🚀 go-pugleaf

"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message 
news:1215765710.4836.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
> rbwinn wrote:
>> On Jul 10, 5:20?am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
>>> Alex W. wrote:
>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:08134c4b-46c5-454f-9a5f-47756eddfd59@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Without religion to oppose, atheists would do nothing at all.
>>> Thats not true. They just would walk away from any discussion on the
>>> subject thankfully, and get on with living, and in some case, trying to
>>> understand the extraordinary universe we seem to find ourselves in.
>>>
>>> Really the transition fom a Gaia type animism picture of the universe,
>>> to a personalised supernatural creator and law giver, to an impersonal
>>> set of amoral laws..is not as abrupt as the fanboys would like to think.
>>>
>>> What is unusual, historically, is the fanatical faith needed to maintain
>>> the concept of a personal and moral God, in the face of Reason.
>>>
>>> Mediaevally speaking, no one questioned that the world and events moved
>>> according to some vast and ineffable and mysterious pattern, and the
>>> concept of a supernatural intelligence and a plan, was pretty
>>> reasonable..until science started uncovering the rules, which turned out
>>> to be mindlessly simple, totally impersonal and implacable, and
>>> impervious to personal appeal. And no evidence of intelligence at all.
>>>
>>> Note that none of this necessarily negates the proposition that faith,
>>> belief, prayer, and a live lived AS IF there were an afterlife,is not a
>>> Good Thing for people and civilisations.
>>>
>>> But none of these even indicate that what is believed in must of
>>> necessity be true.
>>>
>>> Archers were able to hit targets long before Newton identified the Force
>>> of Gravity.
>>>
>>> Understanding of the presumed science behind phenonmena is no
>>> pre-requisite for learning to deal with them. Any ad-hoc theory that has
>>> pragmatic use will do.
>>>
>>> If you look at religion in that light, it makes a lot of sense.
>>>
>>> Mired in dogma however, the fanatical Theist simply persists in the
>>> useless, long past its sell-by date.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> ..... other than get on with our lives ....- Hide quoted text -
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> If atheists want to believe that they are not intelligent, I see no
>> problem with that.
>> Robert B. Winn
> And how is that in any way relevant to what I posted?

You expect relevance from this moron?
He can't even manage coherence, logic or truth.

Smiler,
The godless one
a.a.# 2279