Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 28 Aug 2008 09:32 On Aug 27, 7:25�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Aug 27, 6:42?pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Aug 27, 10:40 am, 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 > > >> Steve is not even married, why should he be an adulterer? > >> Those prophecies were made up by ancient con.......stick this fact > >> into your usable part of the brain.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Maybe he has been looking at pornography. �Jesus said that he who > > looks on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her > > already in his heart. > > And the "Yellow brick road" leads to the Wizard's castle. > > Smiler, And Hezekiah's tunnel leads to the pool of Siloam. Robert B. Winn
From: Alex W. on 28 Aug 2008 14:15 "Yap" <hhyapster(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:288c2e51-34db-41e2-8135-f133af66ec6f(a)s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 27, 8:34 am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> "Yap" <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:4f94802f-8881-41d3-a931-aa30e106e1a0(a)p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com... >> On Aug 26, 7:47 pm, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >> > "Steve O" <nospamh...(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. >> > ;-) >> >> Hey Alex, >> You must be still single? >> Or if you are happily married, your wife must be an obedient Thai? >> But if your are unhappily married, then your message above should be >> one of the cause . >> >> ============ >> >> I'm not married. >> I still have a life. > > Yes, no wonder you have that sort of opinion which can be a source of > dispute with a partner. > But if you do get married one day, make sure you keep your ideas to > yourself if you want lasting relationship. > Of course, if you want a divorce, then that sort of opinion can be of > help. Bah, I'm not being serious. Most of the time, I poke fun at myself. If you can't laugh at yourself, life is pretty dull ....
From: Smiler on 28 Aug 2008 22:48 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 27, 7:25?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Aug 27, 6:42?pm, Yap <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Aug 27, 10:40 am, 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 >> >>>> Steve is not even married, why should he be an adulterer? >>>> Those prophecies were made up by ancient con.......stick this fact >>>> into your usable part of the brain.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>> - Show quoted text - >> >>> Maybe he has been looking at pornography. ?Jesus said that he who >>> looks on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her >>> already in his heart. >> >> And the "Yellow brick road" leads to the Wizard's castle. >> >> Smiler, > > And Hezekiah's tunnel leads to the pool of Siloam. The tunnel known as 'Hezekiah's tunnel' does indeed lead there. So what? Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: Smiler on 28 Aug 2008 23:02 Alex W. wrote: > "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwhipp(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in > message > news:44690b15-7c9e-4c2c-90fe-ee643ee6b07d(a)25g2000prz.googlegroups.com... >> On Aug 28, 10:05 am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:090e3cd3-ea26-4934-a078-e6c0f3bdd11b(a)y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >>> 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? >>> >>> ======= >>> >>> For one thing, unless you are chemically castrated or practise some >>> fairly >>> peculiar sexualorientation, there is no way any male can go through >>> life without ever thinking to himself "cor, look at that woman, I'd >>> really like >>> to sleep with her". >>> >>> Deuteronomy 4:15-18 prohibits you from making any kind of image of >>> any idol, >>> human or animal. Will you tell us that you never took even a single >>> holiday >>> snap? >> >> Or mayhap a cross? > > Borderline. > In itself, the cross is no more than an abstract symbol, similar to > the fish some idiots stick to their cars. Alex, I read that quickly as: "similar to the fish some idiots stick to their EARS." But..but...but...babel fish serve a useful purpose (except when Vogon poetry is being read aloud) :-) Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: Smiler on 28 Aug 2008 23:13
Alex W. wrote: > "Yap" <hhyapster(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:288c2e51-34db-41e2-8135-f133af66ec6f(a)s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com... >> On Aug 27, 8:34 am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> "Yap" <hhyaps...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:4f94802f-8881-41d3-a931-aa30e106e1a0(a)p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com... >>> On Aug 26, 7:47 pm, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> "Steve O" <nospamh...(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. >>>> ;-) >>> >>> Hey Alex, >>> You must be still single? >>> Or if you are happily married, your wife must be an obedient Thai? >>> But if your are unhappily married, then your message above should be >>> one of the cause . >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> I'm not married. >>> I still have a life. >> >> Yes, no wonder you have that sort of opinion which can be a source of >> dispute with a partner. >> But if you do get married one day, make sure you keep your ideas to >> yourself if you want lasting relationship. >> Of course, if you want a divorce, then that sort of opinion can be of >> help. > > Bah, I'm not being serious. > Most of the time, I poke fun at myself. > If you can't laugh at yourself, life is pretty dull .... Well there's always morons like skippy to poke fun at and laugh at. That cheers me up no end. Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279 |