XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
      
   On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:49:38 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 4/29/2015 5:58 PM, mur wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:45:06 -0500, duke  wrote:   
   >> .   
   >>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:58:32 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 4/18/2015 7:24 AM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 19:07:02 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 4/10/2015 2:14 PM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:32:02 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 4/9/2015 5:28 AM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Too much hair splitting.  Evidence exists for the presence of God -   
   it can't be   
   >>>>>>>>> denied.  One may not like it, but none the less, it stares them in   
   the face,   
   >>>>>>>>> hence:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> An atheist denies   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I see that you regard consistency as too much trouble to bother with.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You see wrong.  I'm highly consistent.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Either it can't be denied, or atheists deny it.  Pick one.   
   >>>   
   >>>>> The item that nails the supposed atheist is that he rejects evidence we   
   see.   
   >>>> Yeah.  I've seen a bible too.  But Harry Potter was a more fun read.   
   >>>   
   >>> But not any truth at all.  Unless you think you can ride a broom stick.   
   >>   
   >>      These people can't distinguish between things we know are fiction and   
   things   
   >> no one could know are fiction.   
   >   
   >Really?  So we can't know that there was no world wide flood that wiped   
   >out all life on land some four thousand years ago?   
      
       Sure we can. But what I pointed out remains true none the less.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)