🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:20 +0100 (BST), richard@rmeredith.co.uk (Richard
Meredith) wrote in alt.atheism:

>In article
><756f4c42-5fd6-4c63-97c5-de4cf9bdb17f@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>rbwinn3@juno.com (rbwinn) wrote:
>
>> *From:* rbwinn <rbwinn3@juno.com>
>> *Date:* Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
>> 
>> On Jul 4, 11:49_am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
>> > Richard Meredith wrote:
>> > > In article <g4lbtl$9p...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com>,
>> > > chris.sh...@arm.nospam.com (Chris Shore) wrote:
>> >
>> > >> *From:* "Chris Shore" <chris.sh...@arm.nospam.com>
>> > >> *Date:* Fri, 4 Jul 2008 15:25:57 +0100
>> >
>> > >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>> > 
>> > 
>> >>news:b5ef084b-b578-47aa-b9bf-1285e1588579@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.co
>> m.
>> > >> ..
>> >
>> > >>> Well, there is an earthen ramp that the Assyrian army built to 
>> > get
>> > >>> over the city wall at Lachish. _Atheists do not believe in the
>> > >> earthen
>> > >>> ramp.
>> > >> Of course atheists believe in the ramp. It exists and its 
>> > existence
>> > >> cannot
>> > >> be denied. But the existence of the ramp does not prove that the
>> > >> entire
>> > >> OT is fact, nor does it prove anything, anything at all, about 
>> > God.
>> >
>> > >> What is your point in pointing out the existence of this thing?
>> >
>> > > There is no point. Usenet discussions about religion are seldom 
>> > anything
>> > > more than an opportunity for all sorts of people to restate their
>> > > particular set of beliefs loudly and vociferously while paying 
>> > little
>> > > attention and less respect to the views of anyone else.
>> >
>> > Oh come ON, poor old Robbo has been given a test of faith: he has 
>> > to go
>> > up against satanic atheists and all sorts of sinners to test his
>> > beliefs. We have to at least give him a run for his money.
>> >
>> > He is obviously fairly deluded.
>> >
>> > Its just a way of passing the time..- Hide quoted text -
>> >
>> > - Show quoted text -
>> 
>> Actually I was discussing the Galilean transformation equations with
>> scientists before atheists started posting to me in
>> sci.physics.relativity.
>
>Atheists, theists - what's the difference? They're both equally dogmatic
>that what they happen to believe is the one and only version of the truth,
>despite a complete inability to prove it - or even put up a decent set of
>repeatable and verifiable evidence that supports their position.

What rubbish. Atheists say they don't believe in gods. The lack of
evidence for gods is sufficient not to believe in them. It is not
necessary for atheists to prove that gods do not exist to not believe in
them. Do you believe in Thor because you cannot prove he does not exist?