XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexu, ality   
   From: niunian@ymail.com   
      
   On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 07:39:26 -0700, Jeanne Douglas wrote:   
      
   > In article , niunian    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> 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.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)