XPost: sac.politics, alt.atheism, alt.politics.homosexuality   
   From: nospam@here.thanks   
      
   On 06/03/2015 07:05, Jeanne Douglas wrote:   
   > In article , mur wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 00:42:38 -0800, Jeanne Douglas    
   >> wrote:   
   >>> In article , mur wrote:   
   >>>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:04:24 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >>>>    
   >>>> wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >>> Oh, so you do have evidence of "God's" existence. Please present it.   
   >>   
   >>      What has been presented for you in the past?   
   >   
   > Not evidence. Not ever. That's the whole point.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> The idea that if   
   >>>>      God   
   >>>> does exist and Jesus did the things recorded in the Bible, those records   
   >>>> are   
   >>>> not   
   >>>> evidence, is stupidity in the extreme.   
   >>>   
   >>> Do you have any evidence that this Jesus person ever existed? There's   
   >>> certainly none in the real world.   
   >>   
   >>      You have no idea what more evidence you wish you could pretend there   
   >>      "should   
   >> be" than what there is.   
   >   
   > Care to translate that word salad into English?   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> The idea that if God does exist and   
   >>>> has   
   >>>> performed countless miracles that people have noticed and recorded, those   
   >>>> miracles are not evidence is also stupidity in the extreme.   
   >>>   
   >>> What the fuck are you talking about? Do you have any evidence that any   
   >>> of these miracles ever happened?   
   >>   
   >>      I've made you aware of some.   
   >   
   > That's a lie. I'm still waiting for evidence from you for ANYthing.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> Even an atheist   
   >>>> should be able to figure that much out, but if they can't then it's more   
   >>>> evidence of their own stupidity.   
   >>>   
   >>> Still waiting for you to provide evidence of ANYthing.   
   >>   
   >>      That lie is more evidence of you being evidence.   
   >   
   > More gibberish. Sorry, but I don't have a gibberish to English   
   > dictionary.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>> People believe all kinds of insane shit, so your statement is really   
   >>>>> stupid.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>      You are evidence no matter how you try to wiggle out of it and no   
   >>>>      matter   
   >>>>      how   
   >>>> much you hate the fact that you are.   
   >>>   
   >>> I "are" what?   
   >>   
   >>      What did I point out for you?   
   >   
   > What does that question have to do with my question? Please answer my   
   > question: "I 'are' what?"   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>>> on supposedly   
   >>>>>>>> free "thinking" human minds. YOU ARE evidence.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> How am I evidence?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>      It's obvious that if there truly was no evidence then there would   
   >>>>>>      be   
   >>>>>>      nothing   
   >>>>>> for anyone to believe in.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Nonsense. People believe insane shti all the time.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>      Always for reasons. The reasons are evidence.   
   >>>   
   >>> Wrong again.   
   >>   
   >>      Wrong.   
   >   
   > Contradicting me doesn't make you right.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> You have no evidence that   
   >>>> there's no evidence, or even evidence that the evidence you lie about not   
   >>>> existing is all false.   
   >>>   
   >>> Wow, the gibberish is really getting thick.   
   >>   
   >>      You consistently show that you're a moron regarding this topic.   
   >   
   > Yes, I apologize for not speaking Gibberish. (Oh, you walked right into   
   > that one.)   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> The "best" you could have is your own faith in nothing   
   >>>> but a guess that it's all false, or even more stupidly possibly somehow   
   >>>> your   
   >>>> own   
   >>>> honest faith that it doesn't exist at all.   
   >>>   
   >>> And now it's complete and total world salad.   
   >>>   
   >>> Here's a thought--think about what you're trying to say and see if what   
   >>> you're typing actually gets that idea across in a sane manner.   
   >>   
   >>      Try to translate that into English.   
   >   
   > Stop speaking Gibberish.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>> Since billions of people do believe that means   
   >>>>>> there   
   >>>>>> IS evidence,   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Of course, it absolutely is not.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>      So far I still find it impossible to "believe" you're honestly stupid   
   >>>>      enough   
   >>>> to have faith in that absurd "idea" being true, but I do consider the   
   >>>> possibility that you really are. So far though it still seems more likely   
   >>>> that   
   >>>> you're more dishonest than stupid.   
   >>>   
   >>> What the fuck are you babbling about now?   
   >>   
   >>      Your mind apparently can't comprehend, so maybe you really are more   
   >>      stupid   
   >> than dishonest.   
   >   
   > What the fuck are you talking about?   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>> even if every bit of that evidence is false and supports   
   >>>>>> something   
   >>>>>> that does not exist. The fact that you can't get as "far" as that most   
   >>>>>> basic   
   >>>>>> of   
   >>>>>> starting lines is evidence of something restricting your brain from   
   >>>>>> getting   
   >>>>>> that   
   >>>>>> "far". Since you don't seem to be a retard and seem to have at least   
   >>>>>> average   
   >>>>>> intelligence, what is preventing you from progressing beyond the moron   
   >>>>>> level   
   >>>>>> in   
   >>>>>> regards to the possibility of there being a God associated with this   
   >>>>>> planet?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Who says I haven't considered the "possibility of there being a god   
   >>>>> associated with this planet"? I've considered it and realized that until   
   >>>>> provided with evidence of the existence of any god, it's a huge waste of   
   >>>>> my time to think about it any more.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>      That means you haven't done it successfully.   
   >>>   
   >>> Define "successfully" in this case.   
   >>   
   >>      In this case it would mean that you were able to do what you claim to   
   >>      have   
   >> tried to do, instead of failing entirely as you obviously did IF you ever   
   >> honestly made the attempt. My guess is you're lying about having made the   
   >> attempt, but IF you did there's no doubt at all that you failed completely.   
   >>   
   >> You are NOT mentally capable. You never were, and probably never will be.   
   >   
   > Now you're just confessing that you've lost the argument because you've   
   > resorted to complete and total nonsense.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> The fact that you can't   
   >>>> appreciate that fact makes you even more evidence for the reason I keep   
   >>>> pointing   
   >>>> out for you.   
   >>>   
   >>> What "fact"? What "evidence"?   
   >>   
   >>      Damn you show yourself to be more and more stupid all the time.   
   >   
   > See, insulting me instead of answering my question is a confession that   
   > you've been lying all along. Since your writing is pure Gibberish, you   
   > had to confess to confirm my suspicions.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>> Do you have actual evidence? Something objective and VERIFIABLE by any   
   >>>>> person?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>      I've told you one personal experience,   
   >>>   
   >>> Not objective and VERIFIABLE then, is it?   
   >>   
   >>      It's sure good enough.   
   >   
   > No, it absolutely is not good enough.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>   and given you links to countless   
   >>>> more.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nope, not one piece of objective and VERIFIABLE evidence ever.   
   >>   
   >>      How would you like to pretend you think the evidence should be able to   
   be   
   >> verified, do you have any clue at all about that?   
   >   
   > Because that's the definition of evidence.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)