Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 18 Jun 2008 23:13 On Jun 18, 5:11�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:11f01f12-6b83-46c8-8c82-cf8e71cdb53e(a)w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 18, 12:04 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > On Jun 17, 12:17 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > >>> On Jun 16, 4:50?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>>>news:2709c51e-e0df-48bc-9796-1c51dad9600d(a)d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > > >>>> On Jun 16, 1:36 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >>>>>> On Jun 16, 1:19?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >>>>>>> Smiler wrote: > > >>>>>>>> "BuddyThunder" <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message > > >>>>>>>>news:4854e421$1(a)clear.net.nz... > > >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 4:20 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 13, 7:04 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 7:30?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:21:20 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 11, 6:46?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 05:58:19 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 5:20?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:34:40 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 12:40?am, BuddyThunder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want us to believe some of the history of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> places, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming. If you want us to believe in the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extraordinary > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supernatural > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims, you're going to have to bring something > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new.- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hide > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, with regard to the Assyrian invasion of Judea, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> book > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isaiah claims that a supernatural event took place.. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?Isaiah > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during the night an angel of the Lord went into the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> camp > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrians and slew 186,000 soldiers in one night. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?Besorus, a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chaldean > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> historian, says that the Assyrian army died of plague > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> besieging > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jerusalem. ?Of course, the Chaldeans were idol > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worshippers > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrians. ?Still, this event was of some interest to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Babylonians were planning a conquest of Assyria. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a fact, however, that Sennacherib abandoned the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seige of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jerusalem and fled back to Ninevah. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know enough about the history of the time to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea what > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happened, but I am sure that historians do. If there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disastrous > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> series of deaths, various diseases are a much more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bet > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than an > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Angel of the Lord. No evidence backs up that claim.- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hide > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quoted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I would have to go with the angel of the Lord. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?The > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chaldean > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> historians were quite a ways from the actual event. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, you ignored the Wikipedia entry. Your dishonesty is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noted.- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Bible account is much better than the Wickipedia one. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?Too > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists on the staff of Wickipedia. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have no idea how Wikipedia works. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Bible account is not consistent with the evidence.- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hide > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quoted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Biblical account is obviously true, and the Wickipedia > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> account is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on Sennacherib's story of what happened in the war > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jews. ?Sennacherib's account is obviously the fabricated > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> one. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes that "obvious" to you, exactly?- Hide quoted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib's account is like listening to an atheist. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Do you mean that it sounds non-hysterical and plausible?- Hide > > >>>>>>>>>>> quoted > > >>>>>>>>>>> text - > > >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>>>>>> No, it sounds hysterical and irrational. > > >>>>>>>>> What, specifically, strikes you that way? > > >>>>>>>> It's not like the voices in his head. > > >>>>>>> Crazy huh? I have not received an answer to this yet, I'm not > > >>>>>>> expecting > > >>>>>>> one.- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>>>> Atheists always sound hysterical and irrational to me. > > >>>>> Why? Could you provide an example? Do I sound hysterical?- Hide > > >>>>> quoted > > >>>>> text - > > >>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>>> Well, yes. ? Harry Potter, Harry Potter, Harry Potter. ?You seem to > > >>>> be > > >>>> crying out for magic to save you. > > >>>> ------------------------------------------- > > >>>> Says the believer in a magic sky fairy that magically inseminated a > > >>>> virgin > > >>>> so that she could magically remain a virgin and magically produce his > > >>>> magic > > >>>> son who went on to do magic tricks, like magically turning water into > > >>>> wine, > > >>>> magically walking on water and and magically feeding 5000 people with > > >>>> the > > >>>> scantest of supplies. This magic son, although supposedly dead, > > >>>> magically > > >>>> came back to life and then magically disappeared. All evidence, > > >>>> outside of > > >>>> the of the only book supposedly describing these magical happenings, > > >>>> magically disappeared. This believer apparently also believes that a > > >>>> magic > > >>>> angel magically came to earth with a magic set of golden disks and > > >>>> gave them > > >>>> to a well known fraudster to magically translate into English and > > >>>> then, > > >>>> magically, the disks disappeared. This believer also talks to the > > >>>> magic sky > > >>>> beings to magically get them to work their magic in his favour. Does > > >>>> he also > > >>>> wear magic underwear...curious minds and all that. > > >>>> And I haven't even started on the OT, yet. > > >>>> Smiler, > > >>>> The godless one > > >>>> a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>> You haven't started on anything. > > >> This is a scant rebuttal. How is he wrong?- Hide quoted text - > > > > I did not spend any great amount of time studying his statement. As > > > far as I could tell there was nothing true in it. > > > This seems to read like "I don't like it, so I won't accept/believe it".. > > > What specifically rings false about it? I'd like to know how you assess > > statements for truth.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > The entire thing was false as far as I could tell. �What was there in > it that you thought was true? > -------------------------------------------- > The burden of proof is on the accuser! > You asserted it was untrue....You prove it. > Otherwise it stands as true. > > Smiler, Well, you need to file the case in court, Smiler. These things are not just automatic. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 18 Jun 2008 23:18 On Jun 18, 5:41�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:07:49 -0700 (PDT), asilentskeptic > <asilentskep...(a)gmail.com> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >On Jun 18, 12:51 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >> > On Jun 16, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >> rbwinn wrote: > >> >>> On Jun 16, 1:19 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >> >>>>> On Jun 16, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >> >>>>>>> On Jun 15, 6:32?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > >> >>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:52?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 9:45?pm, none <""doug\"@(none)"> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you should explain your ideas to the twelve apostles after the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrection takes place, Darrell. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you do not know how many there are (if any) or their names > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and you just hide behind the statement above to cover your > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorance. ?Just like in your failed attempts to argue > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> physics, you do not even know enough to argue your religious > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs and have to retreat to claiming ignorance. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not claim ignorance. ?I just told Darrell to look them up > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> himself. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> You admit failure, no matter how you describe it. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Why, because Darrell is not going to look them up? ?I do not care what > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Darrell does. > >> >>>>>>>>>> You told him to look it up because you didn't have the evidence. You ran > >> >>>>>>>>>> away from the question.- Hide quoted text - > >> >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >> >>>>>>>>> Nope. ?I told atheists a long time ago I was not going to be their > >> >>>>>>>>> researcher. > >> >>>>>>>> You refuse to do the research to back up your own claims. You are no > >> >>>>>>>> one's researcher. You worship ignorance.- Hide quoted text - > >> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >> >>>>>>> Well, I did a little �better than the atheists on Hezekiah's tunnel > >> >>>>>>> and the ramp over the city wall at Lachish. > >> >>>>>> No. You only think you did. For some reason. Could you tell us why?- Hide quoted text - > >> >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >> >>>>> Yes, I can do that. �There is an actual earthen ramp built by the > >> >>>>> Assyrian army that still exists today. �There is an actual conduit for > >> >>>>> water between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, just as the Bible > >> >>>>> says there is. �The problem that atheists have is that J..K. Rowling is > >> >>>>> from northern England. �When she wrote about Harry Potter leaving from > >> >>>>> the train station in London, probably the only thing she knew about > >> >>>>> the train station was its name. � So comparing the Biblical account, > >> >>>>> which can be easily verified by going to Israel and looking at the > >> >>>>> ramp and the conduit for water, to what J.K. Rowling wrote in a book > >> >>>>> which she said was fiction means nothing to me, however sacred it may > >> >>>>> be to you atheists. > >> >>>>> Robert B. Winn > >> >>>> So, substituting ... > >> >>>> Yes, I can do that. �There is an actual major city founded by the > >> >>>> Romans that still exists today. �There is an actual railway station, > >> >>>> just as Harry Potter says there is. > >> >>>> We know that Harry Potter is fiction. You're claiming Biblical authority > >> >>>> SOLELY on the existence of some mentioned ancient sites. We're pointing > >> >>>> out that by the same logic, you would be forced to admit Harry Potter's > >> >>>> authority. If can't t accept its authority, then your argument need > >> >>>> reexamination. Maybe the Bible needs more support for its extraordinary > >> >>>> claims.- Hide quoted text - > >> >>>> - Show quoted text - > >> >>> There is also a woman who calls herself J.K. Rowling who says she > >> >>> wrote the Harry Potter books as fiction, regardless of how many > >> >>> atheists believe them. > >> >>> I am not claiming Biblical authority SOLEY on the existence of some > >> >>> mentioned ancient sites. �An atheist claimed that there was nothing in > >> >>> the Bible that could be verified by anything that exists today, so I > >> >>> mentioned Hezekiah's tunnel. �It was not an argument. > >> >> We'll have to take your word about the claim, but okay. You were > >> >> correct, and I don't think that point is contended. Some things in the > >> >> Bible are verifiable. > > >> >>> It was information about something mentioned in the Bible that can be seen > >> >>> today. �And as we can see, atheists still claim that Hezekiah's tunnel > >> >>> is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, including > >> >>> you. �No, Hezekiah's tunnel is not exactly like Harry Potter leaving > >> >>> for wizard's school. �You atheists are not going to be able to > >> >>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter > >> >>> leaving for wizard's school. �As long as you continue to try to > >> >>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter > >> >>> leaving for wizard's school, I will continue to say that you do not > >> >>> believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists because Harry Potter does not exist > >> >>> and wizard's school does not exist. > >> >> Then you would be persisting in your error. If you were simply trying to > >> >> say that at least SOME of the Bible is true, then okay, you've made your > >> >> point. We thought you were arguing for the accuracy of the WHOLE on the > >> >> basis of these minor points. Okay, a whole lot of arguing over nothing > >> >> now that we know what your claim really is. (Is that it?) > > >> >> If you are saying that Hezekiah's > > >> >>> tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, then > >> >>> you are saying that Hezekiah's tunnel does not exist. > >> >> That is of course a deliberate misrepresentation, but I think I can > >> >> understand why you're making it now.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> > It is not a deliberate misrepresentation. �The Biblical account of the > >> > Assyrian invasion of Judea is much more believable than any other > >> > account of the same events, including the account of Sennacherib, the > >> > Assyrian king, which is the account that atheists promote because it > >> > is different from the Biblical one. > > >> You would need to say WHY you find it more believable than the > >> mainstream account if you want any support for your views. I don't have > >> any familiarity with the events in question, so I don't have an opinion > >> either way (or some third, unexplored option), depite being an evil atheist. > > >> > But none of these ancient > >> > accounts have anything to do with Harry Potter, a character in a > >> > modern work of fiction. > > >> I agree, they don't have anything to do with it, except that drawing > >> support for the Bible's claims on this basis is like trying to support > >> Harry Potter by mentioning London. If you believe the Bible is Truth > >> because of these sites, then you should believe that Harry Potter is > >> Truth for the same reason. > > >> � �Nevertheless, all I had to do to get a > > >> > response about Harry Potter was mention Hezekiah's tunnel, a conduit > >> > for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion or the earthen ramp > >> > that the Assyrian army built to get over the city wall at Lachish. > >> > According to atheists, these evidences of the Assyrian invasion were > >> > exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school. > > >> We believe you're trying to show Biblical authority by mentioning these > >> sites. While you persist in this logical fallacy, we're going to stick > >> with the Harry Potter comparrison. :-) > > >> Anyone hysterical yet? > > >I gave up after using two further examples and some further comments. > >Spiderman and the Iliad. > > >I don't like to deal with the deliberately obtuse. > > Yes, Mr. Winn has gone beyond merely being obtuse to being intentionally > dishonest. Even the LDS and other Christians should chastise him for his > lies. I don't expect him to ever repent of his foolish dishonesty.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, I mentioned two things, a ramp and a conduit for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion of Judea. Which of those do you claim I lied about? Robert B. Winn
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 19 Jun 2008 00:19 On Jun 19, 1:18 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jun 18, 5:41�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:07:49 -0700 (PDT), asilentskeptic > > <asilentskep...(a)gmail.com> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > >On Jun 18, 12:51 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > >> > On Jun 16, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> >> rbwinn wrote: > > >> >>> On Jun 16, 1:19 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> >>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >> >>>>> On Jun 16, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >> >>>>>>> On Jun 15, 6:32?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > >> >>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:52?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi....(a)juno.com> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 9:45?pm, none <""doug\"@(none)"> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you should explain your ideas to the twelve apostles after the > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrection takes place, Darrell. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you do not know how many there are (if any) or their names > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and you just hide behind the statement above to cover your > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorance. ?Just like in your failed attempts to argue > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> physics, you do not even know enough to argue your religious > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs and have to retreat to claiming ignorance. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not claim ignorance. ?I just told Darrell to look them up > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> himself. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> You admit failure, no matter how you describe it. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Why, because Darrell is not going to look them up? ?I do not care what > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Darrell does. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> You told him to look it up because you didn't have the evidence. You ran > > >> >>>>>>>>>> away from the question.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >> >>>>>>>>> Nope. ?I told atheists a long time ago I was not going to be their > > >> >>>>>>>>> researcher. > > >> >>>>>>>> You refuse to do the research to back up your own claims. You are no > > >> >>>>>>>> one's researcher. You worship ignorance.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >> >>>>>>> Well, I did a little �better than the atheists on Hezekiah's tunnel > > >> >>>>>>> and the ramp over the city wall at Lachish. > > >> >>>>>> No. You only think you did. For some reason. Could you tell us why?- Hide quoted text - > > >> >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > >> >>>>> Yes, I can do that. �There is an actual earthen ramp built by the > > >> >>>>> Assyrian army that still exists today. �There is an actual conduit for > > >> >>>>> water between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, just as the Bible > > >> >>>>> says there is. �The problem that atheists have is that J.K. Rowling is > > >> >>>>> from northern England. �When she wrote about Harry Potter leaving from > > >> >>>>> the train station in London, probably the only thing she knew about > > >> >>>>> the train station was its name. � So comparing the Biblical account, > > >> >>>>> which can be easily verified by going to Israel and looking at the > > >> >>>>> ramp and the conduit for water, to what J.K. Rowling wrote in a book > > >> >>>>> which she said was fiction means nothing to me, however sacred it may > > >> >>>>> be to you atheists. > > >> >>>>> Robert B. Winn > > >> >>>> So, substituting ... > > >> >>>> Yes, I can do that. �There is an actual major city founded by the > > >> >>>> Romans that still exists today. �There is an actual railway station, > > >> >>>> just as Harry Potter says there is. > > >> >>>> We know that Harry Potter is fiction. You're claiming Biblical authority > > >> >>>> SOLELY on the existence of some mentioned ancient sites. We're pointing > > >> >>>> out that by the same logic, you would be forced to admit Harry Potter's > > >> >>>> authority. If can't t accept its authority, then your argument need > > >> >>>> reexamination. Maybe the Bible needs more support for its extraordinary > > >> >>>> claims.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >>>> - Show quoted text - > > >> >>> There is also a woman who calls herself J.K. Rowling who says she > > >> >>> wrote the Harry Potter books as fiction, regardless of how many > > >> >>> atheists believe them. > > >> >>> I am not claiming Biblical authority SOLEY on the existence of some > > >> >>> mentioned ancient sites. �An atheist claimed that there was nothing in > > >> >>> the Bible that could be verified by anything that exists today, so I > > >> >>> mentioned Hezekiah's tunnel. �It was not an argument. > > >> >> We'll have to take your word about the claim, but okay. You were > > >> >> correct, and I don't think that point is contended. Some things in the > > >> >> Bible are verifiable. > > > >> >>> It was information about something mentioned in the Bible that can be seen > > >> >>> today. �And as we can see, atheists still claim that Hezekiah's tunnel > > >> >>> is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, including > > >> >>> you. �No, Hezekiah's tunnel is not exactly like Harry Potter leaving > > >> >>> for wizard's school. �You atheists are not going to be able to > > >> >>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter > > >> >>> leaving for wizard's school. �As long as you continue to try to > > >> >>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter > > >> >>> leaving for wizard's school, I will continue to say that you do not > > >> >>> believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists because Harry Potter does not exist > > >> >>> and wizard's school does not exist. > > >> >> Then you would be persisting in your error. If you were simply trying to > > >> >> say that at least SOME of the Bible is true, then okay, you've made your > > >> >> point. We thought you were arguing for the accuracy of the WHOLE on the > > >> >> basis of these minor points. Okay, a whole lot of arguing over nothing > > >> >> now that we know what your claim really is. (Is that it?) > > > >> >> If you are saying that Hezekiah's > > > >> >>> tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, then > > >> >>> you are saying that Hezekiah's tunnel does not exist. > > >> >> That is of course a deliberate misrepresentation, but I think I can > > >> >> understand why you're making it now.- Hide quoted text - > > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > >> > It is not a deliberate misrepresentation. �The Biblical account of the > > >> > Assyrian invasion of Judea is much more believable than any other > > >> > account of the same events, including the account of Sennacherib, the > > >> > Assyrian king, which is the account that atheists promote because it > > >> > is different from the Biblical one. > > > >> You would need to say WHY you find it more believable than the > > >> mainstream account if you want any support for your views. I don't have > > >> any familiarity with the events in question, so I don't have an opinion > > >> either way (or some third, unexplored option), depite being an evil atheist. > > > >> > But none of these ancient > > >> > accounts have anything to do with Harry Potter, a character in a > > >> > modern work of fiction. > > > >> I agree, they don't have anything to do with it, except that drawing > > >> support for the Bible's claims on this basis is like trying to support > > >> Harry Potter by mentioning London. If you believe the Bible is Truth > > >> because of these sites, then you should believe that Harry Potter is > > >> Truth for the same reason. > > > >> � �Nevertheless, all I had to do to get a > > > >> > response about Harry Potter was mention Hezekiah's tunnel, a conduit > > >> > for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion or the earthen ramp > > >> > that the Assyrian army built to get over the city wall at Lachish. > > >> > According to atheists, these evidences of the Assyrian invasion were > > >> > exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school. > > > >> We believe you're trying to show Biblical authority by mentioning these > > >> sites. While you persist in this logical fallacy, we're going to stick > > >> with the Harry Potter comparrison. :-) > > > >> Anyone hysterical yet? > > > >I gave up after using two further examples and some further comments. > > >Spiderman and the Iliad. > > > >I don't like to deal with the deliberately obtuse. > > > Yes, Mr. Winn has gone beyond merely being obtuse to being intentionally > > dishonest. Even the LDS and other Christians should chastise him for his > > lies. I don't expect him to ever repent of his foolish dishonesty.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Well, I mentioned two things, a ramp and a conduit for water > constructed during the Assyrian invasion of Judea. Which of those do > you claim I lied about? > Robert B. Winn You lied about the reason for posting those two "facts". The bible mentions cows too, and there are cows. We'll ignore the cud-chewing rabbits for the moment, but no-one said everything mentioned in the bible was falsehood. Just that it was generally a work of fiction. You then leapt in and told everyone that "Atheists are always saying everything in the bible is false." LIE. Al
From: BuddyThunder on 19 Jun 2008 01:37 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 18, 12:47 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 17, 12:59 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jun 16, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jun 16, 1:19 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jun 16, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 15, 6:32�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:52?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 9:45?pm, none <""doug\"@(none)"> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you should explain your ideas to the twelve apostles after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrection takes place, Darrell. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you do not know how many there are (if any) or their names >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and you just hide behind the statement above to cover your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorance. ?Just like in your failed attempts to argue >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> physics, you do not even know enough to argue your religious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs and have to retreat to claiming ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not claim ignorance. ?I just told Darrell to look them up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> himself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You admit failure, no matter how you describe it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why, because Darrell is not going to look them up? ?I do not care what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Darrell does. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You told him to look it up because you didn't have the evidence. You ran >>>>>>>>>>>>>> away from the question.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. �I told atheists a long time ago I was not going to be their >>>>>>>>>>>>> researcher. >>>>>>>>>>>> You refuse to do the research to back up your own claims. You are no >>>>>>>>>>>> one's researcher. You worship ignorance.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>> Well, I did a little better than the atheists on Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>>>>>>> and the ramp over the city wall at Lachish. >>>>>>>>>> No. You only think you did. For some reason. Could you tell us why?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. There is an actual earthen ramp built by the >>>>>>>>> Assyrian army that still exists today. There is an actual conduit for >>>>>>>>> water between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, just as the Bible >>>>>>>>> says there is. The problem that atheists have is that J.K. Rowling is >>>>>>>>> from northern England. When she wrote about Harry Potter leaving from >>>>>>>>> the train station in London, probably the only thing she knew about >>>>>>>>> the train station was its name. So comparing the Biblical account, >>>>>>>>> which can be easily verified by going to Israel and looking at the >>>>>>>>> ramp and the conduit for water, to what J.K. Rowling wrote in a book >>>>>>>>> which she said was fiction means nothing to me, however sacred it may >>>>>>>>> be to you atheists. >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>> So, substituting ... >>>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. There is an actual major city founded by the >>>>>>>> Romans that still exists today. There is an actual railway station, >>>>>>>> just as Harry Potter says there is. >>>>>>>> We know that Harry Potter is fiction. You're claiming Biblical authority >>>>>>>> SOLELY on the existence of some mentioned ancient sites. We're pointing >>>>>>>> out that by the same logic, you would be forced to admit Harry Potter's >>>>>>>> authority. If can't t accept its authority, then your argument need >>>>>>>> reexamination. Maybe the Bible needs more support for its extraordinary >>>>>>>> claims.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>> There is also a woman who calls herself J.K. Rowling who says she >>>>>>> wrote the Harry Potter books as fiction, regardless of how many >>>>>>> atheists believe them. >>>>>>> I am not claiming Biblical authority SOLEY on the existence of some >>>>>>> mentioned ancient sites. An atheist claimed that there was nothing in >>>>>>> the Bible that could be verified by anything that exists today, so I >>>>>>> mentioned Hezekiah's tunnel. It was not an argument. >>>>>> We'll have to take your word about the claim, but okay. You were >>>>>> correct, and I don't think that point is contended. Some things in the >>>>>> Bible are verifiable. >>>>>>> It was information about something mentioned in the Bible that can be seen >>>>>>> today. And as we can see, atheists still claim that Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>>> is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, including >>>>>>> you. No, Hezekiah's tunnel is not exactly like Harry Potter leaving >>>>>>> for wizard's school. You atheists are not going to be able to >>>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter >>>>>>> leaving for wizard's school. As long as you continue to try to >>>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter >>>>>>> leaving for wizard's school, I will continue to say that you do not >>>>>>> believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists because Harry Potter does not exist >>>>>>> and wizard's school does not exist. >>>>>> Then you would be persisting in your error. If you were simply trying to >>>>>> say that at least SOME of the Bible is true, then okay, you've made your >>>>>> point. We thought you were arguing for the accuracy of the WHOLE on the >>>>>> basis of these minor points. Okay, a whole lot of arguing over nothing >>>>>> now that we know what your claim really is. (Is that it?) >>>>>> If you are saying that Hezekiah's >>>>>>> tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, then >>>>>>> you are saying that Hezekiah's tunnel does not exist. >>>>>> That is of course a deliberate misrepresentation, but I think I can >>>>>> understand why you're making it now.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> It is not a deliberate misrepresentation. The Biblical account of the >>>>> Assyrian invasion of Judea is much more believable than any other >>>>> account of the same events, including the account of Sennacherib, the >>>>> Assyrian king, which is the account that atheists promote because it >>>>> is different from the Biblical one. But none of these ancient >>>>> accounts have anything to do with Harry Potter, a character in a >>>>> modern work of fiction. Nevertheless, all I had to do to get a >>>>> response about Harry Potter was mention Hezekiah's tunnel, a conduit >>>>> for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion or the earthen ramp >>>>> that the Assyrian army built to get over the city wall at Lachish. >>>>> According to atheists, these evidences of the Assyrian invasion were >>>>> exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school. >>>> Rationalise the lie as much as you like, it's still a lie. No-one is >>>> denying the existence your tunnel or ramp.- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Well that is wonderful. So what happened to Harry Potter's magical >>> powers? You atheists thought Harry Potter could make the ramp and >>> conduit disappear, didn't you? >> Not at all, you're just drawing more from these sites than is reasonable >> to do so. So what happened to God's magical powers?- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Why don't you ask God? Because I see no good reason to believe in them. The tunnel and ramp's existence don't change that.
From: BuddyThunder on 19 Jun 2008 01:40
rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 18, 1:07 pm, asilentskeptic <asilentskep...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Jun 18, 12:51 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> On Jun 16, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Jun 16, 1:19 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jun 16, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 15, 6:32�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:52?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 9:45?pm, none <""doug\"@(none)"> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you should explain your ideas to the twelve apostles after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrection takes place, Darrell. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you do not know how many there are (if any) or their names >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and you just hide behind the statement above to cover your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorance. ?Just like in your failed attempts to argue >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> physics, you do not even know enough to argue your religious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs and have to retreat to claiming ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not claim ignorance. ?I just told Darrell to look them up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> himself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You admit failure, no matter how you describe it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why, because Darrell is not going to look them up? ?I do not care what >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Darrell does. >>>>>>>>>>>>> You told him to look it up because you didn't have the evidence. You ran >>>>>>>>>>>>> away from the question.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. �I told atheists a long time ago I was not going to be their >>>>>>>>>>>> researcher. >>>>>>>>>>> You refuse to do the research to back up your own claims. You are no >>>>>>>>>>> one's researcher. You worship ignorance.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>> Well, I did a little better than the atheists on Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>>>>>> and the ramp over the city wall at Lachish. >>>>>>>>> No. You only think you did. For some reason. Could you tell us why?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. There is an actual earthen ramp built by the >>>>>>>> Assyrian army that still exists today. There is an actual conduit for >>>>>>>> water between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, just as the Bible >>>>>>>> says there is. The problem that atheists have is that J.K. Rowling is >>>>>>>> from northern England. When she wrote about Harry Potter leaving from >>>>>>>> the train station in London, probably the only thing she knew about >>>>>>>> the train station was its name. So comparing the Biblical account, >>>>>>>> which can be easily verified by going to Israel and looking at the >>>>>>>> ramp and the conduit for water, to what J.K. Rowling wrote in a book >>>>>>>> which she said was fiction means nothing to me, however sacred it may >>>>>>>> be to you atheists. >>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>> So, substituting ... >>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. There is an actual major city founded by the >>>>>>> Romans that still exists today. There is an actual railway station, >>>>>>> just as Harry Potter says there is. >>>>>>> We know that Harry Potter is fiction. You're claiming Biblical authority >>>>>>> SOLELY on the existence of some mentioned ancient sites. We're pointing >>>>>>> out that by the same logic, you would be forced to admit Harry Potter's >>>>>>> authority. If can't t accept its authority, then your argument need >>>>>>> reexamination. Maybe the Bible needs more support for its extraordinary >>>>>>> claims.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>> There is also a woman who calls herself J.K. Rowling who says she >>>>>> wrote the Harry Potter books as fiction, regardless of how many >>>>>> atheists believe them. >>>>>> I am not claiming Biblical authority SOLEY on the existence of some >>>>>> mentioned ancient sites. An atheist claimed that there was nothing in >>>>>> the Bible that could be verified by anything that exists today, so I >>>>>> mentioned Hezekiah's tunnel. It was not an argument. >>>>> We'll have to take your word about the claim, but okay. You were >>>>> correct, and I don't think that point is contended. Some things in the >>>>> Bible are verifiable. >>>>>> It was information about something mentioned in the Bible that can be seen >>>>>> today. And as we can see, atheists still claim that Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>> is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, including >>>>>> you. No, Hezekiah's tunnel is not exactly like Harry Potter leaving >>>>>> for wizard's school. You atheists are not going to be able to >>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter >>>>>> leaving for wizard's school. As long as you continue to try to >>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter >>>>>> leaving for wizard's school, I will continue to say that you do not >>>>>> believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists because Harry Potter does not exist >>>>>> and wizard's school does not exist. >>>>> Then you would be persisting in your error. If you were simply trying to >>>>> say that at least SOME of the Bible is true, then okay, you've made your >>>>> point. We thought you were arguing for the accuracy of the WHOLE on the >>>>> basis of these minor points. Okay, a whole lot of arguing over nothing >>>>> now that we know what your claim really is. (Is that it?) >>>>> If you are saying that Hezekiah's >>>>>> tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, then >>>>>> you are saying that Hezekiah's tunnel does not exist. >>>>> That is of course a deliberate misrepresentation, but I think I can >>>>> understand why you're making it now.- Hide quoted text - >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> It is not a deliberate misrepresentation. The Biblical account of the >>>> Assyrian invasion of Judea is much more believable than any other >>>> account of the same events, including the account of Sennacherib, the >>>> Assyrian king, which is the account that atheists promote because it >>>> is different from the Biblical one. >>> You would need to say WHY you find it more believable than the >>> mainstream account if you want any support for your views. I don't have >>> any familiarity with the events in question, so I don't have an opinion >>> either way (or some third, unexplored option), depite being an evil atheist. >>>> But none of these ancient >>>> accounts have anything to do with Harry Potter, a character in a >>>> modern work of fiction. >>> I agree, they don't have anything to do with it, except that drawing >>> support for the Bible's claims on this basis is like trying to support >>> Harry Potter by mentioning London. If you believe the Bible is Truth >>> because of these sites, then you should believe that Harry Potter is >>> Truth for the same reason. >>> Nevertheless, all I had to do to get a >>>> response about Harry Potter was mention Hezekiah's tunnel, a conduit >>>> for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion or the earthen ramp >>>> that the Assyrian army built to get over the city wall at Lachish. >>>> According to atheists, these evidences of the Assyrian invasion were >>>> exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school. >>> We believe you're trying to show Biblical authority by mentioning these >>> sites. While you persist in this logical fallacy, we're going to stick >>> with the Harry Potter comparrison. :-) >>> Anyone hysterical yet? >> I gave up after using two further examples and some further comments. >> Spiderman and the Iliad. >> >> I don't like to deal with the deliberately obtuse.- Hide quoted text - >> > Well, you don't accept the evidence I offer, and I don't accept the > evidence you offer. I have better evidence./ Do you believe your stance is logically consistent? |