Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Atheist rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments
0 views
Skip to first unread message
fasgnadh
Jan 23, 2012, 6:16:19 PM1/23/12
to
On 21/01/2012 8:52 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>
> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> thank you!
>
B^D
Like the Kooks, the atheists are a self-stroking group-mind cult,
with no real substance underpinning the formation of their NG.
That explains why both NG's are endless posturing, ad hom bitch fights
and little else, they are parasitic, sustained by the
creative attacks of their opponents and their ritualised, scripted,
responses.
In the atheists case the vacuum occurs because they only have ONE idea,
and that is a mere denial that something exists, an impotent,
ineffectual, useless sub branch of Nihilism, not enough
to sustain an interesting after dinner chat, let alone a
great and enduring civilisation.
In the kooks case, they have one less idea than the atheists.
B^]
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
...........................................................
...........................................................
...........................................................
---------
alt.atheism FAQ:
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
>
> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> thank you!
>
B^D
Like the Kooks, the atheists are a self-stroking group-mind cult,
with no real substance underpinning the formation of their NG.
That explains why both NG's are endless posturing, ad hom bitch fights
and little else, they are parasitic, sustained by the
creative attacks of their opponents and their ritualised, scripted,
responses.
In the atheists case the vacuum occurs because they only have ONE idea,
and that is a mere denial that something exists, an impotent,
ineffectual, useless sub branch of Nihilism, not enough
to sustain an interesting after dinner chat, let alone a
great and enduring civilisation.
In the kooks case, they have one less idea than the atheists.
B^]
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
...........................................................
...........................................................
...........................................................
---------
alt.atheism FAQ:
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
Jan 24, 2012, 4:07:03 AM1/24/12
to
On 22/01/2012 3:53 PM, Olrik wrote:
> fasgnadh never showed evidence of some "god" or "gods", leaving atheism
Of course I didn't, I'm an agnostic, your atheist Prophet Dawkins was
the one who claimed atheist Gods, (like the real one), "Came into being"
.... but neither Dawkins the Believer, or any of you, have any EVIDENCE:
> fasgnadh never showed evidence of some "god" or "gods", leaving atheism
Of course I didn't, I'm an agnostic, your atheist Prophet Dawkins was
the one who claimed atheist Gods, (like the real one), "Came into being"
.... but neither Dawkins the Believer, or any of you, have any EVIDENCE:
DonH
Jan 24, 2012, 1:33:57 PM1/24/12
to
"fasgnadh" <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2xuTq.2087$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
# Whether it be Dawkins speculating, or "fasgnadh" agnosticising, there is
no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
ravings of the human mind.
God is a Mental Delusion. God is absent from the human scene. He
performs no Acts. He makes no Revelations, Visitations, or Anything Else.
Hence, He does not Exist.
If you have a God, trot Him out!
Define your God, in, say, 100 words - and any competent Atheist will
refute it.
The Eternal Life Insurance industry relies on Indoctrination of the
Young for its continued existence - and extrapolation of Self-preservation
Instinct, to reinforce it.
God & Son are the CEOs whom no one ever sees or hears, locked away in a
back room.
Meanwhile the Executive demands weekly Premiums, paid at the Office.
The Policy Matures at Death - but there is no proof of anyone
collecting on it.
But the Executive are Experts, so Trust them!
There, put Religion in a normal Business context and it could be
prosecuted for Fraud.
["fasgnadh" doesn't know if a God exists or not, but if a Being
presented Itself and claimed to be God, how would you know the truth or
falsity of such claim - it might be the Devil in disguise?]
[Communists are atheists. You are an atheist. Hence, you are a
Communist.]
news:2xuTq.2087$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
ravings of the human mind.
God is a Mental Delusion. God is absent from the human scene. He
performs no Acts. He makes no Revelations, Visitations, or Anything Else.
Hence, He does not Exist.
If you have a God, trot Him out!
Define your God, in, say, 100 words - and any competent Atheist will
refute it.
The Eternal Life Insurance industry relies on Indoctrination of the
Young for its continued existence - and extrapolation of Self-preservation
Instinct, to reinforce it.
God & Son are the CEOs whom no one ever sees or hears, locked away in a
back room.
Meanwhile the Executive demands weekly Premiums, paid at the Office.
The Policy Matures at Death - but there is no proof of anyone
collecting on it.
But the Executive are Experts, so Trust them!
There, put Religion in a normal Business context and it could be
prosecuted for Fraud.
["fasgnadh" doesn't know if a God exists or not, but if a Being
presented Itself and claimed to be God, how would you know the truth or
falsity of such claim - it might be the Devil in disguise?]
[Communists are atheists. You are an atheist. Hence, you are a
Communist.]
fasgnadh
Jan 29, 2012, 6:49:38 PM1/29/12
to
On 29/01/2012 6:12 PM, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
Ah, Kelpie Bjarnyardson, the atheist who describes
the atheist holocausts killing over 60,000,000 people as
'cleaning house'; 8^o
# From: Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjar...@gmail.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,aus.religion
# Subject: Re: so why are atheists so pigheaded? Ask Kelsey "Squealer'
# Byarnyardson, Chief Porker at Animal Farm! B^D
# Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 07:10:38 -0800
# Message-ID: <eono56-...@spanky-dtr.localhost.net>
#
# [snips]
#
# > "Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
# > -Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
# >
# > "Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
# > - Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
# ...
# Simple solution: get rid of religion.
#
# > But it was not just the Atheism of the leadership, but of the entire
# > State apparatus;
#
# Of course; religion is competition.
# Why you don't get that isn't clear.
#
# > The Atheist leadership's policies were implemented under
# > the red Terror, via gulags and executions,
# > the use of every arm of the state for anti-religious
# > propaganda and the forced indoctrination of CHILDREN!
# >
# > "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
# > - Daniel Peris,
# > "Storming the Heavens:
# > The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
# > Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
# >
# > "Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
#
# Very likely, as criticizing would implicitly support _some_ form of
# religious view, and the competition wasn't wanted. Yes, and? Oh, I'm
# sorry, you can't grasp the notion of competition and why one wouldn't
# want it?
#
# > "Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
# > In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
# > 3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
# > Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
# > in winter until they turned to ice-pillars.
#
# Getting rid of the competition. Cleaning house.
Just like the Nazi's did! B^[
The Cambodian Genocide:
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392millones.jpg
"The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks,
regarded by the regime as social parasites,
were defrocked and forced into labor brigades.
Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were
destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails.
Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into
rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying
or expressing religious sentiments in other ways
were often killed.
The Christian and Muslim communities were among the most
persecuted, as well. The Roman Catholic cathedral of
Phnom Penh was completely razed.
The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they
regard as an abomination. Many of those who refused were killed.
Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed."
- http://countrystudies.us/cambodia/29.htm
"Forty-eight percent of Cambodia's Christians were killed
because of their religion."
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/44camboyano.jpg
Watch him slink away, because they CANNOT REFUTE THE FACTS!
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:52:06 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
> [empty list elided]
>
> The list of rebuttals to flabnads' arguments about atheism will remain
> empty until such time as he posts an argument coherent enough to warrant
> a rebuttal.
Oh, I have had THOUSANDS of responses from atheists, but after none of
them had a COHERENT argument. even to simple QUESTIONS such as "why
have all the great and enduring civilisations been inspired by spiritual
teachings, all built and sustained by RELIGIOUS populations?"
and the corollary, "Why has there never been a SINGLE great atheist
civilisation, not even a single decent secular democracy, EVERY atheist
state in all of human history has been a totalitarian TYRANNY".
For months, dragging ito years atheist's sent in their best pitchers,
and I belted them right out of the park, eventually they gave up, and
as this thread shows, they now only talk ABOUT ME, huddled together in
little self-reinforcement groups of mutual tool fondling, they swap
ad hom abuse ABOUT ME, they don't actually face me, or my arguments,
in debate. B^]
Just like the Kooks, they shit on the carpet but then run away.
It's a toss up whether to chase them with the baseball bat of reason,
(it only sustains their fading sense of self-worth)
or just call the cleaning lady and ignore them.
> If you dislike the empty list of rebuttals, please take it
> up with him, and whomever monitors his medications.
Sure sure.. Only FOOLS would all run around like chooks with your heads
cut off endless talking ABOUT someone with NOTHING to say, but never
actually engaging WITH him in rational debate, let alone SHOWING him to
be wrong!! B^D
Atheists DO respond, but it's always the same, ad hom and abuse, (as
your pointless post demonstrates, empty rhetoric, bluster and bullshit,
lies and slander, but you ALL run from the ISSUES.
Atheism has NO SUBSTANCE,
Everyone can see that the 'opponents' the atheists DO engage with are
the dumbest, weak minded fundies.. because they operate at the same
Low-IQ end of the spectrum as yourselves, and you figure that you
have a (thin) chance of defeating them, and thus making yourselves
look good. It's the same strategy I employ with you knuckle-dragging,
intellectually disabled, gutless atheist holocaust deniers..
You weak minded atheist tools can't even defend a critique based
ENTIRELY on the words of your most prominent atheist SpokesOrcs,
Prophet Dawkins, because NONE of you can explain HOW these
ATHEIST "Gods came into being";
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA
(Watch him RUN, not from me, but from the TRUTH!)
--
Ah, Kelpie Bjarnyardson, the atheist who describes
the atheist holocausts killing over 60,000,000 people as
'cleaning house'; 8^o
# From: Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjar...@gmail.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,aus.religion
# Subject: Re: so why are atheists so pigheaded? Ask Kelsey "Squealer'
# Byarnyardson, Chief Porker at Animal Farm! B^D
# Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 07:10:38 -0800
# Message-ID: <eono56-...@spanky-dtr.localhost.net>
#
# [snips]
#
# > "Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
# > -Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
# >
# > "Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
# > - Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
# ...
# Simple solution: get rid of religion.
#
# > But it was not just the Atheism of the leadership, but of the entire
# > State apparatus;
#
# Of course; religion is competition.
# Why you don't get that isn't clear.
#
# > The Atheist leadership's policies were implemented under
# > the red Terror, via gulags and executions,
# > the use of every arm of the state for anti-religious
# > propaganda and the forced indoctrination of CHILDREN!
# >
# > "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
# > - Daniel Peris,
# > "Storming the Heavens:
# > The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
# > Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
# >
# > "Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
#
# Very likely, as criticizing would implicitly support _some_ form of
# religious view, and the competition wasn't wanted. Yes, and? Oh, I'm
# sorry, you can't grasp the notion of competition and why one wouldn't
# want it?
#
# > "Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
# > In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
# > 3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
# > Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
# > in winter until they turned to ice-pillars.
#
# Getting rid of the competition. Cleaning house.
Just like the Nazi's did! B^[
The Cambodian Genocide:
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392millones.jpg
"The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks,
regarded by the regime as social parasites,
were defrocked and forced into labor brigades.
Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were
destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails.
Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into
rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying
or expressing religious sentiments in other ways
were often killed.
The Christian and Muslim communities were among the most
persecuted, as well. The Roman Catholic cathedral of
Phnom Penh was completely razed.
The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they
regard as an abomination. Many of those who refused were killed.
Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed."
- http://countrystudies.us/cambodia/29.htm
"Forty-eight percent of Cambodia's Christians were killed
because of their religion."
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/44camboyano.jpg
Watch him slink away, because they CANNOT REFUTE THE FACTS!
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:52:06 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
> The list of rebuttals to flabnads' arguments about atheism will remain
> empty until such time as he posts an argument coherent enough to warrant
> a rebuttal.
Oh, I have had THOUSANDS of responses from atheists, but after none of
them had a COHERENT argument. even to simple QUESTIONS such as "why
have all the great and enduring civilisations been inspired by spiritual
teachings, all built and sustained by RELIGIOUS populations?"
and the corollary, "Why has there never been a SINGLE great atheist
civilisation, not even a single decent secular democracy, EVERY atheist
state in all of human history has been a totalitarian TYRANNY".
For months, dragging ito years atheist's sent in their best pitchers,
and I belted them right out of the park, eventually they gave up, and
as this thread shows, they now only talk ABOUT ME, huddled together in
little self-reinforcement groups of mutual tool fondling, they swap
ad hom abuse ABOUT ME, they don't actually face me, or my arguments,
in debate. B^]
Just like the Kooks, they shit on the carpet but then run away.
It's a toss up whether to chase them with the baseball bat of reason,
(it only sustains their fading sense of self-worth)
or just call the cleaning lady and ignore them.
> If you dislike the empty list of rebuttals, please take it
> up with him, and whomever monitors his medications.
Sure sure.. Only FOOLS would all run around like chooks with your heads
cut off endless talking ABOUT someone with NOTHING to say, but never
actually engaging WITH him in rational debate, let alone SHOWING him to
be wrong!! B^D
Atheists DO respond, but it's always the same, ad hom and abuse, (as
your pointless post demonstrates, empty rhetoric, bluster and bullshit,
lies and slander, but you ALL run from the ISSUES.
Atheism has NO SUBSTANCE,
Everyone can see that the 'opponents' the atheists DO engage with are
the dumbest, weak minded fundies.. because they operate at the same
Low-IQ end of the spectrum as yourselves, and you figure that you
have a (thin) chance of defeating them, and thus making yourselves
look good. It's the same strategy I employ with you knuckle-dragging,
intellectually disabled, gutless atheist holocaust deniers..
You weak minded atheist tools can't even defend a critique based
ENTIRELY on the words of your most prominent atheist SpokesOrcs,
Prophet Dawkins, because NONE of you can explain HOW these
ATHEIST "Gods came into being";
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA
(Watch him RUN, not from me, but from the TRUTH!)
--
fasgnadh
Jan 30, 2012, 12:23:43 AM1/30/12
to
> # Whether it be Dawkins speculating,
.....
> there is
> no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
> ravings of the human mind.
Thanks don, you support my rational argument that Dawkin's is raving
> no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
> ravings of the human mind.
and has NO EVIDENCE for his claims about atheist Gods.. you now have
to convince LYING ATHEISTS such as Ravin anc Co who insist Dawkin's is
STILL an Atheist !!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAA
But Don, Don, you are MISSING THE POINT, again old son! B^D
Atheists, being mocked for their INCAPACITY to refute my arguments
screeched hysterically "but he doesn't have rational arguments for us to
Refute" clearly a LIE because here you are having a go..! B^D
Not only have you responded to my rational argument, you have FAILED
to refute it and in fact YOU AGREE WITH IT!
So that's still a 100% FAILURE rate of atheists to refute my rational
arguments!
Keep those arguments coming, you atheist liars, you can't pretend
I don't HAVE rational arguments any more, you are faced with the
truth that YOU SIMPLY CAN'T REFUTE THEM!
Q.E.D
cadit quaetio
--
fasgnadh
Jan 30, 2012, 1:13:18 AM1/30/12
to
Abu'Baker Bashir spat out his angry abuse, but no rational argument:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:52:06 +1100, felix_unger<m...@nothere.com>
> perhaps someone will take the time to rebut it.
Sure, I've already reprised some you all pretended to ignore
and atheists have TRIED to refute it, with a 100% failure rate!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
The atheists couldn't even UNDERSTAND the Challenge or
follow the rational argument, let alone REFUTE any of it!
This one actually caved in and AGREED with my rational argument!!!
I converted one of your formerly BLIND atheist
believers to SEE DE LIGHT: B^D
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.religion,alt.atheism.satire,alt.agnosticism,
# aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Atheist not only fails to refute my rational argument,
# he SUPPORTS IT, making a LIAR of all the atheists who false
# claim I don't present any!
# Re: There is no evidence for Atheist rebuttals
# of fasgnadh's arguments
# Message-ID: <EPpVq.2368$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:43 +1100
This next one couldn't work out what the argument was,
perhaps he needs help from you!?
> Or perhaps not.
Of course, it's the SAME question that gave you a nervous breakdown
years ago, when you threatened to Top yourself, and then gave
a big farewell cruel world speech:
# > From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# > Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# > alt.religion,alt.philosophy,aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,
# > alt.politics.republicans,alt.politics.democrats
# > Subject: Re: Atheist rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments -
# > #1 Why are there no great and enduring atheist civilisations?
# > (EVERY atheist state in history has been a totalitarian tyranny)
# > - Score to date: 100% failure by atheists
# > Message-ID: <yCpVq.2367$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# > Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:09:45 +1100
# >
# > On 30/01/2012 2:34 PM, Michael Gordge wrote:
# >> On Jan 24, 8:45 am, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
# >>> On 21/01/2012 8:54 PM, DanielSan wrote:
# >>>
# >>>
# >>>> On 1/21/2012 1:52 AM, felix_unger wrote:
# >>>
# >>>>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion
# >>>>> has taken place, which I haven't been able to keep
# >>>>> up with due to time and priority
# >>>>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion,
# >>>>> and a brief glance at some recent posts,
# >>>>> I think I have enough information to present a
# >>>>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's
# >>>>> arguments concerning atheism, and so I now list them below:
[long series of blank lines followed]
They are STILL BLANK! B^]
# >>>>> thank you!
# >>>
# >>> Priceless truth!
# >>>
# >>>> And what are "fasgnadh's arguments concerning atheism"?
Atheists find it EASY to play dumb! B^D
# >>> You mean all the atheists that have argued them with me
# >>> for years, NEVER UNDERSTOOD what they were so vehemently,
# >>> but incoherently, opposing with lies, slander, post forging,
# >>> straw man misrepresentations and hysterical denunciations?
# >>>
# >>> Only a fool would put that much energy into arguing
# >>> against 'nothing', are you claiming to be a fool? B^D
# >>>
# >>> Why, I have threads where YOU have taken issue with
# >>> one or more of my arguments. Have you grown senile
# >>> that you can't remember them and claim there were none?
# >>>
# >>> I will remind you all. B^]
# >>>
# >>>> Can you possibly list them?
# >>>
# >>> Sure, I will repost one a week for the next decade,
# >>> so Usenet has a CONSTANT REMINDER of all the arguments
# >>> atheists have run away from, unable to rebut, and which
# >>> they now claim they simply couldn't see and didn't understand
# >>> because of their unique atheist perspective;
# >>>
# >>>
# http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPY...
# >>>
# >>> So don't go away, or people with think you are a pathetic,
# >>> gutless liar, who has abandoned more arguments in defeat
# >>> than I have had hot dinners.
# >>>
# >>> Later I will pull out some specific ones for you and
# >>> other atheists,
# >>> showing your individual flight path from the issues.
# >>>
# >>> For now, just the initial challenge I put when I first arrived
# >>> in alt.atheism and discovered what a seething cesspit
# >>> of anti-theist hatred and bigotry it was;
# >>>
# >>> "Why are there no great and enduring atheist civilisations?
# >>> (EVERY atheist state in history has been a totalitarian
# >>> tyranny)"
# >>>
Now, that not only stumped every atheist in the room this time
round, but all of those atheists that RESPONDED TO THIS POST,
UNIVERSALLY FAILED TO EVEN ADDRESS IT.
And it was the same question that Abu'Baker Bashir drove himself MAD
trying to come up with some sort of feeble explanation... before
he had his breakdown, and left;
# From: John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Another One Bites The Dust
# Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:07:33 -0500
# Message-ID: <hf1aj495t47br8nnh...@4ax.com>
#
# Just wanted to say farewell to everyone.
# I've been giving it quite a
# lot of thought lately, and I've
# decided it's time for me to move on.
#
# I've finally reached the end of my rope.
#
# I've simply had all I can stand
@
# I just can't handle it anymore.
#
# I don't see myself continuing
# I'm going to end up going postal.
I offered to pass the hat around and collect money to buy him a stamp
and an envelope, B^]
...but by then he had lost all sense of humour,
all sense at all, really, and he hasn't gained any since...
So
I have rational arguments,
Atheists can't refute them, as we see here..
and most of them have stopped even trying...
They KNOW when they are LICKED.. all over! B^]
# >>> Oh, I may be going up to the farm next week, the cropping of
# >>> the 40,000 trees in the pine plantation is almost complete
# >>> and we are planning the rehabilitation with native plants,
# >>> now that our CO2 capture project is done..
So I left a second weekly challenge..
and they not only couldn't refute it,
the responding atheists AGREE WITH ME:
# >>> so here's next weeks argument that you all ran from,
# >>> unable to rebut the clear evidence of atheist hypocrisy;
# >>> the claim that these atheist God's came into being, when
# >>> you have NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for that atheist BELIEF:
# >>>
# >>> Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
# >>> intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
# >>> could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
# >>> scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
# >>> atheist can explain in relation to the non-existent atheist Gods)
# >>>
# >>> # "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins
# >>> # walks far afield.
# >>> # He talks of the possibility that we might
# >>> # co-evolve with computers, a silicon destiny.
# >>> # And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# >>> # writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
# >>> # Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# >>> # something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent
# >>> # and moral energy.
# >>> # there are God-like creatures."
# >>> # "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# >>> # came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# >>> # incremental evolution."'
# >>>
# >>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
# >>>
# >>> So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
# >>> unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
# >>> whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, the
# >>> atheist God evolved?
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ---------
# >
# >>
# >> Hey
# >
# > Yes, Whose calling?
# >
# > > dumb cunt,
# >
# > And what do you want, D.C.?
# >
# >> if ewe call those who claim god doesn't exist as
# >> 'atheist' what the fuck do ewe call those who say
@ >> god does exist
Eg prophet Dawkins in the case I have given you...
# >> as an idiotic load of mind dependent
# >> crap, on a par with unicorns and the
# >> tooth fairy?
# >
# > I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what's going on here,
This woolly thinker is AGREEING with me and my criticism
of Prophet Dawkins BELIEF in his Gods, WITHOUT PROOF!
He's NOT refuting my rational argument.. He's ACCEPTING IT
I win.
# > Nappisan and the other atheists tried to pretend that their
# > lack of rebuttal of ANY of my arguments is.. get this,
# > they claim there haven't BEEN ANY !!! BWAHAHAAHAHAHA
# >
# > So I mocked the gutless liars mercilessly and reprised one,
# > for them to rebut..
# >
# > Note, none of my arguments are ABOUT GOD, I'm an agnostic,
# > they are all about Atheism, and in particular, why has every
# > atheist state in history been a totalitarian tyranny!?
In this case the 'God Argument' is from Prophet Dawkins, and
Michael Gorge, sheepishly AGREES WITH ME, that Dawkins HAS NO
EVIDENCE for his claim that these ATHEIST "Gods came into being"
Q.E.D.
# > ...but they can't answer, and have RUN AWAY, thereby
# > admitting that the fault is THEIR INABILITY TO REFUTE
# > THE HISTORICAL TRUTH, not any lack of said historical truth...
# >
# > ..and then YOU bumble along, and demonstrate that atheists
# > can't even GRASP THE CHALLENGE, let alone meet it!
# >
# > Q.E.D.
# >
# > Why don't you just resort to the standard atheist cop-out..
# >
# > Snip
# > Run/ try and change the subject
# > Lie
# >
# > You have just about completed the trifecta:
# >
# >> Hey dopey, at the age of 12 or 14 ewe rejected the tooth fairy and
# >> santa as silly nonsense
# >
# > Liar, where's your evidence that I reject Santa,
# > for all YOU know, you slandering atheist shitpig,
# > I might actually play him at Christmas time...
# >
# > Atheists can't even FIND the ARGUMENT
# > EVEN WHEN I PUT IT IN THE SUBJECT HEADER,
# > let alone can they REFUTE it!
and in their clumsy attempts they LIE,
and end up agreeing with me! B^D
# >
# > Thanks for playing!
>>
>> thank you!
>
> Fuck you!
Still hurting and still gnashing your teeth in impotent rage, I see
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:52:06 +1100, felix_unger<m...@nothere.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
> If and when fagsnuts gets around to actually *presenting* an argument,
>
>>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
> perhaps someone will take the time to rebut it.
Sure, I've already reprised some you all pretended to ignore
and atheists have TRIED to refute it, with a 100% failure rate!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
The atheists couldn't even UNDERSTAND the Challenge or
follow the rational argument, let alone REFUTE any of it!
This one actually caved in and AGREED with my rational argument!!!
I converted one of your formerly BLIND atheist
believers to SEE DE LIGHT: B^D
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.religion,alt.atheism.satire,alt.agnosticism,
# aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Atheist not only fails to refute my rational argument,
# he SUPPORTS IT, making a LIAR of all the atheists who false
# claim I don't present any!
# Re: There is no evidence for Atheist rebuttals
# of fasgnadh's arguments
# Message-ID: <EPpVq.2368$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:43 +1100
This next one couldn't work out what the argument was,
perhaps he needs help from you!?
> Or perhaps not.
Of course, it's the SAME question that gave you a nervous breakdown
years ago, when you threatened to Top yourself, and then gave
a big farewell cruel world speech:
# > From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# > Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# > alt.religion,alt.philosophy,aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,
# > alt.politics.republicans,alt.politics.democrats
# > Subject: Re: Atheist rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments -
# > #1 Why are there no great and enduring atheist civilisations?
# > (EVERY atheist state in history has been a totalitarian tyranny)
# > - Score to date: 100% failure by atheists
# > Message-ID: <yCpVq.2367$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# > Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:09:45 +1100
# >
# > On 30/01/2012 2:34 PM, Michael Gordge wrote:
# >> On Jan 24, 8:45 am, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
# >>> On 21/01/2012 8:54 PM, DanielSan wrote:
# >>>
# >>>
# >>>> On 1/21/2012 1:52 AM, felix_unger wrote:
# >>>
# >>>>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion
# >>>>> has taken place, which I haven't been able to keep
# >>>>> up with due to time and priority
# >>>>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion,
# >>>>> and a brief glance at some recent posts,
# >>>>> I think I have enough information to present a
# >>>>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's
# >>>>> arguments concerning atheism, and so I now list them below:
[long series of blank lines followed]
They are STILL BLANK! B^]
# >>>>> thank you!
# >>>
# >>> Priceless truth!
# >>>
# >>>> And what are "fasgnadh's arguments concerning atheism"?
Atheists find it EASY to play dumb! B^D
# >>> You mean all the atheists that have argued them with me
# >>> for years, NEVER UNDERSTOOD what they were so vehemently,
# >>> but incoherently, opposing with lies, slander, post forging,
# >>> straw man misrepresentations and hysterical denunciations?
# >>>
# >>> Only a fool would put that much energy into arguing
# >>> against 'nothing', are you claiming to be a fool? B^D
# >>>
# >>> Why, I have threads where YOU have taken issue with
# >>> one or more of my arguments. Have you grown senile
# >>> that you can't remember them and claim there were none?
# >>>
# >>> I will remind you all. B^]
# >>>
# >>>> Can you possibly list them?
# >>>
# >>> Sure, I will repost one a week for the next decade,
# >>> so Usenet has a CONSTANT REMINDER of all the arguments
# >>> atheists have run away from, unable to rebut, and which
# >>> they now claim they simply couldn't see and didn't understand
# >>> because of their unique atheist perspective;
# >>>
# >>>
# http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPY...
# >>>
# >>> So don't go away, or people with think you are a pathetic,
# >>> gutless liar, who has abandoned more arguments in defeat
# >>> than I have had hot dinners.
# >>>
# >>> Later I will pull out some specific ones for you and
# >>> other atheists,
# >>> showing your individual flight path from the issues.
# >>>
# >>> For now, just the initial challenge I put when I first arrived
# >>> in alt.atheism and discovered what a seething cesspit
# >>> of anti-theist hatred and bigotry it was;
# >>>
# >>> "Why are there no great and enduring atheist civilisations?
# >>> (EVERY atheist state in history has been a totalitarian
# >>> tyranny)"
# >>>
Now, that not only stumped every atheist in the room this time
round, but all of those atheists that RESPONDED TO THIS POST,
UNIVERSALLY FAILED TO EVEN ADDRESS IT.
And it was the same question that Abu'Baker Bashir drove himself MAD
trying to come up with some sort of feeble explanation... before
he had his breakdown, and left;
# From: John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Another One Bites The Dust
# Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:07:33 -0500
# Message-ID: <hf1aj495t47br8nnh...@4ax.com>
#
# Just wanted to say farewell to everyone.
# I've been giving it quite a
# lot of thought lately, and I've
# decided it's time for me to move on.
#
# I've finally reached the end of my rope.
#
# I've simply had all I can stand
@
# I just can't handle it anymore.
#
# I don't see myself continuing
# I'm going to end up going postal.
I offered to pass the hat around and collect money to buy him a stamp
and an envelope, B^]
...but by then he had lost all sense of humour,
all sense at all, really, and he hasn't gained any since...
So
I have rational arguments,
Atheists can't refute them, as we see here..
and most of them have stopped even trying...
They KNOW when they are LICKED.. all over! B^]
# >>> Oh, I may be going up to the farm next week, the cropping of
# >>> the 40,000 trees in the pine plantation is almost complete
# >>> and we are planning the rehabilitation with native plants,
# >>> now that our CO2 capture project is done..
So I left a second weekly challenge..
and they not only couldn't refute it,
the responding atheists AGREE WITH ME:
# >>> so here's next weeks argument that you all ran from,
# >>> unable to rebut the clear evidence of atheist hypocrisy;
# >>> the claim that these atheist God's came into being, when
# >>> you have NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for that atheist BELIEF:
# >>>
# >>> Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
# >>> intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
# >>> could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
# >>> scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
# >>> atheist can explain in relation to the non-existent atheist Gods)
# >>>
# >>> # "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins
# >>> # walks far afield.
# >>> # He talks of the possibility that we might
# >>> # co-evolve with computers, a silicon destiny.
# >>> # And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# >>> # writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
# >>> #
# >>> # 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of
# >>> # speculative years into the future.
# >>> # 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of
# >>> # Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# >>> # something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent
# >>> # and moral energy.
# >>> #
# >>> # Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
# >>> #
# >>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly
# >>> # plausible that in the universe
# >>> # Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
# >>> #
# >>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly
# >>> # there are God-like creatures."
# >>> #
# >>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks
# >>> # he’s gone around a religious bend.
# >>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks
# >>> # "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# >>> # came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# >>> # incremental evolution."'
# >>> #
# >>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
# >>> #
# >>> # “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# >>> # wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
# >>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
# >>> #
# >>> # “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# >>>
# >>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
# >>>
# >>> So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
# >>> unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
# >>> whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, the
# >>> atheist God evolved?
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ...........................................................
# >>>
# >>> ---------
# >
# >>
# >> Hey
# >
# > Yes, Whose calling?
# >
# > > dumb cunt,
# >
# > And what do you want, D.C.?
# >
# >> if ewe call those who claim god doesn't exist as
# >> 'atheist' what the fuck do ewe call those who say
@ >> god does exist
Eg prophet Dawkins in the case I have given you...
# >> as an idiotic load of mind dependent
# >> crap, on a par with unicorns and the
# >> tooth fairy?
# >
# > I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what's going on here,
This woolly thinker is AGREEING with me and my criticism
of Prophet Dawkins BELIEF in his Gods, WITHOUT PROOF!
He's NOT refuting my rational argument.. He's ACCEPTING IT
I win.
# > Nappisan and the other atheists tried to pretend that their
# > lack of rebuttal of ANY of my arguments is.. get this,
# > they claim there haven't BEEN ANY !!! BWAHAHAAHAHAHA
# >
# > So I mocked the gutless liars mercilessly and reprised one,
# > for them to rebut..
# >
# > Note, none of my arguments are ABOUT GOD, I'm an agnostic,
# > they are all about Atheism, and in particular, why has every
# > atheist state in history been a totalitarian tyranny!?
In this case the 'God Argument' is from Prophet Dawkins, and
Michael Gorge, sheepishly AGREES WITH ME, that Dawkins HAS NO
EVIDENCE for his claim that these ATHEIST "Gods came into being"
Q.E.D.
# > ...but they can't answer, and have RUN AWAY, thereby
# > admitting that the fault is THEIR INABILITY TO REFUTE
# > THE HISTORICAL TRUTH, not any lack of said historical truth...
# >
# > ..and then YOU bumble along, and demonstrate that atheists
# > can't even GRASP THE CHALLENGE, let alone meet it!
# >
# > Q.E.D.
# >
# > Why don't you just resort to the standard atheist cop-out..
# >
# > Snip
# > Run/ try and change the subject
# > Lie
# >
# > You have just about completed the trifecta:
# >
# >> Hey dopey, at the age of 12 or 14 ewe rejected the tooth fairy and
# >> santa as silly nonsense
# >
# > Liar, where's your evidence that I reject Santa,
# > for all YOU know, you slandering atheist shitpig,
# > I might actually play him at Christmas time...
# >
# > Atheists can't even FIND the ARGUMENT
# > EVEN WHEN I PUT IT IN THE SUBJECT HEADER,
# > let alone can they REFUTE it!
and in their clumsy attempts they LIE,
and end up agreeing with me! B^D
# >
# > Thanks for playing!
>>
>> thank you!
>
> Fuck you!
Still hurting and still gnashing your teeth in impotent rage, I see
fasgnadh
Jan 30, 2012, 5:21:48 AM1/30/12
to
On 30/01/2012 5:49 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
> Atheists ALL Agreed With Fasgnadh - NONE Refuted Him
No, not ALL atheists agreed with me, the ones that posted did,
when you exaggerate you weaken the case.
Listen, if you alter my text, be careful, I'm a stickler
for truth, i like to make my arguments airtight,
and as you know, most atheists won't go toe to to with me..
they like their fasgnadh PRE-DIGESTED..
some, who have me killfilled after I bruised their precious ego's,
wait till some atheist stooge has snipped my carefully constructed
arguments to pieces, and then misrepresented it, and they argue
with me via ATHEIST Proxy... it's about as slyly dishonest as you can
get, but it sooths their damaged ego's to defeat their own strawmen.
Some will wait till people who agree with what I have said post, and if
they find an exaggeration they will treat it as if I made it..
So lets have a chat.
We have in common some issues with atheists, but I am not coming from
the same place as you are... for example, I believe in evolution.
If I was God I would have set up self organising rules in the universe,
much as we find them through science, and let it go...
It's stunningly complex, and yet based on very simple self-organising
and self replicating processes.. and far more impressive than taking
a rib from one gender and making the other.
So I rarely chat with theists, because my views on matters spiritual
are invariably broader and more inclusive than most believers.
I share the notion with the Sufi's, and mystics of all religions
that God, if He exists, is ultimately unknowable (see even the
pronoun "He" shows the limits of out language when describing the
numinous, God has no gender, just like the Houris in the Qur'an
which every simple minded Taliban and most ignorant westerners
translate as 'Virgins', when the Arabic translates as 'Pure Ones'
and as they exist in the Spiritual Realm, that would mean like Angels
in your theology.
Al we can never know about God is what we discern in the Universe and
the attributes of his Messengers: Abraham, Moses, Jesus are the ones
I expect you would acknowledge, so lets stick with them, because that is
your language, your frame of reference.. and I can talk it, because
I was raised .. well I was going to say Christian, but my parents
raised us to "see with our own eyes, and not through the eyes of others"
so I was given absolute freedom to believe...
I was different to most kids my age, I read about Buddhism in early
secondary school, I still love it.. and I chose to go to bible study,
(neither of my parents attended church, but they were involved in
community groups and Jesus, that is, the THINGS HE TAUGHT, were
important, in our house. My parents came from mixed religious
backgrounds, my mother had a Catholic father and a Protestant mother
and they remembered the stories of name calling and cliquishness,
which made my parents love what Jesus stood for, but avoid organised
religion.. I think that distinction has always stayed with me, too.
Moses was only just coming down from the mountain, but already
the 'church' the chosen people, were making and worshipping the
Golden Calf.. (much as modern Christians do, on Wall St ;-)
Jesus was betrayed even by the Disciples, his first and closest
followers, and they were EXPECTING a Messiah!
So, in my view, the teachings are the measure of a religion,
and it is almost expected that the followers will FAIL to live
up to them ...it's the TRYING TO that matters
that is what makes the great and enduring civilisations.
They have the power to TRANSFORM human behaviour,
in a way which no man made ideology, Nazism, Atheism, Communism,
Imperialism, Nationalism, Racism, Colonialism.. ever has.
So, they survive because, despite the human F*ck ups who
run the religion, and especially if they have a clergy,
which over time will serve their OWN interests, not follow
the teachings (they are always HARD because they ask us
to become MORE than what we already are...) despite the
backsliding, and the perversion of doctrine over time,
and the corruption when Church and state get into bed,
despite all this, they are better than any system which
'LACKS such Spiritual Guidance.
My arguments, as you see are all historical and reality based,
even if their were no God, the idea of transcendence, and the
goal of attempting to BECOME, to TRANSCEND our own weakness,
is psychologically a sound one.
But my discovery of Buddhism, and later of the Sufi poets,
Islamic civilisation, the Hindu civilisation, Zoroasterians,
so old we know almost nothing about them.. made me realise
that no religion has sole, proprietary rights to truth..
IF there is a God, the fact that the teachings of all the worlds
great religions have THE SAME CORE SPIRITUAL VALUES, and even
share many of the same stories ( KRSNA and Buddha and Jesus have
a great deal in common) would suggest that he speaks to all people
in every corner of the world, in different epochs.
The Jews Christians and Muslims all worship the same God, as do
Sikhs, Mormons, Native Americans.. et al..
Hinduism is so old that the forms have grown over the teachings,
Brahman, the Supreme universal spirit has attributes (like
Yahweh or Allah, being known as the All-powerful, the All-Loving
the All-Wise, the Allmighty.. and these have come to be worshipped
in Hinduism as separate deities, Ganesh, Shiva et al..
Any organisation 4000 years old is bound to have been changed over time
by it's adherents.. but it still has a Billion adherents..
So, Having started life as a Christian, I still think Jesus is
an extraordinary Spiritual teacher, but not the only one.
ANd when he was asked, Rabbi (for that is what he WAS, a TEACHER,
of mankind) what is the Greatest Commandment.. he did not blather
on about the trinity, he did not attack Judaism as 'passe' he
Simply said "Love God" and how can we humans possibly do that,
we can't see him, we can't give him anything he doesn't already have..
and the answer comes in the next bit, by Loving One Another. Q.E.D.
And idea for All Time. Simple to explain, a LIFETIME to master
and put into PRACTICE.
So, I don't talk theology, I am not interested in such pointless
disputation, it's like plants discussing the Sun.. pointless
speculation.
That was a longwinded way of saying..
I belive that if people ACTED as if God exists the world
would be a better place, but arguing about it is NOT
what Jesus said your Job is.. and neither did Buddha,
Mohammed (PBUH) KRSNA, Moses, Zoroaster, Guru Nanak..
I don't talk about religion, I simply ask every
Catholic to be the BEST Catholic they can be.
and every Muslim to be the best they can be
and every Christian to live up to THEIR teacher..
and if they do that, and respect one another..
then surely.. the Kingom will be at hand.
That's your job.. the atheists are not in the game,
but they are still influenced by the spiritual teachings.
So treat them as Jesus taught you to.. with love and forgiveness.
As I do, ;-) even though I'm not a Christian.
# From: fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com.au>
# Subject: Re: Education: an atheist's dilemma
# Message-ID: <sF8jm.12963$ze1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
# Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:26:48 GMT
#
#
# In the end I opted for secular schools..
#
# As my brother, St Rod, says, "I'm not interested
# in people's theology, I just want to see how they TREAT OTHERS!"
#
# 'Adopt as your fundamental creed that you will equip
# yourself for life, not solely for your own benefit,
# but for the benefit of the whole community'
#
# - Sir John Monash, 1923
#
# Verily:
#
# The religion of love is a part from all religions.
# The lovers of God have no religion but God alone
# -The Mathnawi II, 1720
Here's a story you might like, or hate
Have it as a gift any way
THE ONE TRUE LIGHT
Some Hindus bought an elephant, which they exhibited in a dark shed.
As seeing it was impossible, everyone felt it with the palm of his hand.
The hand of one fell on its trunk: he said "This animal is like a water
pipe".
Another touched its ear: to him the creature seemed like a fan.
Another handled its leg and described the elephant as having the shape
of a pillar.
Another stroked its back. "Truly", said he, "this elephant resembles a
throne".
Had each of them held a lighted candle
there would have been no contradiction in their words.
The lamps are different but the Light is the same:
it comes from Beyond.
If thou keep looking at the lamp, thou art lost:
for there arises the appearance of number and plurality.
Fix thy gaze upon the Light,
and thou art delivered from the dualism inherent in the finite body.
O thou who art the Kernel of Existence,
the disagreement between Moslem,
Zoroastrian and
Jew depends upon the standpoint.
For as long as religions argue, as In Life of Brian;
"Follow the Sacred Sandal"
"No Follow the Holy Gourd"
They are worshipping the lamp, not the light.
> Most of the 'troll atheist posters' here outright
> RAN from your Challenge, but the ones who
> went toe to toe with you...they lost and could
> not refute you, either.
>
> Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas,
> for it is the assertion of a universal negative.
> G.K. Chesterton
And by the way, I discourage acolytes.
The Cult of Personality was a mark of the Stalinist
and Maoist atheist states, I do not need any followers,
I am not seeking power or influence.
My ego does not need stroking to stay healthy.
> Atheists ALL Agreed With Fasgnadh - NONE Refuted Him
No, not ALL atheists agreed with me, the ones that posted did,
when you exaggerate you weaken the case.
Listen, if you alter my text, be careful, I'm a stickler
for truth, i like to make my arguments airtight,
and as you know, most atheists won't go toe to to with me..
they like their fasgnadh PRE-DIGESTED..
some, who have me killfilled after I bruised their precious ego's,
wait till some atheist stooge has snipped my carefully constructed
arguments to pieces, and then misrepresented it, and they argue
with me via ATHEIST Proxy... it's about as slyly dishonest as you can
get, but it sooths their damaged ego's to defeat their own strawmen.
Some will wait till people who agree with what I have said post, and if
they find an exaggeration they will treat it as if I made it..
So lets have a chat.
We have in common some issues with atheists, but I am not coming from
the same place as you are... for example, I believe in evolution.
If I was God I would have set up self organising rules in the universe,
much as we find them through science, and let it go...
It's stunningly complex, and yet based on very simple self-organising
and self replicating processes.. and far more impressive than taking
a rib from one gender and making the other.
So I rarely chat with theists, because my views on matters spiritual
are invariably broader and more inclusive than most believers.
I share the notion with the Sufi's, and mystics of all religions
that God, if He exists, is ultimately unknowable (see even the
pronoun "He" shows the limits of out language when describing the
numinous, God has no gender, just like the Houris in the Qur'an
which every simple minded Taliban and most ignorant westerners
translate as 'Virgins', when the Arabic translates as 'Pure Ones'
and as they exist in the Spiritual Realm, that would mean like Angels
in your theology.
Al we can never know about God is what we discern in the Universe and
the attributes of his Messengers: Abraham, Moses, Jesus are the ones
I expect you would acknowledge, so lets stick with them, because that is
your language, your frame of reference.. and I can talk it, because
I was raised .. well I was going to say Christian, but my parents
raised us to "see with our own eyes, and not through the eyes of others"
so I was given absolute freedom to believe...
I was different to most kids my age, I read about Buddhism in early
secondary school, I still love it.. and I chose to go to bible study,
(neither of my parents attended church, but they were involved in
community groups and Jesus, that is, the THINGS HE TAUGHT, were
important, in our house. My parents came from mixed religious
backgrounds, my mother had a Catholic father and a Protestant mother
and they remembered the stories of name calling and cliquishness,
which made my parents love what Jesus stood for, but avoid organised
religion.. I think that distinction has always stayed with me, too.
Moses was only just coming down from the mountain, but already
the 'church' the chosen people, were making and worshipping the
Golden Calf.. (much as modern Christians do, on Wall St ;-)
Jesus was betrayed even by the Disciples, his first and closest
followers, and they were EXPECTING a Messiah!
So, in my view, the teachings are the measure of a religion,
and it is almost expected that the followers will FAIL to live
up to them ...it's the TRYING TO that matters
that is what makes the great and enduring civilisations.
They have the power to TRANSFORM human behaviour,
in a way which no man made ideology, Nazism, Atheism, Communism,
Imperialism, Nationalism, Racism, Colonialism.. ever has.
So, they survive because, despite the human F*ck ups who
run the religion, and especially if they have a clergy,
which over time will serve their OWN interests, not follow
the teachings (they are always HARD because they ask us
to become MORE than what we already are...) despite the
backsliding, and the perversion of doctrine over time,
and the corruption when Church and state get into bed,
despite all this, they are better than any system which
'LACKS such Spiritual Guidance.
My arguments, as you see are all historical and reality based,
even if their were no God, the idea of transcendence, and the
goal of attempting to BECOME, to TRANSCEND our own weakness,
is psychologically a sound one.
But my discovery of Buddhism, and later of the Sufi poets,
Islamic civilisation, the Hindu civilisation, Zoroasterians,
so old we know almost nothing about them.. made me realise
that no religion has sole, proprietary rights to truth..
IF there is a God, the fact that the teachings of all the worlds
great religions have THE SAME CORE SPIRITUAL VALUES, and even
share many of the same stories ( KRSNA and Buddha and Jesus have
a great deal in common) would suggest that he speaks to all people
in every corner of the world, in different epochs.
The Jews Christians and Muslims all worship the same God, as do
Sikhs, Mormons, Native Americans.. et al..
Hinduism is so old that the forms have grown over the teachings,
Brahman, the Supreme universal spirit has attributes (like
Yahweh or Allah, being known as the All-powerful, the All-Loving
the All-Wise, the Allmighty.. and these have come to be worshipped
in Hinduism as separate deities, Ganesh, Shiva et al..
Any organisation 4000 years old is bound to have been changed over time
by it's adherents.. but it still has a Billion adherents..
So, Having started life as a Christian, I still think Jesus is
an extraordinary Spiritual teacher, but not the only one.
ANd when he was asked, Rabbi (for that is what he WAS, a TEACHER,
of mankind) what is the Greatest Commandment.. he did not blather
on about the trinity, he did not attack Judaism as 'passe' he
Simply said "Love God" and how can we humans possibly do that,
we can't see him, we can't give him anything he doesn't already have..
and the answer comes in the next bit, by Loving One Another. Q.E.D.
And idea for All Time. Simple to explain, a LIFETIME to master
and put into PRACTICE.
So, I don't talk theology, I am not interested in such pointless
disputation, it's like plants discussing the Sun.. pointless
speculation.
That was a longwinded way of saying..
I belive that if people ACTED as if God exists the world
would be a better place, but arguing about it is NOT
what Jesus said your Job is.. and neither did Buddha,
Mohammed (PBUH) KRSNA, Moses, Zoroaster, Guru Nanak..
I don't talk about religion, I simply ask every
Catholic to be the BEST Catholic they can be.
and every Muslim to be the best they can be
and every Christian to live up to THEIR teacher..
and if they do that, and respect one another..
then surely.. the Kingom will be at hand.
That's your job.. the atheists are not in the game,
but they are still influenced by the spiritual teachings.
So treat them as Jesus taught you to.. with love and forgiveness.
As I do, ;-) even though I'm not a Christian.
# From: fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com.au>
# Subject: Re: Education: an atheist's dilemma
# Message-ID: <sF8jm.12963$ze1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
# Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:26:48 GMT
#
#
# In the end I opted for secular schools..
#
# As my brother, St Rod, says, "I'm not interested
# in people's theology, I just want to see how they TREAT OTHERS!"
#
# 'Adopt as your fundamental creed that you will equip
# yourself for life, not solely for your own benefit,
# but for the benefit of the whole community'
#
# - Sir John Monash, 1923
#
# Verily:
#
# The religion of love is a part from all religions.
# The lovers of God have no religion but God alone
# -The Mathnawi II, 1720
Here's a story you might like, or hate
Have it as a gift any way
THE ONE TRUE LIGHT
Some Hindus bought an elephant, which they exhibited in a dark shed.
As seeing it was impossible, everyone felt it with the palm of his hand.
The hand of one fell on its trunk: he said "This animal is like a water
pipe".
Another touched its ear: to him the creature seemed like a fan.
Another handled its leg and described the elephant as having the shape
of a pillar.
Another stroked its back. "Truly", said he, "this elephant resembles a
throne".
Had each of them held a lighted candle
there would have been no contradiction in their words.
The lamps are different but the Light is the same:
it comes from Beyond.
If thou keep looking at the lamp, thou art lost:
for there arises the appearance of number and plurality.
Fix thy gaze upon the Light,
and thou art delivered from the dualism inherent in the finite body.
O thou who art the Kernel of Existence,
the disagreement between Moslem,
Zoroastrian and
Jew depends upon the standpoint.
For as long as religions argue, as In Life of Brian;
"Follow the Sacred Sandal"
"No Follow the Holy Gourd"
They are worshipping the lamp, not the light.
> Most of the 'troll atheist posters' here outright
> RAN from your Challenge, but the ones who
> went toe to toe with you...they lost and could
> not refute you, either.
>
> Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas,
> for it is the assertion of a universal negative.
> G.K. Chesterton
And by the way, I discourage acolytes.
The Cult of Personality was a mark of the Stalinist
and Maoist atheist states, I do not need any followers,
I am not seeking power or influence.
My ego does not need stroking to stay healthy.
fasgnadh
Jan 30, 2012, 8:29:28 AM1/30/12
to
On 29/01/2012 6:12 PM, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:52:06 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
>
>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken place,
>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>
> [empty list elided]
>
> The list of rebuttals to flabnads' arguments about atheism will remain
> empty until such time as he posts an argument coherent enough to warrant
> a rebuttal.
I've already reprised two of the rational arguments you all
>
> The list of rebuttals to flabnads' arguments about atheism will remain
> empty until such time as he posts an argument coherent enough to warrant
> a rebuttal.
pretended to ignore, atheists have already TRIED to refute them,
and not only did they FAIL 100%, they actually AGREED
WITH MY ARGUMENT!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
The atheists couldn't even UNDERSTAND the Challenge or
follow the rational argument, let alone REFUTE any of it!
thet Prophet Dawkin's claim that Atheist "Gods came into being.."
is totally without evidence, let alone proof!
I converted two of your formerly BLIND atheist
believers to SEE DE LIGHT: B^D
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.religion,alt.atheism.satire,alt.agnosticism,
# aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Atheist not only fails to refute my rational argument,
# he SUPPORTS IT, making a LIAR of all the atheists who false
# claim I don't present any!
# Re: There is no evidence for Atheist rebuttals
# of fasgnadh's arguments
# Message-ID: <EPpVq.2368$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:43 +1100
This next one couldn't work out what the argument was,
but eventually he also took my line that
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.religion,alt.atheism.satire,alt.agnosticism,
# aus.politics,uk.politics.misc,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Atheist not only fails to refute my rational argument,
# he SUPPORTS IT, making a LIAR of all the atheists who false
# claim I don't present any!
# Re: There is no evidence for Atheist rebuttals
# of fasgnadh's arguments
# Message-ID: <EPpVq.2368$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:43 +1100
This next one couldn't work out what the argument was,
weekly challenge [below]
ALL ENDED UP SUPPORTING *MY* ARGUMENT!
# >> as an idiotic load of mind dependent
# >> crap, on a par with unicorns and the
# >> tooth fairy?
# >
# > I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what's going on here,
This woolly thinker is AGREEING with me and my criticism
DonH
Jan 30, 2012, 1:58:02 PM1/30/12
to
"fasgnadh" <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3XwVq.2381$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
Relates to what Dawkins says about possible deities?
Anyone who claims a god, goddess, or God, exists has the onus of proof
on them.
The God Hypothesis in the modern world is totally without empirical
evidence.
You can bow down and pray umpteen times per day - but who is listening?
God is conspicuous by his absence.
You don't need to fear a non-existence Deity - but beware of his deluded
Followers!
Yes, the Mad Ape slaughters his fellows daily, and all over mental
aberrations.
fasgnadh
Jan 31, 2012, 5:08:54 AM1/31/12
to
gnashfad posted his resume:
> http://tinyurl.com/coas2v5
What are you going to do with the Abu Baker Bashirs arse?
> start licking
Whenever you're ready Kook-sucker.
We will leave you to it, just DON'T post the photos,
we don't share your taste for shite.
> On 30/01/2012 5:13 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
What are you going to do with the Abu Baker Bashirs arse?
> start licking
Whenever you're ready Kook-sucker.
We will leave you to it, just DON'T post the photos,
we don't share your taste for shite.
fasgnadh
Jan 31, 2012, 5:15:08 AM1/31/12
to
> What was your challenge again?
Yours seems to be 'having the slightest clue'
> I must've missed it.
Newsgroups: Subject: Atheist not only fails to refute my rational
argument, he SUPPORTS IT, making a LIAR of all the
atheists who false claim I don't present any!
Re: There is no evidence for Atheist rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments
Message-ID: <EPpVq.2368$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:43 +1100
On 25/01/2012 5:33 AM, DonH wrote:
> "fasgnadh"<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:2xuTq.2087$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>> On 22/01/2012 3:53 PM, Olrik wrote:
>>
>>> fasgnadh never showed evidence of some "god" or "gods", leaving atheism
>>
>> Of course I didn't, I'm an agnostic, your atheist Prophet Dawkins
was the
>> one who claimed atheist Gods, (like the real one), "Came into being"
....
>> but neither Dawkins the Believer, or any of you, have any EVIDENCE:
>>
>>
>> On 22/01/2012 3:53 PM, Olrik wrote:
>>
>>> fasgnadh never showed evidence of some "god" or "gods", leaving atheism
>>
>> Of course I didn't, I'm an agnostic, your atheist Prophet Dawkins
was the
>> one who claimed atheist Gods, (like the real one), "Came into being"
....
>> but neither Dawkins the Believer, or any of you, have any EVIDENCE:
>>
>>
> # Whether it be Dawkins speculating,
.....
> there is
> no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
> ravings of the human mind.
Thanks don, you support my rational argument that Dawkin's is raving
and has NO EVIDENCE for his claims about atheist Gods.. you now have
to convince LYING ATHEISTS such as Ravin anc Co who insist Dawkin's is
STILL an Atheist !!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAA
But Don, Don, you are MISSING THE POINT, again old son! B^D
Atheists, being mocked for their INCAPACITY to refute my arguments
screeched hysterically "but he doesn't have rational arguments for us to
Refute" clearly a LIE because here you are having a go..! B^D
Not only have you responded to my rational argument, you have FAILED
to refute it and in fact YOU AGREE WITH IT!
So that's still a 100% FAILURE rate of atheists to refute my rational
arguments!
Keep those arguments coming, you atheist liars, you can't pretend
I don't HAVE rational arguments any more, you are faced with the
truth that YOU SIMPLY CAN'T REFUTE THEM!
Q.E.D
cadit quaetio
.....
> there is
> no current empirical evidence of any god, goddess, or God - except the
> ravings of the human mind.
Thanks don, you support my rational argument that Dawkin's is raving
and has NO EVIDENCE for his claims about atheist Gods.. you now have
to convince LYING ATHEISTS such as Ravin anc Co who insist Dawkin's is
STILL an Atheist !!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAA
But Don, Don, you are MISSING THE POINT, again old son! B^D
Atheists, being mocked for their INCAPACITY to refute my arguments
screeched hysterically "but he doesn't have rational arguments for us to
Refute" clearly a LIE because here you are having a go..! B^D
Not only have you responded to my rational argument, you have FAILED
to refute it and in fact YOU AGREE WITH IT!
So that's still a 100% FAILURE rate of atheists to refute my rational
arguments!
Keep those arguments coming, you atheist liars, you can't pretend
I don't HAVE rational arguments any more, you are faced with the
truth that YOU SIMPLY CAN'T REFUTE THEM!
Q.E.D
cadit quaetio
fasgnadh
Jan 31, 2012, 5:33:14 AM1/31/12
to
Olrik failed the challenge, couldn't refute me, just Snipped and Ran:
>>>>
>>>> Priceless truth!
rational argument, let alone refute it! B^D
>>>> For now, just the initial challenge I put when I first arrived
>>>> in alt.atheism and discovered what a seething cesspit of anti-theist
>>>> so here's next weeks argument that you all ran from,
>>>> whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, the atheist God
So has every other atheist in Usenet.
Fasgnadh has rational arguments
Atheists cannot refute them
Q.E.D.
now Olrik will snip everything and shit on the carpet...
>>>
>>> Hey
>>
>> Yes, Whose calling?
>>
>> > dumb cunt,
>>> idiotic load of mind dependent crap, on a par with unicorns and the
>>> tooth fairy?
Olrik has admitted he does.. lying;
Olrik claims he has a Divine Right to lie about you
if he doesn't know the truth(which is always):
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.religion
# Subject: Re: fasgnadh is defective
# Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 18:31:59 -0400
# Message-ID: <huh7l5$tss$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# I can claim whatever I want. One day I say you're an atheist,
# then I claim you're a muslim.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.abortion,alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: fasgnadh is an atheist
# Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:49:38 -0500
# Message-ID: <hd5m8q$91a$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh is an atheist.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.Islam,alt.politics.republicans
# Subject: Re: The new video from Pat Condell -- fasgnadh is a muslim
# Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 01:13:01 -0400
# Message-ID: <hufap5$ghh$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# Oh look!
#
# It's fasgnadh, a.a.'s very own islamist!
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.islam,alt.religion
# Subject: Re: Communist states - the Historical Reality
# Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 01:12:48 -0400
# Message-ID: <hucmco$5v5$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh is still an atheist, and the poor thing still refuses to
admit it.
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Re: Atheist liars Syd Moron, China Glue and Olrik the
# Unworthy unable to show proof of a lie -
# demonstrates their absence of honesty... again! B^D
# Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
#Message-ID:<01b9d8cf-d902-4fea...@y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
# On 31 Mrz., 22:54, fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
# > Olrik joins the atheist liar tag team B^D :
#
# Fagsnag
#
# he's a closet theist.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:28:41 -0400
# Message-ID: <hp0b9v$ols$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh,why don't you once and for all admit that you're an atheist ?
#
# It'd be the right thing to do.
One atheist tried to warn Olrik the Unworthy
that he wa making a fool of himself, but he's too
foolish to listen:
# From: raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.religion,
# alt.politics.republicans,alt.politics.democrats,
# uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,alt.politics.communism
# Subject: Re: The Decline of alt atheism - and time to say farewell to
the most trivial and useless branch of Nihilism! B^D
# Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:26:06 -0400
# Message-ID: <n4ofb51jvj209trfh...@4ax.com>
#
# > Dear old "fasgnadh" asserts his deity exists, but can't prove it.
#
# Fasgnadh has never asserted that a deity exists, and recently admitted
# to being agnostic. He's not here to push a deity, he's here to push
# peoples buttons.
Olriks button requires hardly any effort:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9tsuLU0jfPU/S_vwUo7hMeI/AAAAAAAAAEY/RonfSYNOVbw/s1600/easy-button.jpg
> Unless you're "agnostic" about the Tooth Fairy or Thor,
The what? Have they been cited as inspiring a great and
enduring civilisation? No..
They are your childish fantasies, Olrik.
I don't think about them, so I'm nothing in relation to them.
> then you're making an argument "ABOUT GOD",
That's just illogical nonsense. demonstrate your claim that
you discussing the tooth fairy is an argument by me about God,
you nitwit!
> so you're an agnostic
correct
> and an atheist.
No.
They are quite different you know.
And the ARIS data shows there are more of us agnostics than there
are of you atheist liars who want to force your ideology upon others,
just as atheists did in EVERY atheist tyranny in history.
Thanks for demonstrating, repeatedly, for the sake of the young, the
unwary, and the gullible, that atheists must never come to power again,
you would just IMPOSE your worthless and murderous ideology on all of us.
You lose again, arsehole. B^]
>> for all YOU know, you slandering atheist shitpig,
>> You better not cry
>> Better not pout
>> I'm telling you why
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>> He's making a list
>> And checking it twice;
>> Gonna find out Who's naughty and nice
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>> He sees you when you've been lying
>> He knows when you're a snake
>> He knows if you've been bad or good
>> So be good for goodness sake!
>> O! You better watch out!
>> You better not cry
>> Better not pout
>> I'm telling you why
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>>
>>
>> There we go ..job done.
>>
>>
>>
>>> MG
> On 30/01/2012 4:09 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> On 30/01/2012 2:34 PM, Michael Gordge wrote:
>>> On Jan 24, 8:45 am, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21/01/2012 8:54 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2012 1:52 AM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken
>>>>>> place,
>>>>>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>>>>>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>>>>>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>>>>>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>>>>>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>>>>
>>>>>> thank you!
>> On 30/01/2012 2:34 PM, Michael Gordge wrote:
>>> On Jan 24, 8:45 am, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21/01/2012 8:54 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2012 1:52 AM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> After having a short break I notice a lot of discussion has taken
>>>>>> place,
>>>>>> which I haven't been able to keep up with due to time and priority
>>>>>> constraints. However, based on previous discussion, and a brief glance
>>>>>> at some recent posts, I think I have enough information to present a
>>>>>> summary of the successful rebuttals of fasgnadh's arguments concerning
>>>>>> atheism, and so I now list them below:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Priceless truth!
>>>>
>>>>> And what are "fasgnadh's arguments concerning atheism"?
>>>>
>>>>> And what are "fasgnadh's arguments concerning atheism"?
>>>>
>>>> You mean all the atheists that have argued them with me
>>>> for years, NEVER UNDERSTOOD what they were so vehemently,
>>>> but incoherently, opposing with lies, slander, post forging,
>>>> straw man misrepresentations and hysterical denunciations?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only a fool would put that much energy into arguing
>>>> against 'nothing', are you claiming to be a fool? B^D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why, I have threads where YOU have taken issue with
>>>> one or more of my arguments. Have you grown senile
>>>> that you can't remember them and claim there were none?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will remind you all. B^]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Can you possibly list them?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure, I will repost one a week for the next decade,
>>>> so Usenet has a CONSTANT REMINDER of all the arguments
>>>> atheists have run away from, unable to rebut, and which
>>>> they now claim they simply couldn't see and didn't understand
>>>> because of their unique atheist perspective;
>>>>
>>>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPY...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So don't go away, or people with think you are a pathetic,
>>>> So don't go away, or people with think you are a pathetic,
>>>> gutless liar, who has abandoned more arguments in defeat
>>>> than I have had hot dinners.
>>>>
>>>> Later I will pull out some specific ones for you and other atheists,
>>>>
>>>> showing your individual flight path from the issues.
Olrik failed this weeks challenge, he couldn't even understand my
rational argument, let alone refute it! B^D
>>>> For now, just the initial challenge I put when I first arrived
>>>> hatred and bigotry it was;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Why are there no great and enduring atheist civilisations?
>>>> (EVERY atheist state in history has been a totalitarian tyranny)"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I may be going up to the farm next week, the cropping of
>>>> the 40,000 trees in the pine plantation is almost complete
>>>> and we are planning the rehabilitation with native plants,
>>>> now that our CO2 capture project is done..
And similarly, he couldn't refute a single point in Challenge #2:
>>>> so here's next weeks argument that you all ran from,
>>>> unable to rebut the clear evidence of atheist hypocrisy;
>>>> the claim that these atheist God's came into being, when
>>>> you have NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for that atheist BELIEF:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
>>>> intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
>>>> could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
>>>> scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
>>>> intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
>>>> could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
>>>> scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
>>>> atheist can explain in relation to the non-existent atheist Gods)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> evolved?
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ---------
Olrik failed
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ---------
So has every other atheist in Usenet.
Fasgnadh has rational arguments
Atheists cannot refute them
Q.E.D.
now Olrik will snip everything and shit on the carpet...
>>>
>>> Hey
>>
>> Yes, Whose calling?
>>
>> > dumb cunt,
>>
>> And what do you want, D.C.?
>>
>> And what do you want, D.C.?
>>
>>> if ewe call those who claim god doesn't exist as
>>> 'atheist' what the fuck do ewe call those who say god does exist as an
>>> idiotic load of mind dependent crap, on a par with unicorns and the
>>> tooth fairy?
>>
>> I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what's going on here,
>>
>> I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what's going on here,
>>
>> Nappisan and the other atheists tried to pretend that their
>> lack of rebuttal of ANY of my arguments is.. get this,
>> they claim there haven't BEEN ANY !!! BWAHAHAAHAHAHA
>>
>>
>> So I mocked the gutless liars mercilessly and reprised one,
>> for them to rebut..
>>
>> Note, none of my arguments are ABOUT GOD, I'm an agnostic,
>> Note, none of my arguments are ABOUT GOD, I'm an agnostic,
>> they are all about Atheism, and in particular, why has every
>> atheist state in history been a totalitarian tyranny!?
>>
>>
>> ...but they can't answer, and have RUN AWAY, thereby
>> admitting that the fault is THEIR INABILITY TO REFUTE
>> THE HISTORICAL TRUTH, not any lack of said historical truth...
>>
>>
>> ..and then YOU bumble along, and demonstrate that atheists
>> can't even GRASP THE CHALLENGE, let alone meet it!
>>
>> Q.E.D.
>>
>>
>> Why don't you just resort to the standard atheist cop-out..
>>
>> Snip
>> Why don't you just resort to the standard atheist cop-out..
>>
>>
>> Run/ try and change the subject
>>
>> Lie
>> Run/ try and change the subject
>>
>>
>> You have just about completed the trifecta:
>>
>> You have just about completed the trifecta:
>>
>>> Hey dopey, at the age of 12 or 14 ewe rejected the tooth fairy and
>>> santa as silly nonsense, so why not god when ewe was 6?
>>
>> Liar, where's your evidence that I reject Santa,
They have none and are just doing what
>> Liar, where's your evidence that I reject Santa,
Olrik has admitted he does.. lying;
Olrik claims he has a Divine Right to lie about you
if he doesn't know the truth(which is always):
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.religion
# Subject: Re: fasgnadh is defective
# Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 18:31:59 -0400
# Message-ID: <huh7l5$tss$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# I can claim whatever I want. One day I say you're an atheist,
# then I claim you're a muslim.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.abortion,alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: fasgnadh is an atheist
# Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:49:38 -0500
# Message-ID: <hd5m8q$91a$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh is an atheist.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.Islam,alt.politics.republicans
# Subject: Re: The new video from Pat Condell -- fasgnadh is a muslim
# Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 01:13:01 -0400
# Message-ID: <hufap5$ghh$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# Oh look!
#
# It's fasgnadh, a.a.'s very own islamist!
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.islam,alt.religion
# Subject: Re: Communist states - the Historical Reality
# Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 01:12:48 -0400
# Message-ID: <hucmco$5v5$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh is still an atheist, and the poor thing still refuses to
admit it.
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.agnosticism,alt.usenet.kooks
# Subject: Re: Atheist liars Syd Moron, China Glue and Olrik the
# Unworthy unable to show proof of a lie -
# demonstrates their absence of honesty... again! B^D
# Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
#Message-ID:<01b9d8cf-d902-4fea...@y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
# On 31 Mrz., 22:54, fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
# > Olrik joins the atheist liar tag team B^D :
#
# Fagsnag
#
# he's a closet theist.
# From: Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com>
# Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:28:41 -0400
# Message-ID: <hp0b9v$ols$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
#
# fasgnadh,why don't you once and for all admit that you're an atheist ?
#
# It'd be the right thing to do.
One atheist tried to warn Olrik the Unworthy
that he wa making a fool of himself, but he's too
foolish to listen:
# From: raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.religion,
# alt.politics.republicans,alt.politics.democrats,
# uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,alt.politics.communism
# Subject: Re: The Decline of alt atheism - and time to say farewell to
the most trivial and useless branch of Nihilism! B^D
# Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:26:06 -0400
# Message-ID: <n4ofb51jvj209trfh...@4ax.com>
#
# > Dear old "fasgnadh" asserts his deity exists, but can't prove it.
#
# Fasgnadh has never asserted that a deity exists, and recently admitted
# to being agnostic. He's not here to push a deity, he's here to push
# peoples buttons.
Olriks button requires hardly any effort:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9tsuLU0jfPU/S_vwUo7hMeI/AAAAAAAAAEY/RonfSYNOVbw/s1600/easy-button.jpg
> Unless you're "agnostic" about the Tooth Fairy or Thor,
The what? Have they been cited as inspiring a great and
enduring civilisation? No..
They are your childish fantasies, Olrik.
I don't think about them, so I'm nothing in relation to them.
> then you're making an argument "ABOUT GOD",
That's just illogical nonsense. demonstrate your claim that
you discussing the tooth fairy is an argument by me about God,
you nitwit!
> so you're an agnostic
correct
> and an atheist.
No.
They are quite different you know.
And the ARIS data shows there are more of us agnostics than there
are of you atheist liars who want to force your ideology upon others,
just as atheists did in EVERY atheist tyranny in history.
Thanks for demonstrating, repeatedly, for the sake of the young, the
unwary, and the gullible, that atheists must never come to power again,
you would just IMPOSE your worthless and murderous ideology on all of us.
You lose again, arsehole. B^]
>> for all YOU know, you slandering atheist shitpig,
>> I might actually play him at Christmas time...
>>
>> You better watch out
>>
>> You better not cry
>> Better not pout
>> I'm telling you why
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>> He's making a list
>> And checking it twice;
>> Gonna find out Who's naughty and nice
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>> He sees you when you've been lying
>> He knows when you're a snake
>> He knows if you've been bad or good
>> So be good for goodness sake!
>> O! You better watch out!
>> You better not cry
>> Better not pout
>> I'm telling you why
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>> Santa Claus is coming to town
>>
>>
>>
>> There we go ..job done.
>>
>> Atheists can't even FIND the ARGUMENT
>>
>> Atheists can't even FIND the ARGUMENT
>>
>> EVEN WHEN I PUT IT IN THE SUBJECT HEADER,
>> let alone can they REFUTE it!
>>
>> Thanks for playing!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> MG
0 new messages