21 15:12 -0500
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> - 2015-06-22 22:19 +0200
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-06-23 17:08 -0500

Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8  Next page →

#502164

On 06/23/2015 06:54 PM, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:58:07 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:38:55 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>>> Yes, why are we.  Why do we exist?
>>>
>>> Science has revealed half the story...if you're patient enough the other half
>>> will come out eventually. In the meantime stop making silly guesses. You just
>>> sound like an idiot.
>>
>> What half is that and what half is yet to come?
>
> Well, in  some cases, it is already known. Take a flash of lightning, for
> instance....but I suppose you still think you god is responsible

Lightning is all fake and fraud. It's just a bunch of college kids 
playing pranks. This has been admitted by them over and over.

>>> Henry Wilson DSc.
>>
>> the dukester, American-American
>>
>> *****
>> "The Mass is the most perfect form of making money out of gullible idiots."
>> Pope Paul VI
>> *****
>
> __
>
> Henry Wilson DSc.
>


-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

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

#502310

On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 08:54:33 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:58:07 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:38:55 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>>>Yes, why are we.  Why do we exist?
>>>
>>>Science has revealed half the story...if you're patient enough the other half
>>>will come out eventually. In the meantime stop making silly guesses. You just
>>>sound like an idiot.
>>
>>What half is that and what half is yet to come?

>Well, in  some cases, it is already known. Take a flash of lightning, for
>instance....but I suppose you still think you god is responsible

God is guaranteed to have defined and established the parameters.


the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501896

"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen 
news:9t5eoati9fc51cddtjpvkescu3gqgi34es@4ax.com...
>
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 17:05:56 +0200, "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> 
> wrote:
>
> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
> >news:j2uaoap8atfmba2c5lni6plgrqan6bt9ac@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 13:55:50 +0200, "Malte Runz" 
> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
> >> >news:n5d6oah4rn1l3t0peor07761hdrl9tc2tq@4ax.com...
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:36:02 +0200, "Malte Runz"
> >> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >"Henry Wilson DSc."  skrev i meddelelsen
> >> >> >news:40l3oat94vpdtkauqogvo936443nqc1dmi@4ax.com...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 19:28:21 +0200, "Malte Runz"
> >> >> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >This is how it'll play itself out. We, as a species, are
> >> >> >> >> >approaching
> >> >> >> >> >100%
> >> >> >> >> >certainty asymptotically, and at some point it becomes absurd 
> >> >> >> >> >to
> >> >> >> >> >still
> >> >> >> >> >harbour beliefs in gods. But don't worry, you won't live to 
> >> >> >> >> >see
> >> >> >> >> >it.
> >> >> >> >> >You're
> >> >> >> >> >destined to remain deluded for the rest of your life.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You too.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Have you ever been abroad? To my neck of the woods? Religion is 
> >> >> >> >as
> >> >> >> >good
> >> >> >> >as
> >> >> >> >gone in all aspects of society. I'm already living the virtual
> >> >> >> >100%.
> >> >> >> >'Whispering spirits' won't impress any of us.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate
> >> >> >> definition
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> one first.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You won't get it from our local crop of theists. I've often asked 
> >> >> >for
> >> >> >it,
> >> >> >when they demand evidence that there is no god. How can I falsify
> >> >> >something
> >> >> >that isn't even defined.
> >> >>
> >> >> Your problem is that you demand to establish the parameters that
> >> >> declare
> >> >> evidence.  My evidence is my evidence.  You can't tell me what 
> >> >> evidence
> >> >> must be.
> >> >
> >> >You might be right about there being a creator, but 'your evidence'
> >> >doesn't
> >> >support it. All you have are assertions and any 'positives' are
> >> >coincidental.
> >>
> >> Then all you have to do is tell me "why are me".  ...
> >
> >Assuming you mean "why are we", I'll let this brilliant young woman 
> >explain:
> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbpovdjdDpc
> >Wait for contestant no. 3.
>
> Yes, why are we.  Why do we exist?

Watch the video.


-- 
Malte Runz 

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

#502116

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 21:57:22 +0200, "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> wrote:

>"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen 
>news:9t5eoati9fc51cddtjpvkescu3gqgi34es@4ax.com...
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 17:05:56 +0200, "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
>> >news:j2uaoap8atfmba2c5lni6plgrqan6bt9ac@4ax.com...
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 13:55:50 +0200, "Malte Runz" 
>> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
>> >> >news:n5d6oah4rn1l3t0peor07761hdrl9tc2tq@4ax.com...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:36:02 +0200, "Malte Runz"
>> >> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >"Henry Wilson DSc."  skrev i meddelelsen
>> >> >> >news:40l3oat94vpdtkauqogvo936443nqc1dmi@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 19:28:21 +0200, "Malte Runz"
>> >> >> >> <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >This is how it'll play itself out. We, as a species, are
>> >> >> >> >> >approaching
>> >> >> >> >> >100%
>> >> >> >> >> >certainty asymptotically, and at some point it becomes absurd 
>> >> >> >> >> >to
>> >> >> >> >> >still
>> >> >> >> >> >harbour beliefs in gods. But don't worry, you won't live to 
>> >> >> >> >> >see
>> >> >> >> >> >it.
>> >> >> >> >> >You're
>> >> >> >> >> >destined to remain deluded for the rest of your life.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> You too.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Have you ever been abroad? To my neck of the woods? Religion is 
>> >> >> >> >as
>> >> >> >> >good
>> >> >> >> >as
>> >> >> >> >gone in all aspects of society. I'm already living the virtual
>> >> >> >> >100%.
>> >> >> >> >'Whispering spirits' won't impress any of us.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate
>> >> >> >> definition
>> >> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> one first.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >You won't get it from our local crop of theists. I've often asked 
>> >> >> >for
>> >> >> >it,
>> >> >> >when they demand evidence that there is no god. How can I falsify
>> >> >> >something
>> >> >> >that isn't even defined.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Your problem is that you demand to establish the parameters that
>> >> >> declare
>> >> >> evidence.  My evidence is my evidence.  You can't tell me what 
>> >> >> evidence
>> >> >> must be.
>> >> >
>> >> >You might be right about there being a creator, but 'your evidence'
>> >> >doesn't
>> >> >support it. All you have are assertions and any 'positives' are
>> >> >coincidental.
>> >>
>> >> Then all you have to do is tell me "why are me".  ...
>> >
>> >Assuming you mean "why are we", I'll let this brilliant young woman 
>> >explain:
>> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbpovdjdDpc
>> >Wait for contestant no. 3.
>>
>> Yes, why are we.  Why do we exist?

>Watch the video.

I know what it says.  It's all to give you too a shot at eternal salvation.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501031

On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:12:50 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 19:28:21 +0200, "Malte Runz" <malte_runz@forgitit.dk>
>wrote:
>
>>"duke"  skrev i meddelelsen
>
>>> >This is how it'll play itself out. We, as a species, are approaching 100%
>>> >certainty asymptotically, and at some point it becomes absurd to still
>>> >harbour beliefs in gods. But don't worry, you won't live to see it.
>>> >You're
>>> >destined to remain deluded for the rest of your life.
>>>
>>> You too.
>>
>>Have you ever been abroad? To my neck of the woods? Religion is as good as
>>gone in all aspects of society. I'm already living the virtual 100%.
>>'Whispering spirits' won't impress any of us.
>
>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>one first.

The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..

Your turn.

>Read all about religion here: http://www.scisite.info/randf.html

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501163

On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:14:19 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:12:50 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>one first.
>
>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..

How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?

>Your turn.

__

Henry Wilson DSc.

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

#501176

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:13:27 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:14:19 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:12:50 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>>one first.
>>
>>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..
>
>How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?

It doesn't even get that far.

The definition is totally unjustified, it doesn't describe it, simply
presumes it, treats it as an objective fact and assumes everybody
knows it.

Because that's what the definite article "the" does, linguistically.

He's trying to define it into existence.

The problem is that pretty well everything in Christianity is
self-referential without any way out of the loop, because its
definitions have no intersection with reality.

All the terminally dishonest theist has actually done, is define the
universe and add his hypothetical god to that.

When the intersection with reality which he hasn't demonstrated,
should be "that created the universe".

So we have "What creator of the universe?",

He could have justified it but that would have put it in a context
which undermines it.

The most accurate definitions parsimoniously describe it in terms of
which groups believe in it and what they believe, Eg from the Encarta
World Dictionary (print edition)...

   the being believed in monotheistic religions such as Judaism,
   Islam, and Christianity to be the all-powerful all-knowing creator
   of the universe, worshipped as the only god

In other words, to non- Christians, Jews and Muslims it is a BELIEF.

But it would mean his admitting it is only "real" inside his religion,
and how many theists can bring themselves to do that?

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

#501264

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 06:31:59 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net>
wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:13:27 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:14:19 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:12:50 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>>
>>>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>>>one first.
>>>
>>>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>>>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>>>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>>>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..
>>
>>How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?
>
>It doesn't even get that far.
>
>The definition is totally unjustified, it doesn't describe it, simply
>presumes it, treats it as an objective fact and assumes everybody
>knows it.

Science gave us the answer.

   
>Because that's what the definite article "the" does, linguistically.
>
>He's trying to define it into existence.
>
>The problem is that pretty well everything in Christianity is
>self-referential without any way out of the loop, because its
>definitions have no intersection with reality.
>
>All the terminally dishonest theist has actually done, is define the
>universe and add his hypothetical god to that.
>
>When the intersection with reality which he hasn't demonstrated,
>should be "that created the universe".
>
>So we have "What creator of the universe?",
>
>He could have justified it but that would have put it in a context
>which undermines it.
>
>The most accurate definitions parsimoniously describe it in terms of
>which groups believe in it and what they believe, Eg from the Encarta
>World Dictionary (print edition)...
>
>   the being believed in monotheistic religions such as Judaism,
>   Islam, and Christianity to be the all-powerful all-knowing creator
>   of the universe, worshipped as the only god
>
>In other words, to non- Christians, Jews and Muslims it is a BELIEF.
>
>But it would mean his admitting it is only "real" inside his religion,
>and how many theists can bring themselves to do that?

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501261

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:13:27 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:14:19 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:12:50 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>>one first.
>>
>>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..
>
>How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?

I already figured your god is the distiller of your favorite whiskey.  The
vacant lot between your ears re the creation of the universe is evident form the
beginning.

>Henry Wilson DSc.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501300

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 13:41:51 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:13:27 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>>>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>>>one first.
>>>
>>>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>>>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>>>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>>>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..
>>
>>How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?
>
>I already figured your god is the distiller of your favorite whiskey.  The
>vacant lot between your ears re the creation of the universe is evident form the
>beginning.

I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I can now
define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life in the universe
so it must be your god.

Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!

>>Henry Wilson DSc.
>
>the dukester, Idiot-American
>
>*****
>"The Mass is the most perfect form of collecting money from grovelers."

>Pope Paul VI
>*****

__

Henry Wilson DSc.

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

#501440

On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 07:03:17 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 13:41:51 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:13:27 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>
>>>>>I can easily prove there are no gods. All I want is an accurate definition of
>>>>>one first.
>>>>
>>>>The creator of the universe -  the appearance of something from nothing
>>>>appearing in nothingness when suddenly an infinitely small point of infinite
>>>>mass and energy appeared that exploded/expanded outward to form our current
>>>>visible universe of some 160 billion trillion miles in diameter..
>>>
>>>How did your god arrange for that to happen? And who made your god, idiot?
>>
>>I already figured your god is the distiller of your favorite whiskey.  The
>>vacant lot between your ears re the creation of the universe is evident form the
>>beginning.
>
>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I can now
>define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life in the universe
>so it must be your god.

Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said "DNA molecule"
come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to occupy.

>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!

>>>Henry Wilson DSc.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501570

On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:

>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I can now
>>define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life in the universe
>>so it must be your god.
>
>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said "DNA molecule"
>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to occupy.
>
>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!

Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are purely
psychological. In reality there are no such things.  

__

Henry Wilson DSc.

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

#501714

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I can now
>>>define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life in the universe
>>>so it must be your god.
>>
>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said "DNA molecule"
>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to occupy.
>>
>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!
>
>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are purely
>psychological. In reality there are no such things.  

Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.

>Henry Wilson DSc.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#501745

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
> 
>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I
>>>>can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life
>>>>in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>
>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said "DNA
>>>molecule"
>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>occupy.
>>>
>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!
>>
>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are
>>purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
> 
> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.

I'm afraid that you are real.

> *****
> "Paedophilia is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI *****

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

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

#502117

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:02:19 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:

>On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>> 
>>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description, I
>>>>>can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all life
>>>>>in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>>
>>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said "DNA
>>>>molecule"
>>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>>occupy.
>>>>
>>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!
>>>
>>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are
>>>purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
>> 
>> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.
>
>I'm afraid that you are real.

Yep, your worst nightmare until you meet your maker. 

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#502317

On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:00:13 -0500, duke wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:02:19 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:
> 
>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description,
>>>>>>I can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all
>>>>>>life in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said
>>>>>"DNA molecule"
>>>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>>>occupy.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are
>>>>purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
>>> 
>>> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.
>>
>>I'm afraid that you are real.
> 
> Yep, your worst nightmare until you meet your maker.

I met my makers when I was a child. I called them Mum and Dad.

> *****
> "Paedophilia is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI *****

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

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

#502473

On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 19:31:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:00:13 -0500, duke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:02:19 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:
>> 
>>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own description,
>>>>>>>I can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all
>>>>>>>life in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said
>>>>>>"DNA molecule"
>>>>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>>>>occupy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true god!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity are
>>>>>purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.
>>>
>>>I'm afraid that you are real.
>> 
>> Yep, your worst nightmare until you meet your maker.
>
>I met my makers when I was a child. I called them Mum and Dad.

They didn't make you.  All they did was mix the ingredients that were prepared
for procreation by God and placed 50% in dad (sperm) and 50% in mom (egg).

Then you blew it when you refused baptism.  Now you're just an old
run-of-the-mill loser waiting for your eternal trip to the fires of hell.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#502515

On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 13:41:34 -0500, duke wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 19:31:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:00:13 -0500, duke wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:02:19 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own
>>>>>>>>description,
>>>>>>>>I can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all
>>>>>>>>life in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said
>>>>>>>"DNA molecule"
>>>>>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>>>>>occupy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true
>>>>>>>>god!!!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity
>>>>>>are purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.
>>>>
>>>>I'm afraid that you are real.
>>> 
>>> Yep, your worst nightmare until you meet your maker.
>>
>>I met my makers when I was a child. I called them Mum and Dad.
> 
> They didn't make you.  All they did was mix the ingredients that were
> prepared for procreation by God and placed 50% in dad (sperm) and 50% in
> mom (egg).

That would be the supposed god for which you have no evidence.
 
> Then you blew it when you refused baptism. 

How could I refuse something I was never offered?

> Now you're just an old
> run-of-the-mill loser waiting for your eternal trip to the fires of
> hell.

Will your supposed god character be in that supposed hell?

> *****
> "Paedophilia is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI *****

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

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

#502810

On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 21:13:08 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 13:41:34 -0500, duke wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 19:31:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote:
>> 
>>>On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:00:13 -0500, duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:02:19 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:00:52 -0500, duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 09:18:44 +1000, Henry Wilson DSc. <hw@....>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:33:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I think I have solved your problem Duke. From your own
>>>>>>>>>description,
>>>>>>>>>I can now define your god. The DNA molecule is the creator of all
>>>>>>>>>life in the universe so it must be your god.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, it's not really a problem of mine.  However, where did said
>>>>>>>>"DNA molecule"
>>>>>>>>come from and how did it exist when there was NO space for it to
>>>>>>>>occupy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Let's all worship the DNA molecule, the one and only true
>>>>>>>>>god!!!!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hey dupe, the concepts of beginnings and endings and even infinity
>>>>>>>are purely psychological. In reality there are no such things.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks be to God.  I was afraid you were real.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm afraid that you are real.
>>>> 
>>>> Yep, your worst nightmare until you meet your maker.
>>>
>>>I met my makers when I was a child. I called them Mum and Dad.

>> They didn't make you.  All they did was mix the ingredients that were
>> prepared for procreation by God and placed 50% in dad (sperm) and 50% in
>> mom (egg).

>That would be the supposed god for which you have no evidence.

You're here, aren't you?
 
>> Then you blew it when you refused baptism. 
>How could I refuse something I was never offered?

Wise men seek truth.

>> Now you're just an old
>> run-of-the-mill loser waiting for your eternal trip to the fires of
>> hell.

>Will your supposed god character be in that supposed hell?

Well, we profess that God is everywhere's.  However, he won't interface with you
as satan has that duty.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

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

#502838

On 06/26/2015 03:17 PM, duke wrote:
> Well, we profess that God is everywhere's.

I thought you said hell was separation from God.  Isn't hell included in 
"everywhere's" ?

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

Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web