X-No-Archive: yes


It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just is no 
evidence for such entity.
There is a spectrum of believers who cover much space in the intensity and 
consideration of those beliefs from bible literalists (largely the 
fundamentalists..) to liberal christians who accept the notion of evolution 
amongst other things.
My point is that asking for evidence from a christian (islamic or jewish for 
that matter) fundamentalist for their beliefs is meaningless.  It does not 
exist and we ALL know it.
One area of debate could/ought to be WHY people come to believe in god, 
perhaps HOW they came to believe in god and what factors indicate that god 
exists.  Not evidence....it doesn't, but criteria and factors that support 
why people have this belief.
We need to regain control of the arguments by examining these issues and 
exposing the structure, however irrational, of religious faith.  Further, 
probing for what grounds (..and from where such ideas derived) people 
understand that they are to convince/convert others to their own brand of 
religion.
To highlight the glaring problems that the three main religions have in 
presenting their own version of god and how one might be accepted into so 
called heaven.  They cannot all be right and christianity is at odds with 
Islam on redemption through jesus christ ONLY.
Merely asking for evidence results in the discussion just closing down 
because there can be none, from no-one, anywhere, anytime.
I suggest a new plan for the likes of dilv, if we are to continue engaging 
with him,  based upon some of the above and NOT the nonsensical scientific 
controversy he asserts



Mark

On May 23, 7:45 pm, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just is no
> evidence for such entity.
> There is a spectrum of believers who cover much space in the intensity and> consideration of those beliefs from bible literalists (largely the
> fundamentalists..) to liberal christians who accept the notion of evolution
> amongst other things.
> My point is that asking for evidence from a christian (islamic or jewish for
> that matter) fundamentalist for their beliefs is meaningless.  It does not
> exist and we ALL know it.
> One area of debate could/ought to be WHY people come to believe in god,
> perhaps HOW they came to believe in god and what factors indicate that god> exists.  Not evidence....it doesn't, but criteria and factors that support
> why people have this belief.
> We need to regain control of the arguments by examining these issues and
> exposing the structure, however irrational, of religious faith.  Further> probing for what grounds (..and from where such ideas derived) people
> understand that they are to convince/convert others to their own brand of
> religion.
> To highlight the glaring problems that the three main religions have in
> presenting their own version of god and how one might be accepted into so
> called heaven.  They cannot all be right and christianity is at odds with
> Islam on redemption through jesus christ ONLY.
> Merely asking for evidence results in the discussion just closing down
> because there can be none, from no-one, anywhere, anytime.
> I suggest a new plan for the likes of dilv, if we are to continue engaging> with him,  based upon some of the above and NOT the nonsensical scientific
> controversy he asserts
>
> Mark

REPLY:  Hi Mark.  Being an atheist by choice,  why would you even want
evidence to the contrary that would end up being a fly in the
ointment ?   If you really wanted some evidence , you could simply do
a google or take a trip to your local Library ; but it gets back to my
question :  Why would you even desire the evidence that would be
contrary to what you want to follow ?  Can you answer this Mark ?
(or, at least think about it ?)

On May 23, 5:45 pm, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just is no
> evidence for such entity.
> There is a spectrum of believers who cover much space in the intensity and> consideration of those beliefs from bible literalists (largely the
> fundamentalists..) to liberal christians who accept the notion of evolution
> amongst other things.
> My point is that asking for evidence from a christian (islamic or jewish for
> that matter) fundamentalist for their beliefs is meaningless.  It does not
> exist and we ALL know it.
> One area of debate could/ought to be WHY people come to believe in god,
> perhaps HOW they came to believe in god and what factors indicate that god> exists.  Not evidence....it doesn't, but criteria and factors that support
> why people have this belief.
> We need to regain control of the arguments by examining these issues and
> exposing the structure, however irrational, of religious faith.  Further> probing for what grounds (..and from where such ideas derived) people
> understand that they are to convince/convert others to their own brand of
> religion.
> To highlight the glaring problems that the three main religions have in
> presenting their own version of god and how one might be accepted into so
> called heaven.  They cannot all be right and christianity is at odds with
> Islam on redemption through jesus christ ONLY.
> Merely asking for evidence results in the discussion just closing down
> because there can be none, from no-one, anywhere, anytime.
> I suggest a new plan for the likes of dilv, if we are to continue engaging> with him,  based upon some of the above and NOT the nonsensical scientific
> controversy he asserts
>
> Mark

DILV is here ONLY to push his fundamentalist agenda, not to discuss,
converse, or to otherwise engage in any meaningful discussion.
He just repeats the same tired arguments time and time again, repeats
the same fake/altered/mined quotes, repeats his same mantra of "no
such thing as an atheist" which we all know is a delusional fantasy,
never listening to other points of view, while dismissed any
objections to his POV as not relevant.

He's an asshole
He's always been an asshole
And he always will be an asshole

X-No-Archive: yes

 wrote in message 
news:d8286a59-7b40-454e-ba2f-a90c677443e9@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On May 23, 7:45 pm, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just is 
> no
> evidence for such entity.


*****snipped******

REPLY:  Hi Mark.  Being an atheist by choice,  why would you even want
evidence to the contrary that would end up being a fly in the
ointment ?   If you really wanted some evidence , you could simply do
a google or take a trip to your local Library ; but it gets back to my
question :  Why would you even desire the evidence that would be
contrary to what you want to follow ?  Can you answer this Mark ?
(or, at least think about it ?)


Though I should know better, here's your one chance.  Don't waste it.

How did you come to *know*  that your god actually exists....?
Do you believe the bible is literally an accurate account..?
Why are you prepared, in the absence of real evidence, to accept a religious 
theory...?
There are just three questions, there could be many more, that you might 
like to answer....
Now, I'm interested in what YOU think about the above, not regurgitated 
dogma.  Can you step up to the plate and explain...?



Mark

On May 24, 6:24 am, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
>  wrote in message
>
> news:d8286a59-7b40-454e-ba2f-a90c677443e9@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 23, 7:45 pm, "mark"  wrote:
>
> > X-No-Archive: yes
>
> > It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just is
> > no
> > evidence for such entity.
>
> *****snipped******
>
> REPLY:  Hi Mark.  Being an atheist by choice,  why would you even want
> evidence to the contrary that would end up being a fly in the
> ointment ?   If you really wanted some evidence , you could simply do
> a google or take a trip to your local Library ; but it gets back to my
> question :  Why would you even desire the evidence that would be
> contrary to what you want to follow ?  Can you answer this Mark ?
> (or, at least think about it ?)
>
> Though I should know better, here's your one chance.  Don't waste it.
>
> How did you come to *know*  that your god actually exists....?
> Do you believe the bible is literally an accurate account..?
> Why are you prepared, in the absence of real evidence, to accept a religious
> theory...?
> There are just three questions, there could be many more, that you might
> like to answer....
> Now, I'm interested in what YOU think about the above, not regurgitated
> dogma.  Can you step up to the plate and explain...?
>
> Mark

REPLY:  Ummm Mark, you didnt answer my question now did you ?   As for
your questions, what have YOU done to get the answers to them ?  Have
you even bothered to put forth a tiny bit of effort to get these
answers ""IF"" you truly want them ?  And what difference would it
make if you were shown that the Christian Faith was credible ....
would that ol' rusty knee of yours be willing to bow to the Universes
Creator ?   I think not .  You dont want the Creator in your life .
Why is that Mark ?

a écrit dans le message de news:
2239503b-2977-45dd-b124-15caa5540cc9@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
On May 24, 6:24 am, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes

<snip usual dross from DILV>

1- He vigorously denies the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other
religions, but feels outraged when someone denies the existence of his god.
2- He feels insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people
evolved from lesser life forms, but has no problem with the Biblical claim
that we were created from dirt

3- He laughs at polytheists, but has no problem believing in a Trinity god

4- His face turns purple when he hears of the "atrocities" attributed to
Allah, but doesn't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah
slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination
of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" -- including women, children, and trees!

5- He laughs at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods
sleeping with women, but has no problem believing that the Holy Spirit
impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back
to life and then ascended into the sky.

6- He is willing to spend his life looking for little loop-holes in the
scientifically established age of the Earth (4.55 billion years), but finds
nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by pre-historic tribesmen
sitting in their tents and guessing that the Earth is a couple of
generations old.

7- He believes that the entire population of this planet with the exception
of those who share his beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival
sects -- will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet he
considers his religion the most "tolerant" and "loving".

8- While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed
to convince him otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking
in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to prove Christianity.

9- He defines 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered
prayers. He considers that to be evidence that prayer works. And he thinks
that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.

10- He actually knows a lot less than many Atheists and Agnostics do about
the Bible, Christianity, and church history -- but still calls himself a
Christian

X-No-Archive: yes


 wrote in message 
news:2239503b-2977-45dd-b124-15caa5540cc9@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
On May 24, 6:24 am, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>


>
> > It is clear that faith and belief in god are irrational and there just 
> > is
> > no
> > evidence for such entity.
>
> *****snipped******

> Though I should know better, here's your one chance. Don't waste it.



REPLY:  Ummm Mark, you didnt answer my question now did you ?   As for
your questions, what have YOU done to get the answers to them ?  Have
you even bothered to put forth a tiny bit of effort to get these
answers ""IF"" you truly want them ?  And what difference would it
make if you were shown that the Christian Faith was credible ....
would that ol' rusty knee of yours be willing to bow to the Universes
Creator ?   I think not .  You dont want the Creator in your life .
Why is that Mark ?


You just wasted your chance...


Mark

On May 24, 5:38 am, "mark"  wrote:

> You just wasted your chance...
>
> Mark

You didn't really expect a reply, didcha?
Dave needs to control the content of these threads, which is probably
he is no longer married and has no female friends

I've never seen any member of this group posting in Xtian groups to
push "an athiest agenda" or questioning their moral values
I've also never seen any member posting in anti-abortion groups (if
there are any) to promote abortion, or in dating groups to promote
wild sexual abandonment.
Compare this to DILV who has regularly invaded dating, atheist,
abortion, gay, lesbian, marriage, relationship, advice and other
groups, just to push HIS anti-sex, anti-abortion, anti-science, anti-
(any other religion than his own) AGENDA.

Dave's an asshole
He's always been an asshole
And he always will be an asshole

"mark"  wrote

> Merely asking for evidence results in the discussion just closing down 
> because there can be none, from no-one, anywhere, anytime.

Dave has never provided any evidence for any of his wild claims. He 
mistakenly claims that we have no evidence and have not searched for 
evidence but we have good evidence for the Big Band, substantial supporting 
evidence for evolution and interlinked evidence for geology which confirms 
the age and time scales of evolution.

Behe and other ID supporters have failed repeatedly to provide any credible 
evidence for their claims. They have provided tales which science has easily 
shown to be false. Creationists have nothing of substance - only the Bible.

Dave has shown his lack of any understanding, repeatedly misusing the 
language and failing to provide anything but little soundbites from works 
and authors that he clearly doesn't understand and hasn't read in full.
He's never admitted to any of his errors, even the daft confusion between 
'cofounder' and 'codiscoverer' which is pretty basic stuff. If he can't get 
that right, what chances are there of him getting complicated scientific or 
philosophical principles correct?

Steve M

On May 24, 3:04 pm, "Steve Marshall" 
wrote:

what chances are there of him getting complicated scientific or
> philosophical principles correct?
>
> Steve

Chances?
Somewhere near zero
In another group Dave wasn't even able to properly spell:  "Isopropl
Alchohol" (sic)

(ask him to expound on his revolutionary new theory that Nitrogen
fusing into Helium powers the Sun)

Ken wrote:
> On May 24, 3:04 pm, "Steve Marshall" 
> wrote:
>
> what chances are there of him getting complicated scientific or
>> philosophical principles correct?
>>
>> Steve
>
> Chances?
> Somewhere near zero
> In another group Dave wasn't even able to properly spell:  "Isopropl
> Alchohol" (sic)
>
> (ask him to expound on his revolutionary new theory that Nitrogen
> fusing into Helium powers the Sun)

...Or ask him to explain what litmus paper does and is used for.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers

On May 24, 6:56 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

> ...Or ask him to explain what litmus paper does and is used for.
>
> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
> Personalised Desktop Computers

I doubt if he's yet mastered the use of toilet paper

Ken wrote:
> On May 24, 6:56 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
> <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> ...Or ask him to explain what litmus paper does and is used for.
>>
>> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
>> Personalised Desktop Computers
>
> I doubt if he's yet mastered the use of toilet paper

Ah the scientific test for excrement: 'Turns brown when wiped on feces.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers

On May 25, 1:55 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Ken wrote:
> > On May 24, 6:56 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
> > <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> ...Or ask him to explain what litmus paper does and is used for.
>
> >> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
> >> Personalised Desktop Computers
>
> > I doubt if he's yet mastered the use of toilet paper
>
> Ah the scientific test for excrement: 'Turns brown when wiped on feces.
>
> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
> Personalised Desktop Computers

"Turns brown in the vicinity of fundy fuckwadds"?

Ken wrote:
> On May 25, 1:55 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
> <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> Ken wrote:
>>> On May 24, 6:56 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
>>> <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> ...Or ask him to explain what litmus paper does and is used for.
>>
>>>> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
>>>> Personalised Desktop Computers
>>
>>> I doubt if he's yet mastered the use of toilet paper
>>
>> Ah the scientific test for excrement: 'Turns brown when wiped on
>> feces.
>>
>> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
>> Personalised Desktop Computers
>
> "Turns brown in the vicinity of fundy fuckwadds"?

Indeed.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers