posted today in UPH...
Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!) 
fruitcake here..



http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/


Mark

On May 26, 7:13 am, "mark"  wrote:
> posted today in UPH...
> Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!)
> fruitcake here..
>
> http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/
>
> Mark

Mark,  Surely you must know that all of our Modern Science Founders
were Bible believing Christians, didnt you ? It makes absolute good
sense and reason to be a Scientist and still believe in God.  Heck,
even agnostic Dr. Robert Jastrow , Founder of NASA's Goddard Institute
and author of the book 'God, and the Astronomers'  firmly believes and
writes that ALL of science culminates in God creating the heavens and
earth as stated in the very last paragraph of his book.   It makes
complete rational sense to believe in a personal Theistic Designer and
Creator for what we have ;  Materials and Chance is the utmost of
silly beliefs for the sake of not surrendering ones authority to the
Creator in whos image you were made.   The time has arrived to stop
making smokescreens and excuses Mark ;  please do that before it is
just too late for you to do so.

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 26, 7:13 am, "mark"  wrote:
>> posted today in UPH...
>> Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!)
>> fruitcake here..
>>
>> http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/
>>
>> Mark
>
> Mark,  Surely you must know that all of our Modern Science Founders
> were Bible believing Christians, didnt you ? It makes absolute good
> sense and reason to be a Scientist and still believe in God.  Heck,
> even agnostic Dr. Robert Jastrow , Founder of NASA's Goddard Institute
> and author of the book 'God, and the Astronomers'  firmly believes and
> writes that ALL of science culminates in God creating the heavens and
> earth as stated in the very last paragraph of his book.   It makes
> complete rational sense to believe in a personal Theistic Designer and
> Creator for what we have ;  Materials and Chance is the utmost of
> silly beliefs for the sake of not surrendering ones authority to the
> Creator in whos image you were made.   The time has arrived to stop
> making smokescreens and excuses Mark ;  please do that before it is
> just too late for you to do so.

Dimwit: The way to convince us or anyone else is to show us concrete proof 
and verifiable solid unshakable evidence. Hearsay, myths, superstitions, and 
your opinion, or what is written in an ancient book of  superstitions 
derived from the beliefs of their ancestors counts for nil. You can come in 
here and parrot the same garbage ad-infinitum as you do and you'll just be 
wasting bandwidth. Evidence please: Solid unshakable verifiable concrete 
evidence; either that or go away and stop wasting people's time including 
your own.

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

On May 26, 5:13 am, "mark"  wrote:
> posted today in UPH...
> Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!)
> fruitcake here..
>
> http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/
>
> Mark

That same article was featured in the June issue of Scientific
American, which should not be confused with Pseudo-scientific
AmeriKKKan printed by the JW's

On Mon, 26 May 2008 13:13:59 +0100, "mark" 
wrote:

>posted today in UPH...
>Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!) 
>fruitcake here..
>
>http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/

The Templetons are on a hiding  to nothing.

Science models reality which can never compromise to accommodate
religion because the real world simply doesn't work that way.

Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
reality.

>
>Mark
>
>

On May 26, 9:48 am, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On May 26, 7:13 am, "mark"  wrote:
> >> posted today in UPH...
> >> Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!)
> >> fruitcake here..
>
> >>http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/
>
> >> Mark
>
> > Mark,  Surely you must know that all of our Modern Science Founders
> > were Bible believing Christians, didnt you ? It makes absolute good
> > sense and reason to be a Scientist and still believe in God.  Heck,
> > even agnostic Dr. Robert Jastrow , Founder of NASA's Goddard Institute
> > and author of the book 'God, and the Astronomers'  firmly believes and> > writes that ALL of science culminates in God creating the heavens and
> > earth as stated in the very last paragraph of his book.   It makes
> > complete rational sense to believe in a personal Theistic Designer and
> > Creator for what we have ;  Materials and Chance is the utmost of
> > silly beliefs for the sake of not surrendering ones authority to the
> > Creator in whos image you were made.   The time has arrived to stop
> > making smokescreens and excuses Mark ;  please do that before it is
> > just too late for you to do so.
>
> Dimwit: The way to convince us or anyone else is to show us concrete proof> and verifiable solid unshakable evidence. Hearsay, myths, superstitions, and
> your opinion, or what is written in an ancient book of  superstitions
> derived from the beliefs of their ancestors counts for nil. You can come in
> here and parrot the same garbage ad-infinitum as you do and you'll just be> wasting bandwidth. Evidence please: Solid unshakable verifiable concrete
> evidence; either that or go away and stop wasting people's time including
> your own.
>
> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
> Personalised Desktop Computers- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

REPLY:   Sharron,  What difference would it make if the evidence were
presented that you would find compelling ?  It would make no
difference would it ?   Its because its not about wanting evidence to
FOLLOW the Creator...its about the WILL not too , under any
circumstances.   Now isnt that the honest truth Sharron and Mark ???

On May 26, 11:15 am, Christopher A. Lee  wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 2008 13:13:59 퍝, "mark" 
> wrote:
>
> >posted today in UPH...
> >Quite interesting in view of our resident religious (scientific...!!)
> >fruitcake here..
>
> in>http://www.templeton.org:80/belief/
>
> The Templetons are on a hiding  to nothing.
>
> Science models reality which can never compromise to accommodate
> religion because the real world simply doesn't work that way.
>
> Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
> reality.
> REPLY:  Real, true , and honest Science....goes where the evidence leads ;  and not making everything FIT  natural and accidental causes.  You dont get a highly tweaked Universe like ours from a blind random explosion and you dont get personality traits from leftover materials of an explosion and you dont get DNA  with intelligent messages from a bunch of dead chemicals from a 'Soup Pond' .  You know that as well as I do.  Its just that one of us is willing to make smokescreens so they can delay admitting to the obvious :  A personal , intelligent, very powerful,  AND MORAL  Creator  . ( not a very pleasant consideration for many...)

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> REPLY:   Sharron,  What difference would it make if the evidence were
> presented that you would find compelling ?  It would make no
> difference would it ?   Its because its not about wanting evidence to
> FOLLOW the Creator...its about the WILL not too , under any
> circumstances.   Now isnt that the honest truth Sharron and Mark ???

If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present 
it to us and call their bluff!

The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your 
gods existence do you?

Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up' 
time!

regards, Ian

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:

>> Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
>> reality.
>> REPLY:  Real, true , and honest Science....goes where the evidence leads ;  and not making everything FIT  natural and accidental causes.  You dont get a highly tweaked Universe like ours from a blind random explosion and you dont get personality traits from leftover materials of an explosion and you dont get DNA  with intelligent messages from a bunch of dead chemicals from a 'Soup Pond' .  You know that as well as I do.  Its just that one of us is willing to make smokescreens so they can delay admitting to the obvious :  A personal , intelligent, very powerful,  AND MORAL  Creator  . ( not a very pleasant consideration for many...)

So, present this evidence to us then?

Where is any of this real, positive, credible, convincing evidence?

regards, Ian

On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > REPLY:   Sharron,  What difference would it make if the evidence were
> > presented that you would find compelling ?  It would make no
> > difference would it ?   Its because its not about wanting evidence to
> > FOLLOW the Creator...its about the WILL not too , under any
> > circumstances.   Now isnt that the honest truth Sharron and Mark ???
>
> If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> it to us and call their bluff!
>
> The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> gods existence do you?
> p
> Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> time!
>
> regards, Ian

REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it
all over again unless your knee is willing to bend .  Conversely, if
you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then, Im
willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.

On May 26, 2:23 pm, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > REPLY:   Sharron,  What difference would it make if the evidence were
> > presented that you would find compelling ?  It would make no
> > difference would it ?   Its because its not about wanting evidence to
> > FOLLOW the Creator...its about the WILL not too , under any
> > circumstances.   Now isnt that the honest truth Sharron and Mark ???
>
> If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> it to us and call their bluff!
>
> The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> gods existence do you?
>
> Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> time!
>
> regards, Ian

His so called  "evidence" has always been his own opinion, links to
creationist sites (filled with misinformation for the truly gullible),
or links to sites that promote only the pseudo-scientific faith-based
religious view.
When shown the fallacy of these essays, dimwit immediately dismisses
any objection by saying that we're the one's being CLOSED
MINDED................

Besides, he's a proven LIAR!

On May 26, 2:24 pm, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
> >> reality.
> >> REPLY:  Real, true , and honest Science....goes where the evidence leads ;  and not making everything FIT  natural and accidental causes.  You dont get a highly tweaked Universe like ours from a blind random explosion and you dont get personality traits from leftover materials of an explosion and you dont get DNA  with intelligent messages from a bunch of dead chemicals from a 'Soup Pond' .  You know that as well as I do.  Its just that one of us is willing to make smokescreens so they can delay admitting to the obvious :  A personal , intelligent, very powerful,  AND MORAL  Creator  . ( not a very pleasant consideration for many...)
>
> So, present this evidence to us then?
>
> Where is any of this real, positive, credible, convincing evidence?
>
> regards, Ian

Once again the only "evidence" is "his opinion".............which
should not be considered credible coming from someone who doesn't even
understand the basics of fusion

On May 26, 2:52 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:
> On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith 
> > If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> > it to us and call their bluff!
>
> > The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> > gods existence do you?
> > p
> > Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> > time!
>
> > regards, Ian
>
> REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
> evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it
> all over again unless your knee is willing to bend .  Conversely, if
> you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then, Im
> willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Forgot to add another answer Dimwit spews forth when asked for
evidence: "Go look for it yourself"

On May 26, 7:25 pm, Ken  wrote:
> On May 26, 2:52 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith 
> > > If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> > > it to us and call their bluff!
>
> > > The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> > > gods existence do you?
> > > p
> > > Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> > > time!
>
> > > regards, Ian
>
> > REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
> > evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it
> > all over again unless your knee is willing to bend .  Conversely, if
> > you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then, Im
>  > willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Forgot to add another answer Dimwit spews forth when asked for
> evidence: "Go look for it yourself"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

REPLY:  The evidence wouldnt matter to you Ken ;  thats just a
convenient smokescreen.  Evidence for Creation is an affront to your
sexual freedom.

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 26, 7:25 pm, Ken  wrote:
>> On May 26, 2:52 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith 
>>>> If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
>>>> it to us and call their bluff!
>>
>>>> The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
>>>> gods existence do you?
>>>> p
>>>> Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
>>>> time!
>>
>>>> regards, Ian
>>
>>> REPLY: Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
>>> evidence that only a PERSON can deliver. Im not going to go thru it
>>> all over again unless your knee is willing to bend . Conversely, if
>>> you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then,
>>> Im
>>  > willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.- Hide quoted
>> text -
>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Forgot to add another answer Dimwit spews forth when asked for
>> evidence: "Go look for it yourself"- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> REPLY:  The evidence wouldnt matter to you Ken ;  thats just a
> convenient smokescreen.  Evidence for Creation is an affront to your
> sexual freedom.

Jealous?

Oh no; I forgot - Everyone finds you so sexually and otherwise repulsive 
that you can't get a sex life other than with desperate old men and Mrs Palm 
and her five lovely daughters.

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

Ken wrote:
> On May 26, 2:24 pm, Ian Smith 
> wrote:
>> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
>>>> reality.
>>>> REPLY: Real, true , and honest Science....goes where the evidence
>>>> leads ; and not making everything FIT natural and accidental
>>>> causes. You dont get a highly tweaked Universe like ours from a
>>>> blind random explosion and you dont get personality traits from
>>>> leftover materials of an explosion and you dont get DNA with
>>>> intelligent messages from a bunch of dead chemicals from a 'Soup
>>>> Pond' . You know that as well as I do. Its just that one of us is
>>>> willing to make smokescreens so they can delay admitting to the
>>>> obvious : A personal , intelligent, very powerful, AND MORAL
>>>> Creator . ( not a very pleasant consideration for many...)
>>
>> So, present this evidence to us then?
>>
>> Where is any of this real, positive, credible, convincing evidence?
>>
>> regards, Ian
>
> Once again the only "evidence" is "his opinion".............which
> should not be considered credible coming from someone who doesn't even
> understand the basics of fusion

...or litmus paper.

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

On May 26, 7:05 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:
> On May 26, 7:25 pm, Ken  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 26, 2:52 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:> > > On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith > > > > If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> > > > it to us and call their bluff!
>
> > > > The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> > > > gods existence do you?
> > > > p
> > > > Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> > > > time!
>
> > > > regards, Ian
>
> > > REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
> > > evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it> > > all over again unless your knee is willing to bend .  Conversely, if> > > you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then, Im
> >  > willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.- Hide quoted text> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Forgot to add another answer Dimwit spews forth when asked for
> > evidence: "Go look for it yourself"- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> REPLY:  The evidence wouldnt matter to you Ken ;  thats just a
> convenient smokescreen.  Evidence for Creation is an affront to your
> sexual freedom.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can't keep quiet anymore
Mr Pot calling all the other kettles black
Here we have Dave accusing others of using smokescreens, while this
lying frigging numbskull is living his little life under the greatest
smokescreen of them all...the mindnumbing opiate of organized religion
Sandy

On 26 May, 22:24, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> IlBeBa...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Any compromising has to be done by religion to come to terms with
> >> reality.
> >> REPLY:  Real, true , and honest Science....goes where the evidence leads ;  and not making everything FIT  natural and accidental causes.  You dont get a highly tweaked Universe like ours from a blind random explosion and you dont get personality traits from leftover materials of an explosion and you dont get DNA  with intelligent messages from a bunch of dead chemicals from a 'Soup Pond' .  You know that as well as I do.  Its just that one of us is willing to make smokescreens so they can delay admitting to the obvious :  A personal , intelligent, very powerful,  AND MORAL  Creator  . ( not a very pleasant consideration for many...)
>
> So, present this evidence to us then?
>
> Where is any of this real, positive, credible, convincing evidence?
>
> regards, Ian

On 27 May, 03:05, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:
> On May 26, 7:25 pm, Ken  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 26, 2:52 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"  wrote:> > > On May 26, 4:23 pm, Ian Smith > > > > If you do have any real, positive, convincing evidence then present
> > > > it to us and call their bluff!
>
> > > > The plain fact is: you don't have any evidence whatsoever for your
> > > > gods existence do you?
> > > > p
> > > > Now isn't that the honest truth, Dave? So: It's 'Put up or shut up'
> > > > time!
>
> > > > regards, Ian
>
> > > REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
> > > evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it> > > all over again unless your knee is willing to bend .  Conversely, if> > > you can show me evidence that atheism philosophies are true, then, Im
> >  > willing to bend my knee to accidents and Nothing.- Hide quoted text> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Forgot to add another answer Dimwit spews forth when asked for
> > evidence: "Go look for it yourself"- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> REPLY:  The evidence wouldnt matter to you Ken ;  thats just a
> convenient smokescreen.  Evidence for Creation is an affront to your
> sexual freedom.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The problem is that there is no evidence for creation.   Creation is
just a Stone Age myth.

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:

> 
> REPLY:   Youve been in this NG long enough Ian and have read the
> evidence that only a PERSON can deliver.  Im not going to go thru it
> all over again 

I think that we can take that as an admission that you have no evidence!

So, your hypothesis can be categorised as a failed hypothesis!

regards, Ian