XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:14:26 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 04-November-2014 11:35 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 23:32:20 +1100, Sylvia Else    
   >> wrote:   
   >> ..   
   >>> On 1/11/2014 7:05 AM, The.W@tcher wrote:   
   >>>> For years atheists have demanded what they call "evidence" of God's   
   existence,   
   >>>> when what they really have been demanding is proof. When presented with   
   evidence   
   >>>> of various types they dishonestly have denied the fact that it is   
   evidence,   
   >>> Care to list what you consider to be the evidence that's been presented?   
   >   
   >how many times has this question been asked and answered here, just so   
   >they can say it's not evidence. sheesh!   
      
       What can they think they gain by repeating that lie when we've not only   
   told   
   them we're aware that it's a lie, but we've proven it enough times that we're   
   tired of proving it? Could they possibly think it will eventually stop being a   
   lie if they lie about it enough times?   
      
   >>      Why don't you do it, so we can see if you're aware of at least that   
   much?   
   >> I'd also invite you to let us know what evidence you think there should be   
   if   
   >> God exists, but by now we've learned that you haven't got the slightest clue   
   >> about that. You seem to think some should exist for some reason you can't   
   >> explain, yet you have no clue what it should be, where it should be, or why   
   it   
   >> should be available to humans at all. Can you not appreciate how idiotic it   
   is   
   >> for anyone to be in the position you're in, when just describing it is   
   >> hilarious?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)