🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 18, 8:10 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

So you are changing your mind again and saying that the tunnel does
not exist.
Robert B. Winn