Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #560938 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-09 13:53 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-03-16 14:46 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 278 — 20 participants |
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.
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-03-09 13:53 -0800
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-10 17:02 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-03-11 01:25 -0800
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-11 11:36 -0800
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-12 07:38 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-03-13 09:57 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Earle Jones27 <earle.jones@comcast.net> - 2016-03-13 11:32 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-14 16:33 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-03-14 14:42 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-15 07:00 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-15 12:07 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-16 14:46 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-16 17:23 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-17 12:32 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-17 16:30 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-18 15:46 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-19 04:14 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-19 08:10 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-19 17:21 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-20 09:47 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-20 11:06 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-20 15:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-20 23:28 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-21 17:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-22 04:12 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-22 07:02 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-22 20:49 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-23 07:01 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-23 18:20 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-24 08:16 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-24 18:17 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-24 15:57 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-25 19:09 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-26 12:08 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-26 19:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-03-26 13:50 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-28 16:20 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-29 22:39 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-30 11:15 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-30 18:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 07:03 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-31 17:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 15:16 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-01 20:59 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-01 16:13 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:23 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-01 23:21 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-02 07:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-02 19:38 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:30 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-03 23:46 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-04 13:19 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 00:54 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-05 07:40 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-05 17:16 +0200
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-05 13:50 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 19:23 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:40 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-05 15:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:31 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 20:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 11:56 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-05 15:25 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:30 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 20:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 11:58 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:25 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-08 13:01 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:47 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 18:52 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-09 15:06 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:53 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:47 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-10 16:06 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:18 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-10 23:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-11 16:19 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-12 19:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-12 14:52 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:45 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 18:54 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:54 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 19:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:32 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 20:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-04-06 14:46 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 23:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:03 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:33 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 11:59 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:47 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 18:56 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:55 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:27 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 20:24 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:48 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 18:58 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:56 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-10 16:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:19 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-10 23:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-11 16:20 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-12 19:25 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 18:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-03-24 15:53 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-27 04:16 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-27 04:15 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-28 04:01 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-28 13:59 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-28 16:23 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-28 16:57 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-29 14:17 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-28 18:47 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-28 16:56 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-29 04:40 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-29 14:18 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-30 04:58 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-30 11:19 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-31 03:41 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 07:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-31 17:11 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-01 23:25 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-02 07:36 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-02 10:59 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:34 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-03 17:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-04 13:21 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 00:50 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-05 08:31 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-05 13:52 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:33 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 19:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:05 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-04-08 16:28 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-09 07:53 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 19:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:57 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 18:41 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-03 17:17 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-04 13:23 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-04 15:17 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-05 08:33 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 18:39 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:34 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 19:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:07 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 19:06 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:58 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-10 16:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:20 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-11 00:05 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-11 16:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-12 19:32 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-10 22:01 +0200
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-05 15:09 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 19:39 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-06 19:40 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-07 04:51 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:08 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-08 04:14 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:50 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-09 04:49 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 08:29 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-10 05:32 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-09 07:54 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-10 05:34 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 08:59 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-10 15:01 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:29 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-11 05:17 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-11 16:27 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-11 18:42 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-12 07:45 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-06 15:25 +0100
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:36 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-09 07:57 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 14:33 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 09:20 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-28 16:23 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 16:22 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-29 14:21 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-06 15:26 +0100
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:36 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-28 18:50 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-28 17:02 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-29 04:43 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-28 16:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-28 16:21 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-28 18:52 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-29 14:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-30 05:02 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-30 11:25 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-03-30 09:50 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 07:11 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-31 03:47 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 07:12 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-31 17:26 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-31 17:26 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-31 15:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-01 20:46 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-01 15:55 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:32 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:30 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-01 23:17 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-02 07:38 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-02 19:32 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:37 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-03 17:07 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-04 13:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 00:46 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-05 00:07 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-05 00:23 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-09 16:54 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-05 08:34 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-05 18:35 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-08 17:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:51 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-09 19:02 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 09:26 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Ted Street <ted.smasher@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 14:38 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:39 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-03-31 17:30 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-03-31 17:17 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-01 16:32 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-01 23:27 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-04-02 04:25 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-02 07:39 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-02 11:03 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-04-02 09:48 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-02 16:14 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-02 23:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-02 21:43 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Apollo <nowhere@def.com> - 2016-04-02 22:17 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-03 00:09 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-04-02 23:30 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-04-03 00:45 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-04-02 23:39 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Apollo <nowhere@def.com> - 2016-04-03 03:01 -0600
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:40 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-04-03 17:00 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:38 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-03 17:18 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-02 07:38 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-02 11:06 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-03 08:40 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-03 17:19 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-04 13:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-04 15:20 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-05 08:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-05 15:11 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-06 11:37 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-07 04:54 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-07 12:09 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-08 04:16 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-08 13:51 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-09 04:50 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-09 07:58 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-10 05:35 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 09:27 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-10 15:02 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-10 14:40 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-11 05:19 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-11 16:28 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-04-11 18:43 -0400
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-04-12 07:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-03-15 10:00 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 11:19 -0700
Re: [OT] Re: Is there a God, Yes or No? duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-03-16 14:46 -0500
Page 3 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 14 Next page →
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 07:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mb4qfbdfa1p3ilklrhfusdro564s982i4o@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #566701 |
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>> Sorry, but the evidence is so strong that science is on the verge of >>>>>> declaring it proof of God's existence. >>>>> >>>>>You may believe that, but I don't. >>>>>That supposed verge is non-existent, as science doesn't work that way. >>>> >>>> There you go again - showing your ignorance. You can't even see the >>>> evidence and then declared the verge is non-existent. >>> >>>What evidence would that be, liar Earl? >> >> You have to see the evidence first to then declare the verge >> non-existent. > >So where is it, liar Earl? I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>I don't believe in an unevidenced sky pixie like you do. >> I wouldn't either, but I have the evidence. >Yet you are unable to show it, liar Earl. >Did the dog eat it? I said it over and over on this ng. But you goofed when you said there is no verge. To deny the verge is to accept the present of evidence. Heeheehee. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 17:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndjnnl$7vg$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #566895 |
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>>>>>> Sorry, but the evidence is so strong that science is on the verge >>>>>>> of declaring it proof of God's existence. >>>>>> >>>>>>You may believe that, but I don't. >>>>>>That supposed verge is non-existent, as science doesn't work that >>>>>>way. >>>>> >>>>> There you go again - showing your ignorance. You can't even see the >>>>> evidence and then declared the verge is non-existent. >>>> >>>>What evidence would that be, liar Earl? >>> >>> You have to see the evidence first to then declare the verge >>> non-existent. >> >>So where is it, liar Earl? > > I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>>I don't believe in an unevidenced sky pixie like you do. >>> I wouldn't either, but I have the evidence. > >>Yet you are unable to show it, liar Earl. >>Did the dog eat it? > > I said it over and over on this ng. But you goofed when you said there > is no verge. To deny the verge is to accept the present of evidence. You have shown no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists,liar, just as you have shown no evidence that your supposed god character exists, liar. Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence. > Heeheehee. Your insane laughter confirms that you're lying. > ***** > "Telling lies about evidence 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]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 15:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <h71rfblkm0ddiaod0ml5dti8urtv3gbna3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #566993 |
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> Sorry, but the evidence is so strong that science is on the verge >>>>>>>> of declaring it proof of God's existence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You may believe that, but I don't. >>>>>>>That supposed verge is non-existent, as science doesn't work that >>>>>>>way. >>>>>> >>>>>> There you go again - showing your ignorance. You can't even see the >>>>>> evidence and then declared the verge is non-existent. >>>>> >>>>>What evidence would that be, liar Earl? >>>> >>>> You have to see the evidence first to then declare the verge >>>> non-existent. >>> >>>So where is it, liar Earl? >> >> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. > >You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>I don't believe in an unevidenced sky pixie like you do. >>>> I wouldn't either, but I have the evidence. >> >>>Yet you are unable to show it, liar Earl. >>>Did the dog eat it? >> >> I said it over and over on this ng. But you goofed when you said there >> is no verge. To deny the verge is to accept the present of evidence. >You have shown no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists,liar, I didn't. YOU denied the verge, so you must be looking at the evidence.. >just as >you have shown no evidence that your supposed god character exists, liar. >Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence. > >> Heeheehee. > >Your insane laughter confirms that you're lying. You stepped in it with this one. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 20:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndmng3$som$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #567026 |
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>> wrote: <snip> >>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>> >>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >> >>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. > > That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so > you must see the evidence to declare no verge. I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>>I don't believe in an unevidenced sky pixie like you do. >>>>> I wouldn't either, but I have the evidence. >>> >>>>Yet you are unable to show it, liar Earl. >>>>Did the dog eat it? >>> >>> I said it over and over on this ng. But you goofed when you said >>> there is no verge. To deny the verge is to accept the present of >>> evidence. > >>You have shown no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists,liar, > > I didn't. YOU denied the verge, so you must be looking at the > evidence.. The same evidence that you have for the non-existence of leprechauns. >>just as you have shown no evidence that your supposed god character >>exists, liar. >>Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence. >> >>> Heeheehee. >> >>Your insane laughter confirms that you're lying. > > You stepped in it with this one. Your meaningless shit is easy to avoid. > ***** > "The Mass 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]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 16:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <01ptfbd8i0tpbmn36schodembgb2t440mr@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567302 |
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: > ><snip> > >>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>> >>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>> >>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >> >> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so >> you must see the evidence to declare no verge. > >I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. The in-your-face, sociopathic, lying moron pretends he doesn't understand the falsifiable default, which it the only way to deal with baseless claims.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 16:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <amptfb5vo69g2edusid45nbsqrhfghgt1f@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567308 |
On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:13:27 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> wrote: >On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >> >><snip> >> >>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>> >>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>> >>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>> >>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so >>> you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >> >>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. > >The in-your-face, sociopathic, lying moron pretends he doesn't >understand the falsifiable default, which it the only way to deal with >baseless claims. Blah, blah, blah. Tell me what you have to say that there is NO God. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 16:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5kptfblpkidno98u31tb9sbkjv08gd8kvo@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567302 |
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: > ><snip> > >>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>> >>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>> >>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >> >> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so >> you must see the evidence to declare no verge. > >I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs with evidence. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 23:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndmvqi$18q3$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #567312 |
On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >> >><snip> >> >>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>> >>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>> >>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>> >>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so >>> you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >> >>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. > > Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs with > evidence. What beliefs would they be, Earl? > ***** > "The Mass 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]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 07:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <u4fvfbpk8dhbrvju2ei3u1fmm0v0ah5sls@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567334 |
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >>><snip> >>> >>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>> >>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>> >>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>> >>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, so >>>> you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>> >>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >> >> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs with >> evidence. > >What beliefs would they be, Earl? That there is NO God. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 19:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndp73o$ifq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #567418 |
On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>> >>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>> >>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>>> >>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, >>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>> >>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>> >>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>> with evidence. >> >>What beliefs would they be, Earl? > > That there is NO God. That isn't my belief, moron. I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of them, I remain an atheist. > ***** > "Telling lies 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]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-03 08:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3k62gb1fnjqoocfck0ipnd7ftgikrgnpg2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567542 |
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, >>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>> >>>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>> >>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>> with evidence. >>> >>>What beliefs would they be, Earl? >> >> That there is NO God. > >That isn't my belief, moron. >I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >them, I remain an atheist. Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support for their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-03 23:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndsa0k$19un$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #567668 |
On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: > On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>><snip> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, >>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>> >>>>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>> >>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>> with evidence. >>>> >>>>What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>> >>> That there is NO God. >> >>That isn't my belief, moron. > >>I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>them, I remain an atheist. > > Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support for > their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. Only in your demented excuse for a mind. > ***** > "Telling lies 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]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 13:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n0c5gbtcm38apqv3o0e6r8of1bvm08nvrd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567739 |
On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:46:29 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, liar. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no verge, >>>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>> >>>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>>> with evidence. >>>>> >>>>>What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>>> >>>> That there is NO God. >>> >>>That isn't my belief, moron. >> >>>I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>>them, I remain an atheist. >> >> Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support for >> their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. > >Only in your demented excuse for a mind. Agnostic smiler - sounds musical. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 00:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndv2be$1hj6$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #567877 |
On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:19:25 -0500, duke wrote: > On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:46:29 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >>On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, >>>>>>>>>>liar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no >>>>>>>>> verge, >>>>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>>>> with evidence. >>>>>> >>>>>>What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>>>> >>>>> That there is NO God. >>>> >>>>That isn't my belief, moron. >>> >>>>I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>>>them, I remain an atheist. >>> >>> Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support >>> for their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. >> >>Only in your demented excuse for a mind. > > Agnostic smiler - sounds musical. Like you, it sounds stupid and is a lie. > ***** > "Telling lies 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]
| From | duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 07:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oec7gbh14fvak50p56qf3unmc9i74cqpq4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #567968 |
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:54:06 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:19:25 -0500, duke wrote: > >> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:46:29 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, >>>>>>>>>>>liar. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no >>>>>>>>>> verge, >>>>>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>>>>> with evidence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>>>>> >>>>>> That there is NO God. >>>>> >>>>>That isn't my belief, moron. >>>> >>>>>I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>>>>them, I remain an atheist. >>>> >>>> Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support >>>> for their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. >>> >>>Only in your demented excuse for a mind. >> >> Agnostic smiler - sounds musical. > >Like you, it sounds stupid and is a lie. Well, you're definitely no atheist. That's an impossibility as there is exactly zero (0) evidence to support that there is NO God. the dukester, American-American ***** "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI *****
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 17:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <dmi374FejiqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #568023 |
On 05/04/2016 14:40, duke wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:54:06 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: > >> On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:19:25 -0500, duke wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:46:29 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, >>>>>>>>>>>> liar. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no >>>>>>>>>>> verge, >>>>>>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>>>>>> with evidence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That there is NO God. >>>>>> >>>>>> That isn't my belief, moron. >>>>> >>>>>> I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>>>>> them, I remain an atheist. >>>>> >>>>> Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support >>>>> for their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. >>>> >>>> Only in your demented excuse for a mind. >>> >>> Agnostic smiler - sounds musical. >> >> Like you, it sounds stupid and is a lie. > > Well, you're definitely no atheist. That's an impossibility as there is exactly > zero (0) evidence to support that there is NO God. More proof, if it were needed, that you have no understanding of the scientific method. Science does not depend on positive evidence. ALL evidence is of equal value -- including negative. When a scientist looks for something and cannot find any trace or hint of it, then that is as important and indicative as any positive evidence. Having looked for evidence of any supernatural deity for centuries, having looked high and low, having used the best available techniques and the most cunning tests and experiments our clever brains were able to devise, we have found precisely ... nothing. Zip, nada, bupkis. That is good, hard, solid evidence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 13:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ciu7gbtbchmccauvl8ocqargl2ealm000p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #568043 |
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:16:52 +0200, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >On 05/04/2016 14:40, duke wrote: >> On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:54:06 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:19:25 -0500, duke wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:46:29 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:30:04 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 07:35:56 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:22:58 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 20:59:47 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:16:44 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:45:25 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:03:19 -0500, duke wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So where is it, liar Earl? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I already gave it to you. But you still don't get it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You have given no evidence that your claimed 'verge' exists, >>>>>>>>>>>>> liar. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That's exactly right. You're the one that says there is no >>>>>>>>>>>> verge, >>>>>>>>>>>> so you must see the evidence to declare no verge. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I need no evidence to not believe your stupid unevidenced claims. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Your damnation comes in your inability to support your own beliefs >>>>>>>>>> with evidence. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What beliefs would they be, Earl? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That there is NO God. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That isn't my belief, moron. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I know that there are some claimed gods. As I don't believe in any of >>>>>>> them, I remain an atheist. >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually, that only makes you an agnostic. You can't offer support >>>>>> for their being NO God. Hence you are no atheist. >>>>> >>>>> Only in your demented excuse for a mind. >>>> >>>> Agnostic smiler - sounds musical. >>> >>> Like you, it sounds stupid and is a lie. >> >> Well, you're definitely no atheist. That's an impossibility as there is exactly >> zero (0) evidence to support that there is NO God. > >More proof, if it were needed, that you have no understanding of the >scientific method. > >Science does not depend on positive evidence. ALL evidence is of equal >value -- including negative. When a scientist looks for something and >cannot find any trace or hint of it, then that is as important and >indicative as any positive evidence. > >Having looked for evidence of any supernatural deity for centuries, >having looked high and low, having used the best available techniques >and the most cunning tests and experiments our clever brains were able >to devise, we have found precisely ... nothing. Zip, nada, bupkis. >That is good, hard, solid evidence. > Oi. That's what they said about black swans. And then they found one. Absence of evidence is perhaps evidence of absence, true. But it's not conclusive. Ultimately, saying that there is zero evidence to support that there is no god is exactly the same logic that there is no evidence to support there is no leprechaun. Or unicorn. Or dragon. It's a seriously stupid argument because you cannot prove a negative. Ever. -- Cheers, Dreamer AA 2306 "If God listened to the prayers of men, all men would quickly have perished: for they are forever praying for evil against one another." Epicurus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 19:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ne13bg$13r8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568059 |
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:50:38 -0400, Dreamer In Colore wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:16:52 +0200, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: <snip> >>More proof, if it were needed, that you have no understanding of the >>scientific method. >> >>Science does not depend on positive evidence. ALL evidence is of equal >>value -- including negative. When a scientist looks for something and >>cannot find any trace or hint of it, then that is as important and >>indicative as any positive evidence. >> >>Having looked for evidence of any supernatural deity for centuries, >>having looked high and low, having used the best available techniques >>and the most cunning tests and experiments our clever brains were able >>to devise, we have found precisely ... nothing. Zip, nada, bupkis. That >>is good, hard, solid evidence. >> > Oi. That's what they said about black swans. And then they found one. > > Absence of evidence is perhaps evidence of absence, true. But it's not > conclusive. > > Ultimately, saying that there is zero evidence to support that there is > no god is exactly the same logic that there is no evidence to support > there is no leprechaun. Or unicorn. Or dragon. > > It's a seriously stupid argument because you cannot prove a negative. > Ever. I can prove I don't have three legs, or that there is no elephant hiding in my garage! What you mean is that it's impossible to prove a _universal_ negative. -- 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]
| From | Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mt48gb1mn1s185rlslom65gt80s4iis6su@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #568102 |
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 19:23:28 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> wrote: >On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:50:38 -0400, Dreamer In Colore wrote: > >> On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:16:52 +0200, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > ><snip> > >>>More proof, if it were needed, that you have no understanding of the >>>scientific method. >>> >>>Science does not depend on positive evidence. ALL evidence is of equal >>>value -- including negative. When a scientist looks for something and >>>cannot find any trace or hint of it, then that is as important and >>>indicative as any positive evidence. >>> >>>Having looked for evidence of any supernatural deity for centuries, >>>having looked high and low, having used the best available techniques >>>and the most cunning tests and experiments our clever brains were able >>>to devise, we have found precisely ... nothing. Zip, nada, bupkis. That >>>is good, hard, solid evidence. >>> >> Oi. That's what they said about black swans. And then they found one. >> >> Absence of evidence is perhaps evidence of absence, true. But it's not >> conclusive. >> >> Ultimately, saying that there is zero evidence to support that there is >> no god is exactly the same logic that there is no evidence to support >> there is no leprechaun. Or unicorn. Or dragon. >> >> It's a seriously stupid argument because you cannot prove a negative. >> Ever. > >I can prove I don't have three legs, or that there is no elephant hiding >in my garage! If we really wanted to get silly about it, we could argue both those things ad nauseam. The elephant could have taken a walk when you went to check, for example.... The whole point is how you frame the issue. You'd never say "I don't have three legs", or "I don't have four legs". You'd say "I have two legs." Framing the non-existence of a deity is stupid when the argument is predicated on existence in the first place. The logic devolves to humour at this point. >What you mean is that it's impossible to prove a _universal_ negative. Yeah, I'll go with this. Thanks for refining the semantics, Mr. Smiler. -- Cheers, Dreamer AA 2306 "If God listened to the prayers of men, all men would quickly have perished: for they are forever praying for evil against one another." Epicurus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bq78gb5ca98e7nri4bc3rt0l79ib79a5eq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #568103 |
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 15:40:40 -0400, Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> wrote: >On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 19:23:28 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> >wrote: > >>On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:50:38 -0400, Dreamer In Colore wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:16:52 +0200, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >><snip> >> >>>>More proof, if it were needed, that you have no understanding of the >>>>scientific method. >>>> >>>>Science does not depend on positive evidence. ALL evidence is of equal >>>>value -- including negative. When a scientist looks for something and >>>>cannot find any trace or hint of it, then that is as important and >>>>indicative as any positive evidence. >>>> >>>>Having looked for evidence of any supernatural deity for centuries, >>>>having looked high and low, having used the best available techniques >>>>and the most cunning tests and experiments our clever brains were able >>>>to devise, we have found precisely ... nothing. Zip, nada, bupkis. That >>>>is good, hard, solid evidence. >>>> >>> Oi. That's what they said about black swans. And then they found one. >>> >>> Absence of evidence is perhaps evidence of absence, true. But it's not >>> conclusive. >>> >>> Ultimately, saying that there is zero evidence to support that there is >>> no god is exactly the same logic that there is no evidence to support >>> there is no leprechaun. Or unicorn. Or dragon. >>> >>> It's a seriously stupid argument because you cannot prove a negative. >>> Ever. >> >>I can prove I don't have three legs, or that there is no elephant hiding >>in my garage! > >If we really wanted to get silly about it, we could argue both those >things ad nauseam. The elephant could have taken a walk when you went >to check, for example.... > >The whole point is how you frame the issue. You'd never say "I don't >have three legs", or "I don't have four legs". You'd say "I have two >legs." > >Framing the non-existence of a deity is stupid when the argument is >predicated on existence in the first place. No. Look up "Popperian falsifiability" - which was around long before Popper formulated it. It's the way to deal with unsupported claims. >The logic devolves to humour at this point. > >>What you mean is that it's impossible to prove a _universal_ negative. > >Yeah, I'll go with this. Thanks for refining the semantics, Mr. >Smiler. Which is why you use a methodology which works with them better than "I don't know", which actually applies to the entire spectrum apart from the two extremes and takes no account of likelihood.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web