Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 22 Jun 2008 06:56 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 21, 3:57 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 21, 3:54�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> Well, you seem to have faith in Spiderman and Harry Potter. >>>> And you don't believe that London exists.- Hide quoted text - >>> I don't? So where does the Queen of England live? >> It's your logic to defend. If you find it inconsistent, perhaps you need >> to revise it. > > I do not need to revise anything. I was not the one claiming the > reality of Harry Potter. And in so doing you deny London's existence. Or does London being in Harry Potter not really mean that the book is true?
From: BuddyThunder on 22 Jun 2008 06:58 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 21, 4:02 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 21, 8:19�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>> news:5de9de62-15db-436d-a09c-db8e21818eef(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >>>> Well, no. �Neither Stuart Dowling nor I suscribe to sorcery. >>>> Atheists, on the other hand always have something about sorcery in >>>> their signatures and nicknames similar to Ku Klux Klan members. >>>> ========== >>>> Do I now ... amazingly, I never noticed. >>>> Would you be so kind and point out these features about my nanem and >>>> signature? >>>> Or is it something invisible which I will only be able to see using my >>>> special-issue super-sikrit decoder ring? >>> Well, actually, Darrell Stec has yours included with his, since you >>> support everything Darrell Stec says. >> Aaaaaah, the old atheist hive-mind canard again. You couldn't support it >> before, will you now? >> >> YOU WILL BE... ASSIMILATED! RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Yes, Darrell's signature specifically mentions sorcery. Other > atheists call themselves witches, demons, etc. > Yours mentions thunder. That's a nickname I got as a teenager. I play the drums. Thunderous drums. And a very famous drummer is Buddy Rich. BuddyThunder. You see gods everywhere!
From: BuddyThunder on 22 Jun 2008 07:00 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 21, 4:05 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 21, 4:01 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jun 20, 3:24 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jun 18, 11:42 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 4:45 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:21d2e037-7498-4d49-bb95-5a308e107d58(a)j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 12:14 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:c44cff96-90ef-45f4-badc-413fcf95321e(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 17, 10:41�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:f8121cc3-37c1-4561-b7cc-b6292578b7f1(a)34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All atheists I talk to indicate to me that if they do not have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written record of something, then it did not exist, and if the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> record is the Bible, then it still did not exist. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Liar. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have simply told you on many occasions that the magical events >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have taken place in your Bible are uncorroborated by any >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>>>>>>> source. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile, all you can do is bleat about ramps and conduits, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> offer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>>>>> proof at all that the supposed magical events actually happened, or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> main characters depicted in the book actually existed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are either incapable of listening, or unwilling to listen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, you atheists thought Harry Potter was going to make the tunnels >>>>>>>>>>>>> and ramps disappear. >>>>>>>>>>>> We did no such thing. >>>>>>>>>>>> You simply offered that as a straw man argument to disguise your weak >>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>> I was not arguing about anything. If you atheists want to believe in >>>>>>>>>>> Harry Potter, go ahead and believe in him. I just said that there was >>>>>>>>>>> a tunnel between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, exactly the way >>>>>>>>>>> three books of the Old Testament say there is, and there is an earthen >>>>>>>>>>> ramp over the city wall at the ruins of Lachish. You want to be cute >>>>>>>>>>> about it, so go ahead and be cute. >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>> Now explain why the existence of this tunnel and ramp and the fact that they >>>>>>>>>> are mentioned in the bible is evidence that the rest of the magic story is >>>>>>>>>> real. >>>>>>>>> So what you would have me believe is that there are only two things >>>>>>>>> mentioned in the Bible that are real, an earthen ramp and a conduit >>>>>>>>> for water. I think that there are other things mentioned in the Bible >>>>>>>>> that are real. >>>>>>>> I'm sure there are other things that are true in the Bible, but they >>>>>>>> require independent verification before we'll know. >>>>>>>> As you well know, London exists just as decribed in Harry Potter, but >>>>>>>> that's no reason to accept flying broomsticks. Flying broomsticks would >>>>>>>> require independent evidence. We don't have any. So there's no >>>>>>>> compelling reason to believe in it. >>>>>>>> Jerusalem exists, just as described in the Bible, but that's no reason >>>>>>>> to accept a six-literal-day creation. A six day creation would require >>>>>>>> independent evidence. We don't have any. We have overwhelming evidence >>>>>>>> for an old earth. So there's no compelling reason to believe in a young >>>>>>>> earth.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>> Well, you atheists insist on relativity of time except in one >>>>>>> circumstance, the creation of the earth. When it comes to dinosaurs, >>>>>>> you insist on absolute time, just like Isaac Newton. >>>>>> You think that a 6000 year old planet that looks 4.5 billion years old >>>>>> can be accounted for by the theory of relativity? Could you explain the >>>>>> mechanism in layman's terms? I'm not an expert.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> Well, as I said, you atheists do not want relativity of time applied >>>>> to this particular thing, which the Bible does in more than one >>>>> place. There are two definitions of time at the present, only one of >>>>> which scientists will discuss, what they call local time or scientific >>>>> time. This is defined by a certain number of transition of a cesium >>>>> isotope molecule. Then Einstein's theory shows that if a cesium >>>>> isotope molecule is moving relative to another cesium isotope >>>>> molecule, then the time of its transitions will be slower than the >>>>> transitions of the molecule that is not moving. So time is relative, >>>>> except when scientists are talking about dinosaurs or the time of the >>>>> planet earth. >>>> Where can I read the peer-reviewed publication of this fascinating new >>>> theory? That's quite something, you should write it up if no-one has, >>>> it's Nobel Prize material!- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> I write it up all the time in sci.physics.relativity. >> Posting in a usenet group is not an effective way of getting a >> challenging new theory taken seriously. Why wouldn't you go through >> accepted scientific channels? Do you not really believe your new theory?- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > I am the only one who does. I would suspect that sometime in the > coming centuries that someone in science will decide to think about > time, and then it will be accepted. Right now scientists are making > too much money selling Einstein's idea. Read that back slowly and tell me if it sounds kooky.
From: BuddyThunder on 22 Jun 2008 07:02 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 21, 4:09 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 21, 8:16�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote in message >>>> news:6c4ja8F3erpl2U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>> If you think that Harry Potter is fiction then you must also think that >>>>> London doesn't exist right? >>>>> You'd better tell that to all of the people who live there, it may come as >>>>> a surprise to them. >>>> Like the esteemed Mr Winn Esq, London councils have no doubt whatsoever >>>> about the existence of London. �At least, that is what they profess when >>>> they send out council tax demands. >>> Taxes. Well, that is something that should convince some atheists. >>> Taxes are something they will never deny. >> Are taxes evidence that any gods exist?- Hide quoted text - >> > Taxes are evidence that atheists exist. Yeah, Christians don't like to pay their taxes, do they?
From: BuddyThunder on 22 Jun 2008 07:03
rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 21, 4:10 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 21, 7:59 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>> news:1f62d629-c363-4da7-9dfb-e564fb275e38(a)e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >>>>> On Jun 21, 4:03 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jun 20, 3:25 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 11:45 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 12:13�pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:87b0e53d-5a57-49b1-b3d0-a331560793fb(a)c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 17, 10:37 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:d6db0a86-413e-4057-a2cf-40363e9b8a34(a)a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well some people might not be convinced by your video footage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are many people who believe that the Apollo moon landings were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faked. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not my fault if other people have mental health problems or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gullible enough to swallow any wild- assed claim they come >>>>>>>>>>>>>> across. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, if my video footage is insufficient evidence, what makes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2,000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> year old book o' blood and that silly Mormon bible more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> convincing? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, you atheists did not do very well with regard to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian >>>>>>>>>>>>> invasion of Judea. >>>>>>>>>>>> I can assure you we had absolutely nothing to do with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The Bible seems to have its facts a lot straighter >>>>>>>>>>>>> than you atheists do. >>>>>>>>>>>> There are very few facts in the bible at all. >>>>>>>>>>>> It is a magic story based around real (and sometimes non- >>>>>>>>>>>> existent ) >>>>>>>>>>>> locations. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Was there some other specific thing that you >>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists wanted to discuss? >>>>>>>>>>>> How about your inability to differentiate fantasy from reality? >>>>>>>>>>> I think I do fairly well. Hezekiah's tunnel is real. The earthen >>>>>>>>>>> ramp over the city wall at Lachish is real. Harry Potter is not >>>>>>>>>>> real. >>>>>>>>>> Ah, but London is! Is the Bible? It may be, we haven't refuted >>>>>>>>>> anything >>>>>>>>>> yet. But your logic is not supportive of your claims.- Hide quoted >>>>>>>>>> text - >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>> I actually know a man from London, England. I make doors and window >>>>>>>>> frames for him sometimes. He soes not believe in Harry Potter either. >>>>>>>> Then how can you logically deny that London even exists?!- Hide quoted >>>>>>>> text - >>>>>>> Actually Harry Potter is what does not exist. I know this will come >>>>>>> as a shock to the atheist community. >>>>>> It's your logic, you defend it!- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> It does not need defended. Harry Potter either exists or he does >>>>> not. You are free to believe he exists if that is what you want to >>>>> do. >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> If you think that Harry Potter is fiction then you must also think that >>>> London doesn't exist right? >>>> You'd better tell that to all of the people who live there, it may come as a >>>> surprise to them. >>> It was your idea. Why don't you tell them? >> Ah, but it's YOUR idea. We're just reapplying your logic in defence of >> the Bible to defending Harry Potter. The logical consequences are your >> problem, we don't believe such silliness. Neither the Bible, nor Harry >> Potter.- Hide quoted text - >> > > Well, someday you will come to realize that Harry Potter does not need > defending. He is only a fictional character in a book. Like Huckleberry Finn and Jesus? |