Can Christian Electronic Designers Design?
in [Design]
|
From: Archimedes' Lever on 2 Apr 2010 19:57 On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:29:49 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >Yes.. It's my aim to get a response. The more difficult it is, the >stronger the data point. > In this thread, idiot, you have made a grand total of ZERO points.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 2 Apr 2010 19:59 On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:31:00 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >In article <d2tbr5lnp7aondg4bkpgptm9u96g1gfj40(a)4ax.com>, >jfields(a)austininstruments.com says... >> >> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:40:50 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In article <4llar5p9f943cv0rt0jjfn90avjo5utqb2(a)4ax.com>, >> >OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org says... >> >> >> >> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:23:48 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >The bible would certainly be of interest if physics,chemisty and biology >> >> >books quoted the bible on gravity theory, atomic theory and genetics. >> >> > >> >> >Those mid east bronze age bible writing desert monkeys didn't even know >> >> >they were breathing nitrogen. >> >> >> >> >> >> Whouda thunk that all those times I called you an idiot that it was >> >> actually spot on!? >> > >> >Maybe you can help me out and explain what you found wrong in my post. >> >> --- >> The Bible is certainly of interest, but it isn't a science book. >> >> Consequently, references to gravity theory, atomic theory and genetics >> won't be found there, and your denigration of its authors as well as the >> book itself is disingenuous. >> >> JF > >Thank you making the point that the bible isn't a science book.. Thank you for showing us all that you are so goddamned stupid that you cannot figure out that it is not supposed to be one, nor was it ever. You are absolutely pathetic.
From: D from BC on 2 Apr 2010 20:05 People love myths. You have your component soul smoke. I have my transistor fairies. They're not true but they're fun BS concepts. I heard of one story where an atheist (ex-christian) who didn't like going to church but now enjoys going to church .. How... He finds church enjoyable cause he sees it all as mythology. :P It's like entertainment to him. imo Star Wars is a more fun mythology than Christianity. -- D from BC British Columbia
From: John Larkin on 2 Apr 2010 20:30 On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:45:03 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >RogerN prays you hit no trees.. :P > > You're the second person in two days to warn me about skiing into trees. The other one is a Fellow of United Technologies. John
From: John Larkin on 2 Apr 2010 20:32
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:23:19 -0500, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:22:09 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >wrote: > >>In article <pgbar5tad973ruhjttv83rls0ull3cmvac(a)4ax.com>, >>jfields(a)austininstruments.com says... >>> >>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:41:49 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >Wouldn't it make me look stupid if you were bluntly clear and posted 'I >>> >Larkin am an atheist' or 'I Larkin am a Christian'. >>> >>> --- >>> Well, the thing is: >>> >>> 1. In reality, one has nothing to do with the other. >>> >>> 2. You already look stupid, and, >>> >>> 3. Your trying to get JL to play your game of "Here are your only >>> choices, choose now!" makes you look stupider yet. >>> --- >>> >>> >Show which way I was confused. >>> >>> --- >>> How many ways does the wind blow? >>> --- >>> >>> >If you're a Christian, why not make it public. >>> >You're in the gang, in the club, part of the group, in the herd. >>> >You should easily be able to post 'I am Christian.' >>> >Or post 'I am a _______ Christian.' >>> >Where _____ is one of those 38000 Christian denominations. >>> >It should be easy for you to post that you're Christian because the >>> >majority of North America is Christian. >>> >This should be as easy you writing 'I am an engineer.' >>> >Are you going to let some stupid atheist make you shy in posting what >>> >religion you are in. >>> >>> --- >>> Oh, my... >>> >>> It seems that by being, by your own admission, a stupid atheist, you've >>> never pondered the difference between being spiritual and religious or >>> sorted out the difference between spirituality and religion. >>> --- >>> >>> >Perhaps there's lots of Christians on SED that would feel all warm and >>> >fuzzy inside after you post 'I Larkin am a Christian engineer.' >>> >>> --- >>> And what would be wrong with that? >>> >>> Being a Christian engineer would bind him to the Old Testament as well >> >>But do you have the balls to tell me what religion Larkin is in? > >--- >Grasping at straws, are we? > >In the first place, it's certainly not within your bailiwick to demand >anything from anyone here, and in the second place all of your >sophomoric attempts at "coercion" seem to be falling on deaf ears. > >Thirdly, this unhealthy obsession you seem to have for Larkin borders on >what I would consider to be sexual in that in another post you referred >to his frequency of sexual activity in order to try to make a point. > Hey, I'm perfectly willing to not talk about that, too. John |