XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 15-November-2014 8:42 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
      
   > On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:23:22 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   > ..   
   >> On 14-November-2014 10:45 PM, Chicken Runz wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> "felix_unger" skrev i meddelelsen   
   >>> news:ccm0piFgsiqU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>   
   >>> (snip)   
   >> you see, the trouble in trying to talk sense to atheists, is that they   
   >> have no sense. just stuck in their mindset rut, not able to see the   
   >> forest for the trees.   
   >>   
   >>>> I've concluded, following recent exchanges, that this guy is dishonest.   
   >>> There is nothing dishonest about saying that a story about a crippled   
   >>> hand being healed in 1858 doesn't cut it as evidence. There is nothing   
   >>> dishonest about saying that a 67 pixels out of focus grainy blob in   
   >>> photo is not evidence for anything, let alone alien spaceships. It's   
   >>> not dishonest to laugh at people who believe that medieval tales of   
   >>> Dog Heads is evidence of the existence of DH's.   
   >>>   
   >>> The dishonesty becomes apparent when you, who claim that everythining   
   >>> I just mentioned is indeed evidence,   
   >> I've told you over and over again what my position is. not my fault if   
   >> you can't/won't accept it. I posted this just yesterday, 13/11/14, which   
   >> you completely ignored:   
   >>   
   >> ".. if you had any common sense, you would use it. firstly, we have to   
   >> consider ALL factors about anything to decide what the situation   
   >> actually is. belief CAN be evidence, as I will try to explain, but in   
   >> 99.9% of cases belief is because of what evidence exists. In the case of   
   >> Christianity, the religion we are most familiar with in the West, apart   
   > >from Judaism, the beliefs are based on the bible and it's teaching, and   
   >> specifically the teachings of Jesus, and what is written about Jesus.   
   >> but we could then go on to say that the billions of christians are also   
   >> evidence, because if you (a person) had not heard of the bible, or   
   >> anything about Christianity, the fact that so many ppl believed   
   >> something would be evidence that there is something to believe in. and   
   >> when you take everything about Christianity into consideration.. ie. the   
   >> bible, the testimony of religious experiences, reports of miracles,   
   >> various texts and books, etc., that is all evidence for the existence of   
   >> the Christian God. likewise there is evidence for God (in general, if   
   >> you like), life, the universe, is evidence along with the literally   
   >> billions of ppl who believe in God in various ways. it's all just plain   
   >> common sense. ..."   
   >>   
   >>> refuse to say whether you actually believe your own words or not.   
   >> and I've told you twice at least that what I believe, and the use of a   
   >> pseudonym, is immaterial to the validity of my arguments or any points I   
   >> make. and what did you do? you just snipped and ran.   
   >>   
   >>>> when confronted with solid irrefutable argument or fact he just snips   
   >>>> and runs away. ...   
   >>> Do you believe that water from a well in France can heal people?   
   >>> Do you believe in miracles in general?   
   >>> Do you believe a grainy blob or a shaky video from 1954 is evidence of   
   >>> alien UFO's visting Earth?   
   >>> Do you believe that once Dog Heads lived in southern India?   
   >>> Do you believe that gods exist?   
   >> see above.   
   >>   
   >>> You drag a tail of unanswered questions behind you that'd make   
   >>> Halley's Comet proud. But if you dare to answer those questions, and   
   >>> the ones to come, I'll consider picking up the debate again.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>> ... he doesn't have the decency to admit it when something that is   
   >>>> said it true. ...   
   >>> What truths?   
   >> like the fact that whether I disclose in a public forum what I   
   >> personally believe is irrelevant to the veracity of my arguments. like   
   >> the fact that you're too stupid to even suspect that a person might have   
   >> good reason(s) for not wanting to disclose their identity or beliefs.   
   >> like the fact that ppl may have good reasons to believe as they do. like   
   >> that fact that just because you don't accept as evidence what is clearly   
   >> evidence doesn't mean that it isn't. there is evidence for UFO's,   
   >> Nessie, and God. what do you suppose the Air force and NASA investigate   
   >> if not the evidence for UFO's and alien life forms to determine if they   
   >> exist or not?   
   >      LOL! It does seem that even the most stupid of atheists should be able   
   to   
   > comprehend that. But then that same thing applies to miracles and stories in   
   the   
   > Bible, and saints, as well as UFOs, Nessie and Big Foot. If Chicken is   
   honestly   
   > as stupid as he acts he is one incredibly stupid individual, as chickens are.   
      
   I think you're being rather unkind to chickens. chickens are smarter   
      
   > Then again even if he's not honestly as stupid as he's acting like he is, he   
   > still has to be impressively stupid to pretend he's as stupid as he's   
   pretending   
   > to be. And to what gain? What does he think he could possibly gain by   
   continuing   
   > to lie to you that there's no evidence when you not only have told him   
   directly   
   > that you know he's lying, but also given examples proving that he is as you   
   just   
   > did above?   
   >   
   >> like the fact that that I don't have to prove that God,   
   >> Nessie, or UFO's exist to know that there is evidence for them. like the   
   >> fact that I don't have to defend any evidence for something and prove   
   >> that it proves anything, as you keep asking me to do, to know that it is   
   >> evidence.   
   >      Again the question of whether he could honestly be too stupid to   
   > comprehend...   
   >   
   >> like the fact that you lie and misrepresent mine and murs   
   >> position from time to time, and even make contradictory remarks about   
   >> what you yourself believe as mur has quoted you on. like the fact that   
   >> you deny such truths, or snip and run with confronted with them. etc.,   
   >> etc., etc.,   
   >      I did some quick poking around to see how badly he's lying about there   
   being   
   > no evidence of dog headed people. It turns out that again he is lying   
   horribly   
   > blatantly for whatever reason when he claims there's no evidence:   
   >   
   > http://is.gd/fgOc9C   
   > http://is.gd/9qpiFd   
   > _________________________________________________________   
   > "The Travels of Marco Polo, Volume 2   
   > .. . .   
   > Angamanain is a very large Island. The people are without a king and are   
   > Idolaters, and no better than wild beasts. And I assure you all the men of   
   this   
   > Island of Angamanain have heads like dogs, and teeth and eyes likewise; in   
   fact,   
   > in the face they are all just like big mastiff dogs! They have a quantity of   
   > spices; but they are a most cruel generation, and eat everybody that they can   
   > catch, if not of their own race."   
   >   . . .   
   > http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12410/12410.txt   
   > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)