🚀 go-pugleaf

On Aug 6, 3:32�am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Aug 5, 7:34 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >> rbwinn wrote:
> >>> On Aug 5, 6:42 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>> On Aug 4, 9:39 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
> >>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Aug 4, 10:13 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Aug 3, 9:31 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
> >>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Aug 2, 1:07 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Aug 1, 8:14 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...@thanks.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>news:f012c137-ec7a-4f41-acf8-81a047bcb82d@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Smiler,
> >>>>>>>>>>> I never go to alt.atheism.
> >>>>>>>>>> Idiot - you are never out of it.
> >>>>>>>>>> Every time you hit that send button with alt.atheism in your headers, you go
> >>>>>>>>>> there.
> >>>>>>>>>> All I am doing is responding to posts in
> >>>>>>>>>>> sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>>>>>>>> And alt.atheism, cretin.
> >>>>>>>>> I don't care what is in the headers. I have already told you how to
> >>>>>>>>> avoid talking to me. Just take sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity
> >>>>>>>>> out of the header. I never go to alt.atheism.
> >>>>>>>>> Robert b. Winn
> >>>>>>>> The issue is really that some of us really object to lies. And when
> >>>>>>>> we see lies, we feel the need to publicly denounce them to the same
> >>>>>>>> audience as they were originally disseminated to.
> >>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>> If you object to lies, then you should stop posting lies in
> >>>>>>> sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity. Lies are off topic in these
> >>>>>>> newsgroups.
> >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>>>> I haven't posted any lies. You however, have demonstrably posted many
> >>>>>> lies
> >>>>> It did not happen. I was the person who said that Hezekiah's tunnel
> >>>>> exists, which was demonstrated to be true.
> >>>> And King's Cross Station exists.
> >>> Does the Bible say that King's Cross Station exists?
> >> No, because, when the Bible was written, the station was not built yet.
> >> When the Bible was written, it didn't even REFERENCE the entire
> >> country that would later be known as England.
>
> > Well, then you cannot prove the Bible wrong by using King's Cross
> > Station. �You would have to use something in the Bible.
>
> Well, then you cannot prove the Bible right by using Hezekiah's Tunnel.
> � You would have to use something else in Bible.
>
> (Oh, by the way, there was no world-wide flood.)
>
> --
> ****************************************************
> * � � � � �DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 � � � � �*
> *--------------------------------------------------*
> * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He *
> * can't eat it? � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �*
> ****************************************************- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The verses describing the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel were
certainly proven true.  Were there some other verses you were
interested in?
Robert B. Winn