Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Yap on 23 Aug 2008 02:17 On Aug 22, 9:11 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Aug 21, 10:56 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > On Aug 22, 2:25 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 21, 8:51 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > On Aug 21, 3:08 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 20, 9:58 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 21, 1:23 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Aug 20, 7:30 pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> Well, I studied post graduate in British university at Manchester city > > > > > > > > previously. > > > > > > > > There were no European propaganda but most people did not bother to > > > > > > > > talk in Christianity, due to the fact that the tales were so obviously > > > > > > > > invented. > > > > > > > > British loons in most cases got cornered when being questioned about > > > > > > > > the inability of their god to do reasonable things. > > > > > > > > They evaded and switched subjects, like you did. > > > > > > > > I don't evade and switch subjects. The subject is relativity of > > > > > > > time. That is what we discuss here in sci.physics.relativity. > > > > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > > > > No. The discussion was started by a Mitch who began discussing the > > > > > > subject line in typical retarded fashion. And your first comment was > > > > > > not in any way connected to relativity. > > > > > > How many times do you need to be corrected on this lie? > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > So, Al, are you saying that we are not allowed to discuss relativity > > > > > of time here in sci.physics.relativity? > > > > > No, I did not say that. In no way should that be infered from my > > > > comments. Your attempt to say that that is what I've said is a > > > > typical representation of your lying and attempts to sway > > > > conversations to suggest you are being repressed in some way, which > > > > again is typical of both christians and paranoid schitzos. > > > > > > How are you going to enforce > > > > > your edict? > > > > > I'm not, as it's not an edict. I am going to correct you everytime I > > > > spot you lying outright about what others or yourself have said. > > > > Well, your claim is that we do not discuss relativity of time in > > > sci.physics.relativity. > > > No, that is NOT my claim. > > Well, what is your claim, Al? I said that we discuss relativity of > time in sci.physics.relativity, and you immediately objected to that > statement and said that you were not going to allow it. > Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - In this forum of alt.atheism, you can discuss many subjects. Even when someone wish to talk religion like you get entertained, but will be clobbered hard. In the case of relativity of time, you don't seem to have the required reasoning and have not been explaining clearly your position or the equation. You said past two year scientists from the sci.physics.relativity were pissed off with you. That tells you a lot, right?
From: Steve O on 23 Aug 2008 02:18 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:8a10f131-39a6-4f41-96e1-fcec5888a0d9(a)8g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >> > Well, basically, you say that you think you have something better, but >> > when asked about what you have, you say that you have the ability to >> > oppose religion. �So without religion, what do you have? >> > Robert B. Winn >> >> No religion? >> > Right. You do not seem to have anything of your own. > Robert B. Winn We have lots of things. We just don't have religion. Religion isn't everything, you know, no matter how much you think it is. -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence
From: Steve O on 23 Aug 2008 02:20 "Smiler" <Smiler(a)Joe.King.com> wrote in message news:D0Krk.306873$7f3.22242(a)newsfe23.ams2... > rbwinn wrote: >> On Aug 21, 7:16?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> On Aug 20, 9:11?pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Wrong. >>>>> The Nazi party was a past organization trying to elevate the >>>>> financial status of German people. The Jews were trying to dominate >>>>> then, like the current Jews in the US. >>>>> There is no more influence of Roman culture in this world now, let >>>>> alone Jewish. >>> >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Aug 20, 7:34 pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> You are wrong here. >>>>>>> I know Roman history were taught in school and not Jewish >>>>>>> history. >>> >>>>>> That is correct. ?So who do you think had the greatest influence >>>>>> on Europe, the Jews or the Nazi Party? ? The Nazi and Fascist >>>>>> Parties were patterned after Roman government. >>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text - >>> >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>>> For crying out loud, Yap. ?Haven't you ever heard of the Holy Roman >>>> empire? ?Where do you think it was? >>>> With regard to the Fascist Party, it was advertised as being Roman >>>> government. >>> >>> Mussolini's fascist party certainly was a 'Roman' government, as it >>> governed from Rome and was led by a Roman Catholic. >>> >> Well, it was patterned after ancient Roman government, which was a >> pagan government. > > I suggest that you take that up with Julius Caesar. When he sees him. -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence
From: Yap on 23 Aug 2008 02:47 On Aug 23, 2:18 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:8a10f131-39a6-4f41-96e1-fcec5888a0d9(a)8g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > >> > Well, basically, you say that you think you have something better, but > >> > when asked about what you have, you say that you have the ability to > >> > oppose religion. So without religion, what do you have? > >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> No religion? > > > Right. You do not seem to have anything of your own. > > Robert B. Winn > > We have lots of things. > We just don't have religion. > Religion isn't everything, you know, no matter how much you think it is. > > -- > Steve O > a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) > B.A.A.W.A. > Convicted by Earthquack > Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence Yes. Rbwinn needs the religion and all he has is his god. But since we are the one with healthier and more brain cells, he is not the one actually wanted by his god. I do not know if he understands the implication.
From: Alex W. on 23 Aug 2008 04:29
"Smiler" <Smiler(a)Joe.King.com> wrote in message news:PSJrk.306871$7f3.48877(a)newsfe23.ams2... > rbwinn wrote: >> On Aug 21, 6:57?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> On Aug 20, 7:41?pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Some important points: >>>>> 1). You know revelations are nonsense and had never been correct. >>>>> 2). Why would a temple be so difficult to build? >>> >>>> There is a Muslim mosque called the Dome of the Rock located on the >>>> temple site. >>> >>> Are there any other sorts of Mosque? >> >> Why do you ask? > > Because I've never heard of a mosque that wasn't Muslim. Mosque-ow? Mosque-rat? |