XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexu, ality   
   From: niunian@ymail.com   
      
   On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 21:25:39 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:   
      
   > In article , niunian    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 18:31:41 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > In article , niunian    
   >> > wrote:   
   >> >   
   >> >> On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 14:03:52 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >> >> > On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 01:16:50 -0600, David Johnston   
   >> >> >    
   >> >> > wrote:   
   >> >> > .   
   >> >> >>On Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:22:27 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >> >> >>   
   >> >> >>>On Fri, 29 May 2015 21:22:46 -0500, Mitchell Holman   
   >> >> >>> wrote:   
   >> >> >>>.   
   >> >> >>>>On Fri, 29 May 2015 20:46:01 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:03:14 -0600, David Johnston   
   >> >> >>>>> wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>>.   
   >> >> >>>>>>On Fri, 22 May 2015 12:03:38 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>>On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:03:14 -0600, David Johnston   
   >> >> >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>>>>.   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>On 5/8/2015 8:03 PM, mur wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:11:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>    
   >> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>> .   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>> In article ,   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>> 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.   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>> Let's have examples of "things no one could know are   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>> fiction".   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>> 3-5 examples would be a good start.   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>      Any of the miracles Jesus was said to have performed,   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>>      including rising from   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>> the dead, etc.   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>>>What evidence do we see of that?   
   >> >> >>>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>>    Other than what we have, what else do you like to think   
   >> >> >>>>>>>    there should be, or   
   >> >> >>>>>>>even could be? So far no one has been able to make any   
   >> >> >>>>>>>respectable attempt to answer that question, meaning that   
   >> >> >>>>>>>those who demand it not only have no reason to believe any   
   >> >> >>>>>>>should be available, but they can't even imagine what it   
   >> >> >>>>>>>could possibly be, or where, or why it should be available.   
   >> >> >>>>>>>Jeanne Douglas is a great example in a bunch of clueless   
   >> >> >>>>>>>individuals. She's convinced that if God exists there should   
   >> >> >>>>>>>be some sort of verifiable evidence of it. She has no idea   
   >> >> >>>>>>>what it should be, where it should be, why it should be   
   >> >> >>>>>>>available, or when she thinks God should or should have made   
   >> >> >>>>>>>it available, but still she thinks it should be available if   
   >> >> >>>>>>>God exists. She did make one extremely naive and completely   
   >> >> >>>>>>>unrespectable claim that God should re-grow limbs on amputees   
   >> >> >>>>>>>immediately whenever they ask him to if he exists, but that's   
   >> >> >>>>>>>the "best" she could come up with. It's also the "best" these   
   >> >> >>>>>>>people as a group could come up with, and their "best" can't   
   >> >> >>>>>>>be considered a respectable explanation at all. None of them   
   >> >> >>>>>>>have the slightest clue what they think they're trying to   
   >> >> >>>>>>>talk about when they demand evidence.   
   >> >> >>>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>>What evidence do we see of that?   
   >> >> >>>>>   
   >> >> >>>>>    When I challenge them to explain what evidence they think   
   >> >> >>>>>    there should be,   
   >> >> >>>>>where they think it should be, why they think it should be   
   >> >> >>>>>available,   
   >> >> >>>>>and when they think God should or should have made it available   
   >> >> >>>>>if he exists, they consistently reveal the fact that they don't   
   >> >> >>>>>have the slightest clue what they think they're trying to talk   
   >> >> >>>>>about. Every time!   
   >> >> >>>>   
   >> >> >>>>      .....you admit you have no evidence for your beliefs   
   >> >> >>>   
   >> >> >>>    I admit there's obviously no verifiable evidence, as   
   >> >> >>>    everybody knows.   
   >> >> >>>   
   >> >> >>>>and try to switch the burden of proof.   
   >> >> >>>   
   >> >> >>>    I challenge you people to see if any of you have any idea   
   >> >> >>>    what you think   
   >> >> >>>you're trying to talk about when you demand verifiable evidence.   
   >> >> >>>So far there hasn't been a single one of you who has the   
   >> >> >>>slightest idea at all what you imagine there should be. When I   
   >> >> >>>first started presenting the challenge I was interested in what   
   >> >> >>>you people think you are imagining, expecting to possibly get   
   >> >> >>>some interesting ideas.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)