🚀 go-pugleaf

rbwinn wrote:
> On Jul 19, 8:15 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>> rbwinn wrote:
>>> On Jul 18, 11:53 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 18, 8:22 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>> BuddyThunder wrote:
>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 3:58 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 6:49 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 5:45 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 5:27 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 16, 7:39 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 5:21 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 15, 7:49 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 16, 12:10 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 15, 1:00 am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 15, 4:03 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 14, 8:43�pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 15, 1:40 am, ben_dolan_...@reet.com (Ben Dolan)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 14, 2:54 pm, ben_dolan_...@reet.com (Ben
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dolan) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your analysis, Peter. �I was merely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expanding on a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> statement from an atheist to show where it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leading: �Atheists do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not believe anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's not true, we believe you're a fuckin'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moron... We even have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm going to take that as an article of faith. �The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence isn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compelling. �We do have evidence that he's a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> �So he could be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acting incredibly stupid, or more likely be stupid,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's impossible to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tell. �But the evidence for lies is overwhelming.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, we believe he's as stupid as dog shit. �But we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have evidence, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thus no need of faith, that he's a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I understand your point, but I believe we have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overwhelming evidence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both. Bobby is a classic newsgroup troll who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> desparately craves
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attention. Lying is an excellent way to get attention,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> although it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normally means suffering considerable ridicule and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> insult in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I also believe he's rather unintelligent (as most
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroup trolls
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tend to be). He has shown a remarkable inability to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absorb and integrate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new information presented to him. There's no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indication he reads
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything outside of the few newsgroups he spends
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> countless hours posting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in. And he has shown a breathtaking lack of self
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> awareness and maturity,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether about his ridiculous physics kookiness or his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> puerile religious
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. Taken together these point to someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering from mental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illness combined with a serious cognitive impairment,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or as I prefer to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think of it, he's a fuckin' moron...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, I'll agree it's a good summary.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Profanity is the attempt of a weak mind to make a strong
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> statement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Al.  You are agreeing with someone who has a weak mind.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree or disagree with propositions.  Not people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And your statements are wrong.  Profanity can be used by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weak minds to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempt to make a strong statement.  Just because someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses profane
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language, does not mean they have a "weak mind".  And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what do you mean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by "weak mind"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A weak mind is one that cannot deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EG: Christians.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some Christians do use profanity, but the biggest promoters of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> profanity are atheists.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And yet the minds that demonstrably don't deal with reality are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> christians.  Please do keep up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheists are the people who are trying to make the Bible
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disappear.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep.  You've just demonstrated that you aren't dealing with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheists are not trying to make the Bible disappear.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I think thy are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your thoughts have no bearing on reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  That is one reason why they are so intrigued
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by Harry Potter books.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Um, no.  You still aren't getting it, are you?  Harry Potter is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> convenient fiction story that is set on modern day Earth.  We
>>>>>>>>>>>>> could've
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as easily used ANY OTHER fiction story that is set on modern
>>>>>>>>>>>>> day Earth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ******************************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *          DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226            *
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, that is not going to happen when Harry Potter books were the
>>>>>>>>>>>> books that outsold the Bible for a short time.
>>>>>>>>>>> Um, no.  That's not the reason.
>>>>>>>>>>> I could've easily used Fantastic Voyage, which was set in
>>>>>>>>>>> Washington DC.
>>>>>>>>>>>   It even mentioned some buildings there.  Therefore,
>>>>>>>>>>> miniaturization is
>>>>>>>>>>> real.
>>>>>>>>>>> Right?
>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you just take some time and decide for yourself?
>>>>>>>>> Why don't you address the point rather than simply issuing glib
>>>>>>>>> responses like the one above?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>> There is no point that I can see.  He is claiming that these four
>>>>>>>> books prove the Bible wrong in some way.
>>>>>>> No, he's not saying that they prove it false, he's saying your example
>>>>>>> of the tunnel offers no support for it. That's his point.
>>>>>> I think Winn knows this.  I think he's purposefully being evasive in
>>>>>> order to not address the serious issues with his claims.
>>>>>> I could be wrong, though.  He could really be that stupid.
>>>>>> --
>>>>> Well, make up your minds.  The tunnel either exists or it does not
>>>>> exist.  
>>>> It exists.
>>>>> If it exists, it is exactly where three books of the Old
>>>>> Testament said it was.
>>>> So?
>>>>> If it does not exist, then Jerusalem tour
>>>>> guides are taking tourists on tours through solid rock.  So decide for
>>>>> yourselves whether it exists.   I said from the beginning that the
>>>>> tunnel does exist.
>>>> As have atheists.  Try READING what we type.
>>>> --
>>> I do read what you type.  If you are going to say the tunnel exists in
>>> one post, then you need to leave it that way instead of pretending it
>>> does not exist the next time you post.  I can keep explaining to you
>>> that it does exist as long as you want me to.
>> Who is saying that it does not exist?  Please provide the exact quote
>> that led you to believe that we're saying that.
>>
>> --
> Any time you atheist make a statement that implies that Hezekiah's
> tunnel does not prove certain verses of the Old Testament correct, I
> am going to say that the tunnel does exist.  That way we can stay on
> topic for a longer time than atheists are used to staying on topic.

I see. So, you're lying when you say that atheists are saying that it 
doesn't exist.

Isn't there a commandment that you're breaking here?

And which atheist is saying that those verses that reference the tunnel 
itself in the Old Testament are incorrect?  Please provide the exact quote.

(...not holding my breath.)


-- 
******************************************************
*          DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "I distrust those people who know so well what God *
*  wants them to do because I notice it always       *
*  coincides with their own desires."                *
*                                 --Susan B. Anthony *
******************************************************