🚀 go-pugleaf

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?                                    *
****************************************************