🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 19, 12:11 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Jul 19, 8:43 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >> rbwinn wrote:
> >>> On Jul 19, 8:13 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> On 17 jul, 05:29, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jul 16, 1:31 pm, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 16 jul, 16:23, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jul 15, 9:20 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 14 jul, 05:42, hhyaps...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 14, 1:12 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 13 jul, 16:22, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 13, 12:10 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 12, 7:29�am, Stan-O <bndsna...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:21:44 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You atheists seem to have a lot of trouble with the meanings of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words. ?There was another atheist who seemed to believe that adult and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adulterer meant the same thing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...which is an old joke that you obviously didn't get.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a very foolish mistake. �Although the two words look and sound
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> similar, they mean very different things.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd explain the meaning of "a play on words", but it would be like
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pouring water on a rock and expecting it to sink in...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> With atheists, it is not a play on words.  They really believe that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> adulterers are the most mature adults.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Atheists don't believe anything.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> More lies from the Prince of Lies.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Its amazing how much ore of an atheist I want to be, listening to you.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Well, there you have it.  Atheists don't believe anything, they don't
> >>>>>>>>>>> do anything, and they don't think anything.  It does not sound very
> >>>>>>>>>>> exciting to me, but maybe it does to an atheist.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> >>>>>>>>>> Well. Atheist are not lying their butt off like you do.
> >>>>>>>>>> Most of them believe in natural explanations,
> >>>>>>>>>> most of them have a job,
> >>>>>>>>>> and many of them are intelligent enough not to make as silly a claim
> >>>>>>>>>> as to say someone else doesn't think anything.
> >>>>>>>>>> Your statement would be truth though if it was made about dead people.
> >>>>>>>>>> But if all dead people are atheists, what would that mean for heaven
> >>>>>>>>>> and hell?
> >>>>>>>>>> Think about it!
> >>>>>>>>>> I am sure you have enough brains to understand,
> >>>>>>>>>> I only doubt whether you will use them on this issue or perfer to keep
> >>>>>>>>>> making silly statements
> >>>>>>>>>> Peter van Velzen
> >>>>>>>>>> July 2008
> >>>>>>>>>> Amstelveen
> >>>>>>>>>> The Netherlands
> >>>>>>>>> That's where you are wrong, Peter.
> >>>>>>>>> You think rbwinn got brain? OK, has a brain but without cells...
> >>>>>>>>> But you do not know he has mental problem, which the scientists have
> >>>>>>>>> not come up with any cure yet?- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> >>>>>>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> >>>>>>>> I always assume that a person with whom I can have some kind of
> >>>>>>>> conversation, is more or less intelligent in the same way I am.
> >>>>>>>> Though rbwinn sometimes posts like a moron, that does not nescesarily
> >>>>>>>> mean he is one. He sort of acknowledged he was actually mocking
> >>>>>>>> atheism, by pursuing the line "an atheist has no believe". And if that
> >>>>>>>> would indeed be true, than logic requires that the atheist does not
> >>>>>>>> think. For what is there to think about unless you believe something?
> >>>>>>>> Anyway I always treat posters as if they can understand what I am
> >>>>>>>> saying,
> >>>>>>>> and I will keep doing do, however hard those posters are trying not
> >>>>>>>> to.
> >>>>>>>> Love,
> >>>>>>>> Peter van Velzen
> >>>>>>>> July 2008
> >>>>>>>> Amstelveen
> >>>>>>>> The Netherlands
> >>>>>>>> PS In order to make this post I had to believe:
> >>>>>>>> I exist
> >>>>>>>> You exist
> >>>>>>>> rbwinn exists
> >>>>>>>> My computer exists
> >>>>>>>> Google exists
> >>>>>>>> (my provider doesn't provide Newsgroup access)
> >>>>>>>> sci.physics,cam.mist,alt.sci.physics or alt.atheism exists
> >>>>>>>> English exists
> >>>>>>>> The english words mean what I think they mean
> >>>>>>>> Others can understand the English I produce.
> >>>>>>>> Someone who doesn't believe all of this (except maybe for Google and
> >>>>>>>> rbwinn)
> >>>>>>>> cannot sensibly reply to your post.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>> Europeans are very existential.
> >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> >>>>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> >>>>>> Somehow Robert, I do not think my philosophy is existentialism. I
> >>>>>> think it rather borders on pragmatism. Discussions become rather
> >>>>>> meaningsless, unless one accepts there is a ground for it. So in order
> >>>>>> to exchange thought with you, I have to suppose that to be possible.
> >>>>>> My main premise is that you are an intelligent human being, able to
> >>>>>> understand what I am saying and able to make me understand what you
> >>>>>> are thinking.
> >>>>>> Besides discussions becoming worthless if this were not the case, I
> >>>>>> think it's a mater of courtesy also.
> >>>>>> Some peopleon usenet are very quick to dismiss others as inferior. I
> >>>>>> admit some people have superior knowledge and/or superior
> >>>>>> understanding. But communication works best if we try and find a way
> >>>>>> to exchange ideas without making arrogant assumptions.
> >>>>>> Even if someone says something that seems utterly stupid, one should
> >>>>>> try an find out their reason for saying it. Many times we find out
> >>>>>> that there is less stupidity in the person than in his/her words.
> >>>>>> Love,
> >>>>> Well, I have never met an atheist who wanted to communicate.  What is
> >>>>> it that you want to communicate?
> >>>>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> >>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> >>>> To my amazement, my previous reply dissappeared.
> >>>> So I will try to repost what I said then
> >>>> Generally I want to communicate to people, that I care about them.
> >>>> To you in particular I want to say that eveyone who calls himself an
> >>>> atheist, does at least want to communnicate that he is one.
> >>>> If you get the impression that atheists do not want to communicate,
> >>>> that might be because of the negative way you are approaching them. A
> >>>> liittle more open-mindedness might be sufficient for getting more
> >>>> friendly replies.
> >>>> As far as I can see, you are shouting out misconceptions about
> >>>> atheists, that lead many of them to claim you are stupid.
> >>>> I do not think you are stupid, but I do think you knowledge about
> >>>> atheism is very poor.
> >>>> That is what I want to say to you
> >>>> (apart from the general fact that I care)
> >>>> Peter van Velzen
> >>> Well, there may be an atheist somewhere who is actually trying to be a
> >>> good person just as there may be an honest lawyer somewhere, but these
> >>> people in this newsgroup are not examples of that.   These are people
> >>> who regard themselves as being more intelligent than others because
> >>> they have rejected religion.
> >> Nope, no one thinks that.  They're just more intelligent than you.
>
> > Well, the correct definition of intelligence is the capacity to obey
> > God.  That would seem to mean that you folks are a little bit lacking.
>
> And that's why everyone in alt.atheism are more intelligent than you.
>
> Intelligence:
> capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of
> mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts,
> meanings, etc.
>
> --
If you want to believe you are more intelligent than I am, go ahead
and believe that.  It does not mean anything to me.
Robert B. Winn