bb9f3f88   
   XPost: alt.atheism, sci.physics, alt.astronomy   
   XPost: alt.astrology   
   From: arthurf@kxol.com   
      
   In article    
   je suis charly  wrote:   
   >   
   > In article <9fnltad2dpu26tt5lno98eq1hu3nktngtc@4ax.com>,   
   >  Attila < wrote:   
   >   
   > > I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do.  At   
   > > the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I   
   > > automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves   
   > > something must have been created.  Existence only proves itself and   
   > > does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what   
   > > that origin was.   
   >   
   > What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb   
   "create".   
   > You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word,   
   it   
   > will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.   
   >   
   > Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an   
   agent?   
   > Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and   
   nickel"   
   > because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept   
   > that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.   
      
   Lol!  You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.   
      
   > --   
   > Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments   
   > of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from   
   > coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true   
   > of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)