🚀 go-pugleaf

rbwinn wrote:
> On Jul 19, 10:03 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>> rbwinn wrote:
>>> 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.
>> Then why post to alt.atheism at all?
>>
> I cannot see any reason to do it.  

So, you'll stop?

> Maybe some of the other atheists
> could tell you why they do it.

Because they want to.

-- 
******************************************************
*          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 *
******************************************************