Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Alex W. on 27 Aug 2008 07:12 "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message news:6hirf0FmdtjfU1(a)mid.individual.net... > > > "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:6hi8vcFm1p0tU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message >> news:6hhhfiFltptvU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> >>> The last time I set fire to a barbecue, it certainly didn't end up clean >>> afterwards. >>> >> >> Yeah, but who cares? >> It's an immutable law of nature that the wife cleans the barbecue after >> you're done cooking. >> ;-) >> > > Ooh, Alex, remember what happened when you last made a misogynous > statement? > You had your head bitten off by all the girls, didn't you? > ;-) It is misogynist to poke fun at males?
From: Alex W. on 27 Aug 2008 07:15 "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwhipp(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:d556c247-efce-4e7b-8de7-d18280155cdf(a)25g2000prz.googlegroups.com... > I actually got a nice glossy offer of a buybull recently, and my first > thought was fuel. That's a waste. Nice thin bible paper is perfect for use in the dunny. If you want fuel, burn your junk mail and mail-order catalogues. That's what it's there for.
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Aug 2008 07:41 Alex W. wrote: > "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message > news:6hirf0FmdtjfU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:6hi8vcFm1p0tU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message >>> news:6hhhfiFltptvU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>>> The last time I set fire to a barbecue, it certainly didn't end up clean >>>> afterwards. >>>> >>> Yeah, but who cares? >>> It's an immutable law of nature that the wife cleans the barbecue after >>> you're done cooking. >>> ;-) >>> >> Ooh, Alex, remember what happened when you last made a misogynous >> statement? >> You had your head bitten off by all the girls, didn't you? >> ;-) > > It is misogynist to poke fun at males? Nope. That's gene sifting. /BAH
From: rbwinn on 27 Aug 2008 09:43 On Aug 27, 4:10�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:045ba16c-666c-42ba-8eeb-c028260e7d31(a)c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > > It is the people who bring the calamities. �God said that if they keep > His commandments, they will have His protection. �The people say, No, > we want the calamities. > > ========= > > And it doesn't bother you at all that He passed so many commandments that > they are impossible to keep, that He is setting Man up to fail? �You are > happy to play a game that is rigged? Which commandments are impossible to keep? Robert B. Winn
From: Steve O on 27 Aug 2008 04:40
"Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwhipp(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:89bf4f65-862d-4371-91b8-ee9e57563b8a(a)q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 27, 12:40 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >> On Aug 26, 6:44 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >> >> >> >> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >> > On Aug 22, 11:11 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 >> >> > No, I did not. I objected to your assertion that that's all you've >> > been doing and that sci.physics.relativity is the only newsgroup >> > you've been posting to. If you want a specific claim to attempt to >> > refute, how about; >> > You, rbwinn, are systematically lying about what others say and you've >> > said in these discussions. >> >> > Al- Hide quoted text - >> >> > - Show quoted text - >> >> Well, Al, I am sorry you feel that was. Maybe we could discuss the >> prophecy that if a man denies God and asks to see a sign, that man is >> an adulterer. Steve suddenly left when that subject came up. >> Robert B. Winn > > That's probably because you saying that makes it perfectly clear to > all that you've completely lost your mind. > > It makes no sense. What exactly did you want to discuss about it? > > Al He thinks I have left. He doesn't have the wit to understand that I have simply kill-filed him, Al. It was interesting when he came up with that "If you deny God- you must be an adulterer" thing. Pity he doesn't understand that is exactly the kind of statement which demonstrates their way of thinking. The critical reasoning skills of these people are truly appalling and doesn't differ much from the days when they were running around burning old women and saying "Only a witch would deny they are a witch!" I kill- filed the sad sack when his posts started to become a little sinister. He had started talking about how he wasn't interested in society, wants the world to end etc. Coupled with his mental health problems, that's a dangerous mix. I didn't want to push him any further. I've seen what happens to those type of people before, and in Winn's case, all of the indicators are there. -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence "I like Jesus, but he loves me, so it's awkward" |