XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism
XPost: sci.skeptic
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:04:09 -0400, Ralph wrote:
.
>On 10/23/2014 11:54 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 15:48:44 -0400, Ralph wrote:
>> .
>>> On 10/20/2014 5:47 PM, mur.@.not. wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:52:52 -0400, August Rode
wrote:
>>>> .
>>>>> On 15/10/2014 1:25 PM, Malte Runz wrote:
>>>>>> "August Rode" skrev i meddelelsen news:V4w%v.386241$Q61.
3019@fx13.iad...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (snip)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excuse me?
>>>>>> (snip)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dude, your spittle is coating the inside of my monitor. Stop. Take a
>>>>>>> breath. Calm yourself. *Then* try to say something coherent.
>>>>>> Don't get me wrong, but it has been rather amusing to follow your joust
>>>>>> with mur, and to see how you become more and more puzzled by the
>>>>>> responses you get from him.
>>>>> Are we certain he isn't some sort of 'bot? He seems to deal mostly in
>>>>> handwaving generalities.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been there myself, and I see that he is
>>>>>> still, months later, talking about atheists being ashamed and how
>>>>>> atheist should say what type of proof for God (the god associated with
>>>>>> Earth, that is) must be there. Has he quoted Arthur C. Clarke yet?
>>>>> Yes, he has. I take it then that he has some kind of modus operandi.
>>>> There are basic starting lines atheists can't get as "far" as. I
encourage
>>>> them to try, and at least point them out for people, to see if any
atheist can
>>>> ever move on and get as "far" as any of the starting lines I point out
for them.
>>>> As yet none have been able to.
>>>>
>>>>> Are we sure he's not a 'bot?
>>>>>
>>>>>> If
>>>>>> you're the patient kind, I give you a few more days before you explode
>>>>>> and eventually kill file him.
>>>>> I'm not going to killfile him. At worst, I'll simply go back to ignoring
>>>>> his posts like I had been doing until a couple of days ago.
>>>> What finally got him to run and hide was that I challenged him
repeatedly
>>>> about his own claims in ways he couldn't deal with, and apparently still
can't.
>>>> After pointing out basic aspects like that God would pretty much have to
be a
>>>> very technologically advanced alien, and that given the size of the
universe it
>>>> seems more likely than not there are beings that can be considered Gods
some
>>>> places in it, at some point he made the following claims:
>>>>
>>>> "Aaaaarrrrghhhhh! I have written, at least ten times, in various posts,
that
>>>> I believe it is likely that there are very, very advanced creatures in the
>>>> universe with abilities that would seem miraculous and god-like to us. The
>>>> idea is not new to me. Why the hell do you claim that I believe the exact
>>>> opposite?" - Malte Runz
>>>>
>>>> "Don't you read what I actually write? God as an alien is NOT a new
concept
>>>> to me. It's roughly 40 years since I first heard of Erich van Dänekin and
>>>> all that crap. Don't think you're ahead of me in that department." -
Malte Runz
>>>>
>>>> Yet he coud never put it all together:
>>>>
>>>> "I must insist that you distinguish between Biblical God and
>>>> Advanced Alien God." - Malte Runz
>>>>
>>>> When I continued to challenge him as to why, he apparently learned that
he has
>>>> no idea and finally ran away entirely because the cognitive dissonance it
>>>> created in his overly challenged mind was too much for him. He also could
never
>>>> say why he could imagine "god-like" beings associated with other planets,
yet
>>>> can't imagine such a thing happening in association with this one. Most
likely
>>>> when I pointed out the things I mentioned above in order to try to act
like he
>>>> was capable of appreciating such possibilities himself he parroted things
he
>>>> heard other people say, about possibilities he has never actually been
able to
>>>> appreciate himself.
>>>>
>>>> He also made another absurd claim he could never attempt to back up:
>>>>
>>>> "I showed an example of evidence that proves god does not exist." - Malte
Runz
>>>>
>>>> He could never present the supposed evidence he boasted about. He finally
got
>>>> tired of trying to keep up the lies I challenged him about and gave up
entirely.
>>>> That seems most likely from my pov.
>>>
>>> Folks, if you wish to play with this fool, then by all means, do so.
>>> Generally, unless they provide comedic relief,
>>> I prefer to not waste a lot of time on them.
>>> So long, you god damn fool.
>> LOL!!! You people are such horrible wusses, you God Damn fucking
morons. You
>> badly wish you could defend your brothers when they are stupid god damn
fucking
>> morons, but you never can do it. All you can do is hurl some childlike
insults
>> and go run crying away when your brothers and yourselfs are revealed to be
>> stupid as shit. LOL....when your brothers' stupidity is laid out clearly
for all
>> to see, you respond with a blatant display of your own. While the original
>> stupidity is STILL in clear view and the challenges I presented to try
>> explaining HIS OWN stupidity still defeat your brother, and now you
yourself, so
>> entirely that neither of you can even attempt to address them.
>
>Gee, your god must be disappointed with you.
Not for pointing out the truth to atheists I wouldn't think, but there are
probably a number of other things I do that he dislikes. Hopefully pointing out
atheist failings and challenging them to do better, even though none of them
ever seem able to even make an attempt, will help balance other things I do but
he doesn't like. That is if he exists of course. If not then none of it means
anything anyway.
>Get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning-:))).
Just going with the flow. Did you think I should respond differently than
you do? If so, why?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
