XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 06-October-2014 9:45 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
      
   > On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 13:04:28 +0200, Chicken Runz squawked::   
   > ..   
   >> "Mitchell Holman"  skrev i meddelelsen   
   >> news:XnsA3BAD81DE68E6noemailattnet@216.196.121.131...   
   >>   
   >> (snip)   
   >>   
   >>>      Are you "ashamed" of your faith that Odin   
   >>> doesn't exist? Are you "ashamed" of your faith   
   >>> that Vishnu doesn't exist?   
   >>>   
   >>>      Or is your denial of those deities based   
   >>> on something different than no evidence of   
   >>> their existence?   
   >> mur is an utter nut-job, and apart from the occational BJ from felix_unger   
   >> he is all alone in the world.   
      
   he's not. there are far more theists and agnostics in the world than   
   atheists   
      
   >> He has been droning on and on about atheist   
   >> being 'ashamed' about their belief that there is no god   
      
   many are, because getting them to admit to it is like pulling teeth   
      
   >      Most of the atheists in these ngs HAVE denied their belief that God   
   doesn't   
   > exist. And in fact YOU were the first, and one of the very few, who was not   
   > ashamed to confess your own faith:   
   >   
   > "There is no god." - Malte Runz   
   >   
   > "How many times do I need to write: "I believe no gods exist" for you to   
   > realize that nobody is ashamed of neither not believing in gods, nor   
   > believing gods do not exist?" - Malte Runz   
   >   
   >> or their faith in there being no evidence for God,   
   >      YOU have made it known you have faith in that too:   
   >   
   > "the utter lack of evidence is enough for me to believe that there are no   
   gods.   
   > Anywhere, anywhen." - Malte Runz   
   >   
   > though now it appears you're ashamed of it and are now trying to crawl away   
   from   
   > yourself.   
   >   
   >> and he insists that atheists must be able   
   >> to say what evidence for a god there should be.   
   >      LOL!!! Because they certainly should have some clue what they think they   
   > think.   
      
   they should at least be able to say what it is they don't believe in   
      
   >   It's still amusing that atheists believe there should be some sort of   
   > evidence, and not just evidence but...LOL...verifiable evidence of God's   
   > existence if he does exist. They don't have any clue at all what they think   
   it   
   > should be, or where they think it should be, or why they think it should be   
   > there...LOL....but they still think "it" should be somewhere for some reason.   
   > This is another example where just describing the position you people are in   
   is   
   > hilarious.   
   >   
   >> Ignore him and move on, that's my advice. Let him feel superior if it gives   
   >> him a kick.   
   >      It's not that I'm on a superior level. It's that you atheists are on an   
   > especially low level   
      
   sub-normal.. :)   
      
   > to the point of not knowing what you think you think, the   
   > evidence issue being an especially clear example. You in particular are a   
   very   
   > pathetic case. You have claimed that the following concepts have entered your   
   > overly restricted little brain:   
   > _________________________________________________________   
   > "I don't think God could be a native to Earth." - Malte Runz   
   >   
   > "I don't think any naitive to Earth has any powers, supernatural or just   
   > natural, that makes him/her/it appear godlike." - 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   
   >   
   > "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   
   > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯   
   > butt you have faith that no such being could be associated with Earth, yet   
   you   
   > can't give any respectable explanation as to WHY. It's because I challenge   
   you   
   > on such things and YOUR OWN cluelessness defeats when you are challenged   
   > resulting in congnitive dissonance in your overly challenged little mind,   
   that   
   > you have surrendered and are afraid of responding to me any more. Cognitive   
   > dissonance is very uncomfortable, and the only way you have of keeping it   
   down   
   > as much as possible is to hide away from things that trigger it like the   
   > challenges I present you with.   
   >      Another example of you not know what you think you think is this   
   problem you   
   > kept having and most likely still do have:   
   >   
   > "I must insist that you distinguish between Biblical God and   
   > Advanced Alien God." - Malte Runz   
   >   
   > LOL...that one is still amusing. Even after I pointed out for you a number of   
   > times that it would be THE SAME BEING, and probably gave you examples   
   involving   
   > the sun and moon etc time after time, you never could comprehend. Nor could   
   you   
   > explain how YOU think anyone should "distinguish between" God and himself. I   
   > believe challenging you on your own horrendous ignorance about that   
   particular   
   > aspect was the final straw that caused you to run sobbing away and be afraid   
   to   
   > try responding to any more challenges for you to try to explain YOUR SELF.   
   >   
   >> Fuck 'im!   
      
   what a compelling argument, lol!   
      
   >      Another way that I pointed out how you defeated yourself and the   
   challenge   
   > for you to try to explain yourself defeated you entirely was in response to   
   this   
   > lie:   
   >   
   > "I showed an example of evidence that proves god does not exist." - Malte   
   Runz   
   >   
   > There is NO "evidence that proves god does not exist" and certainly nothing   
   > you've shown has or could do so. You lied blatantly when you made the claim,   
   and   
   > couldn't even pretend to present the supposed "example" when challenged   
   directly   
   > to try doing so. You have proven yourself to be a horrible wuss and a blatant   
   > liar, so fuck you!   
   >   
   >> You'll never get him to concede a point even if it is   
   >> blatantly obvious to everybody, himself included, that he is wrong. Never,   
   >> ever, ever...   
   >      You neglected to mention that I often challenged you to TRY TO explain   
   what   
   > you want me to think I'm wrong about. The simple challenge to try to explain   
   > "Like what?" has completely defeated you and others of your ilk a number of   
   > times and afawk none of you could give examples and provide the evidence   
   that I   
   > was wrong. Never, ever, ever... Also you never conceded a point or admitted   
   that   
   > you have no idea what you think you're trying to talk about even after you   
   made   
   > it clearly obvious that you don't, nor did you ever try to get a clue and   
   rise a   
   > bit above your own pitifully clueless position. Never, ever, ever...   
      
   an atheist admitting to being wrong!? wishful thinking.. :(   
      
   --   
   rgds,   
      
   Pete   
   -------   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)