You're the one always asking INFLAMATORY questions about people's sex
lives, making unreasonable, unfounded, unsubstantial, and unsupported
statements about religion and pseudoscience, yet somehow can't find
the time to answer these NON-INFLAMATORY and VERY BASIC questions
about yourself

What is the highest level of education you reached?
Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?
To what level did you study physics and biology?
What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?
Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
scientifically illiterate?
What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
than
your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?
Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?


BTW----->Why not take some time and look up what "Simular" means?

"why one needs him, and simular....if a new Post is started having
the
title of 'Questions'  .

On Jul 27, 7:27 am, Ken  wrote:
> You're the one always asking INFLAMATORY questions about people's sex
> lives, making unreasonable, unfounded, unsubstantial, and unsupported
> statements about religion and pseudoscience, yet somehow can't find
> the time to answer these NON-INFLAMATORY and VERY BASIC questions
> about yourself
>
> What is the highest level of education you reached?
> Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?
> To what level did you study physics and biology?
> What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?
> Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
> scientifically illiterate?
> What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
> than
> your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?
> Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?
>
> BTW----->Why not take some time and look up what "Simular" means?
>
> "why one needs him, and simular....if a new Post is started having
> the
> title of 'Questions'  .

Don't hold ur breath.
He never likes being questioned and rarely replies when done so
Hewy

"Ken"  wrote in message

You repeatedly post those questions and it is pretty damn annoying have the 
place cluttered up with that broken record stuff.  So I will say what the 
answers are, from my limited knowledge, in an attempt to help you to move on 
and try to think up something interesting to write.

> What is the highest level of education you reached?

I expect that the person you ask was educated until he was about 16 and did 
moderately well in his tests at that age.

> Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?

I would be surprised if he had what I would call a professional 
qualification, because he repeatedly posts the same points - someone fairly 
bright would be bored by that sort of thing.


> To what level did you study physics and biology?

Don't be daft.  Physics is seen as a hard subject and almost everyone drops 
it as soon as they are teenaged (I kept it up because it requires almost as 
little work as maths.)   I have not a clue about biology because after O 
level I gratefully said goodbye to it.  (Plants were fine but I am too 
squeamish for all those animals insides.)

So, in other words, his answer is that he never studied those subjects.

> What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?

He knows a bit about his religion and so is well qualified in it.


> Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
> scientifically illiterate?

It isn't at all confused.  It is an extremely simple story of God making 
everything in 6 days and then having a rest.  The term 'scientifically 
illiterate' does not mean anything.  I expect you mean unscientific.  They 
did not know in those days that there is even such a thing as science.  It 
wasn't invented until much more recent times.


> What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
> than
> your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?

That is perfectly clear from everything he writes.  The evidence is the 
wonders of nature.


> Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?
>

Hmm.  Well my body has worked pretty well my whole life.

You see, you have missed the point about Dave from LV.   If he stuck to 
promulgating his own side of the story he'd be OK.   Where he goes wrong is 
in being rude about perfectly sensible reasonable people like me, saying 
that I am an atheist in order to act in a immoral way.

The fact that he denies the wonders of nature by dismissing many of them as 
merely 'miracles' and others as just untrue because they conflict with his 
beliefs is just part of what he is like as a person.

On Jul 27, 9:27 am, Ken  wrote:
> You're the one always asking INFLAMATORY questions about people's sex
> lives, making unreasonable, unfounded, unsubstantial, and unsupported
> statements about religion and pseudoscience, yet somehow can't find
> the time to answer these NON-INFLAMATORY and VERY BASIC questions
> about yourself
>
> What is the highest level of education you reached?
> Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?
> To what level did you study physics and biology?
> What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?
> Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
> scientifically illiterate?
> What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
> than
> your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?
> Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?
>
> BTW----->Why not take some time and look up what "Simular" means?
>
> "why one needs him, and simular....if a new Post is started having
> the
> title of 'Questions'  .

REPLY: Like i told  you just yesterday,  start a new thread
titled :'Questions'  at the top, and,  refrain from personal attacks .
Concentrate on creationism or atheism related questions.

X-No-Archive: yes

"John Brockbank"  wrote in message 
news:488cc72c$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
> "Ken"  wrote in message
>
> You repeatedly post those questions and it is pretty damn annoying have 
> the place cluttered up with that broken record stuff.  So I will say what 
> the answers are, from my limited knowledge, in an attempt to help you to 
> move on and try to think up something interesting to write.


Yes.   However, there is a fundamental point being made here......and one 
that is valid in my opinion.
The point is that dilv continually asks questions of members of this ng.   I 
will not go into the validity of those questions but merely illuminate (..if 
it were ever needed!) the fact that they are numerous.
What dilv fails to do (which in a 'debating' forum seems inanely pointless 
frankly)  is answer questions posed to him - usually in response to the mind 
numbing, re-iteration of endless, circular, religious diatribe.
This is not something that is lightly brushed aside, nor, frankly, 
acceptable.
His attendance here is nothing short of a charade - a cyber evangelism 
really and I think that many here have already made, rightly or wrongly, 
assessment about his intellectual capabilities.......  the very capability 
that, in my view, prevents him from expounding coherently his religious 
dogma.  Further, it appears he is not a *mainstream* christian - probably 
some evangelical and/or born again marginal offshoot of religious dogma and 
one that is clearly, in many ways, ignoring the reality and evidence that 
contradicts and overturns facets of their belief system.  Age of the earth 
being just one.....
Worse, dilv and many like him are bible literalists - something that is 
plainly incomprehensible and impossible to support - which is not how 
mainstream christians regard the bible.
Pseudo science is wheeled into the arena and we are asked to accept a whole 
plethora of  twisted truths, mis-quotes, quote mining and downright lies to 
support the ideology. It is little wonder that many rational, free thinking, 
intellegent people are moved to levels of utter frustration by this 
nonsense.
I won't respond to your response of the questions as it seems pointless. 
The point is that dilv should begin debating and answering questions after 
he has posted something and to which questions are then asked of him....
The usual (lying....actually, there is no other word for this) response that 
he has answered the questions previously is laughingly futile...


Mark

On Jul 27, 12:28 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" 
wrote:
> On Jul 27, 9:27 am, Ken  wrote:

> > You're the one always asking INFLAMATORY questions about people's sex
> > lives, making unreasonable, unfounded, unsubstantial, and unsupported
> > statements about religion and pseudoscience, yet somehow can't find
> > the time to answer these NON-INFLAMATORY and VERY BASIC questions
> > about yourself
>
> > What is the highest level of education you reached?
> > Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?
> > To what level did you study physics and biology?
> > What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?
> > Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
> > scientifically illiterate?
> > What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
> > than
> > your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?
> > Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?
>
> > BTW----->Why not take some time and look up what "Simular" means?
>
> > "why one needs him, and simular....if a new Post is started having
> > the
> > title of 'Questions'  .
>
> REPLY: Like i told  you just yesterday,  start a new thread
> titled :'Questions'  at the top, and,  refrain from personal attacks > Concentrate on creationism or atheism related questions.

MORE AVOIDISM!!!  This IS a new thread or didn't you notice?

How can the above questions from David Wynne-Griffiths be considered a
"personal attack"?
He's simply asking your about your educational background and why you
imagibne that you can lecture the rest of the World
Why can't you answer him?

As Mark said yesterday:
YOU do not keep this ng,  it is not you
who decides how posts are made.... any attempt to do so will attract
derision and contempt.

And now in my words--->YOU are NOT the MC in here, and your attempts
to control the subject matter and the content just isn't going to fly,
no matter how you try

Think about it, control freak, your superiority attitude is quite
probably the reason your wife took her child and left and also why you
have no real friends, only your imaginary sky pixie

On Jul 27, 3:13 pm, "mark"  wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> "John Brockbank"  wrote in message
>
> news:488cc72c$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
>
>
> > "Ken"  wrote in message
>
> > You repeatedly post those questions and it is pretty damn annoying have
> > the place cluttered up with that broken record stuff.  So I will say what
> > the answers are, from my limited knowledge, in an attempt to help you to
> > move on and try to think up something interesting to write.
>
> Yes.   However, there is a fundamental point being made here......and one
> that is valid in my opinion.
> The point is that dilv continually asks questions of members of this ng.   I
> will not go into the validity of those questions but merely illuminate (..if
> it were ever needed!) the fact that they are numerous.
> What dilv fails to do (which in a 'debating' forum seems inanely pointless
> frankly)  is answer questions posed to him - usually in response to the mind
> numbing, re-iteration of endless, circular, religious diatribe.
> This is not something that is lightly brushed aside, nor, frankly,
> acceptable.
> His attendance here is nothing short of a charade - a cyber evangelism
> really and I think that many here have already made, rightly or wrongly,
> assessment about his intellectual capabilities.......  the very capability
> that, in my view, prevents him from expounding coherently his religious
> dogma.  Further, it appears he is not a *mainstream* christian - probably
> some evangelical and/or born again marginal offshoot of religious dogma and
> one that is clearly, in many ways, ignoring the reality and evidence that
> contradicts and overturns facets of their belief system.  Age of the earth
> being just one.....
> Worse, dilv and many like him are bible literalists - something that is
> plainly incomprehensible and impossible to support - which is not how
> mainstream christians regard the bible.
> Pseudo science is wheeled into the arena and we are asked to accept a whole
> plethora of  twisted truths, mis-quotes, quote mining and downright lies to
> support the ideology. It is little wonder that many rational, free thinking,
> intellegent people are moved to levels of utter frustration by this
> nonsense.
> I won't respond to your response of the questions as it seems pointless.
> The point is that dilv should begin debating and answering questions after
> he has posted something and to which questions are then asked of him....
> The usual (lying....actually, there is no other word for this) response that
> he has answered the questions previously is laughingly futile...
>
> Mark

Thank you.

As for John's comments about my "broken record"...you more or less
answered for me. Dave is a while lot more ann

On Jul 27, 4:07 pm, Ken  wrote:

>
> Thank you.
>
> As for John's comments about my "broken record"...you more or less
> answered for me. Dave is a while lot more ann- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Aw crap... Hit the wrong key,

DILV is a whole lot more annoying than I could EVER be.
Talk about a broken record.
Dimwit constantly parrots the exact same religious crap, regurgitates
the same pseudo-science crapola (while ignoring any replies disputing
his BS), then posts more (and often faked) quotes in the vain hope
that someone new might happen along.
He's LONG ago worn out the welcome he's never had.


Ken

On Jul 27, 4:04 pm, Ken  wrote:
> On Jul 27, 12:28 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" 
> wrote:

> > On Jul 27, 9:27 am, Ken  wrote:
> > > You're the one always asking INFLAMATORY questions about people's sex
> > > lives, making unreasonable, unfounded, unsubstantial, and unsupported
> > > statements about religion and pseudoscience, yet somehow can't find
> > > the time to answer these NON-INFLAMATORY and VERY BASIC questions
> > > about yourself
>
> > > What is the highest level of education you reached?
> > > Do you have a professional qualification and if so what?
> > > To what level did you study physics and biology?
> > > What qualifies you to lecture us on your religion?
> > > Why is the account of the creation in Genesis so confused and
> > > scientifically illiterate?
> > > What evidence do you have for your alleged theistic creator other
> > > than
> > > your customary arguments from ignorance and incredulity?
> > > Why was your alleged intelligent designer so bad at designing?
>
> > > BTW----->Why not take some time and look up what "Simular" means?
>
> > > "why one needs him, and simular....if a new Post is started having
> > > the
> > > title of 'Questions'  .
>
> > REPLY: Like i told  you just yesterday,  start a new thread
> > titled :'Questions'  at the top, and,  refrain from personal attacks .
> > Concentrate on creationism or atheism related questions.
>
> MORE AVOIDISM!!!  This IS a new thread or didn't you notice?
>
> How can the above questions from David Wynne-Griffiths be considered a
> "personal attack"?
> He's simply asking your about your educational background and why you
> imagibne that you can lecture the rest of the World
> Why can't you answer him?
>
> As Mark said yesterday:
> YOU do not keep this ng,  it is not you
> who decides how posts are made.... any attempt to do so will attract
> derision and contempt.
>
> And now in my words--->YOU are NOT the MC in here, and your attempts
> to control the subject matter and the content just isn't going to fly,
> no matter how you try
>
> Think about it, control freak, your superiority attitude is quite
> probably the reason your wife took her child and left and also why you
> have no real friends, only your imaginary sky pixie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It's useless to enter into any type of discussion with this fuckwit.
I've seen it all before
Dave loves to argue, usually by first posing a question or making a
ridiculous statement (A) like Adam and Eve is not a myth, man actually
lived with dinosaurs, the Earth is 6000 years old, or there is no
proof an asteroid was responsible for extinctions, all designed only
to draw you into his web, but if one directs a reply to the first
issue of (A), the subject will change (as in "Yes, but what about
B,C,D and E") and never addressing your reply to subject (A)

Any attempt to cover B,C,D, or E is doomed to failure, as he then
directs the discussion into another direction.
He'd used this exact same tactic with me and many others.
The best strategy, just not play his game
Hewy

Hewy

X-No-Archive: yes

"Hewy"  wrote in message 
news:7a621873-d91d-4b52-adee-fb6cd8454365@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 27, 4:04 pm, Ken  wrote:
> On Jul 27, 12:28 pm, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" 

***
It's useless to enter into any type of discussion with this fuckwit.
I've seen it all before
Dave loves to argue, usually by first posing a question or making a
ridiculous statement (A) like Adam and Eve is not a myth, man actually
lived with dinosaurs, the Earth is 6000 years old, or there is no
proof an asteroid was responsible for extinctions, all designed only
to draw you into his web, but if one directs a reply to the first
issue of (A), the subject will change (as in "Yes, but what about
B,C,D and E") and never addressing your reply to subject (A)

Any attempt to cover B,C,D, or E is doomed to failure, as he then
directs the discussion into another direction.
He'd used this exact same tactic with me and many others.
The best strategy, just not play his game
***

We did try a 'moratorium' on replying to dilv a while back.....
Unfortunately some posters wished to continue with cohesive, measured 
responses in a tactical effort to show the idiocy of his position.
Those people have as much right as you or me to reply to whom they wish, 
when they wish..... which rather defeats the point of the moratorium. 
Sadly, in my view.
But there we are,  we are going to have his peanut brain around for a while 
although he's  not here to discuss, debate, learn or teach..... he is here 
to (trollishly) evangelicise for his rather narrow, marginal belief system.
As noted by many before, one wonders if there is a DIRECT correlation 
between intelligence and the seemingly mindless, religious submission needed 
for this level of inane devotion.



Mark

The message 
from "mark"  contains these words:

> As noted by many before, one wonders if there is a DIRECT correlation 
> between intelligence and the seemingly mindless, religious submission 
> needed for this level of inane devotion.

Subnormal levels of intelligence and unusually high levels of
gullibility are needed but other personal inadequacies probably
contribute.

-- 
********
DavidWG
********

On Jul 27, 8:24 pm, Hewy  wrote:
.
> The best strategy, just not play his game
> Hewy

DILV's just an asshole.........he's always been one and always will be
one

On Jul 28, 2:22 am, David Wynne-Griffiths 
wrote:
> The message 
> from "mark"  contains these words:
>
> > As noted by many before, one wonders if there is a DIRECT correlation
> > between intelligence and the seemingly mindless, religious submission
> > needed for this level of inane devotion.
>
> Subnormal levels of intelligence and unusually high levels of
> gullibility are needed but other personal inadequacies probably
> contribute.
>
> --
> ********
> DavidWG
> ********

Anyone who professes that Dino's and Humans lived together, that
Noah's flood "created" the Grand Canyon and that NASA faked our moon
landings should be considered not just possessing a high level of
gullibility, but sinking far beyond the lowest level of human
stupidity ever "achieved"