"Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists" - Religion for Atheists! and the hypocrites want the taxpayer to fund it! B^D

[fasgnadh]

After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA

"Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists"

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02122/alandebotton_2122200b.jpg

"A concept image of the City of London temple,
designed by the architect Tom Greenall and
Jordan Hodgson Photo: © THOMAS GREENALL & JORDAN

In his poem “Church Going”, Philip Larkin anticipates
a time when faith completely vanishes from England.
“And what remains when disbelief has gone?/ Grass,
weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky”.

Alain de Botton disagrees. In his new book Religion for Atheists,
the popular sage argues that, although many in the West have
little time for organised religion, they still have feel
nostalgic for its “consoling, subtle or just charming rituals”.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA!


Priceless!

Atheists are Interested in the Fruit without the Tree! B^D

"De Botton, who was raised an atheist , "

...most people grow out of as they develop rational
thinking skills and become mature adults...

"..likewise feels an affinity for religiously inspired
architecture – especially old churches."

Of course, the architecture, music, sculpture, science and
secular democracies inspired built and sustained by majority
religious societies provide immense beauty and have created
the very civilisations we all enjoy.. atheist states have
all been bleak, grey, dull, monotonous TOTALITARIAN TYRANNIES..

you would think atheists could draw the appropriate conclusions! B^]

"de Botton has come up with ambitious scheme that he calls
Temples for Atheists. "


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA


# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation: Debunking Flatnads Juvenile Bullshit
Number Whatever
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

"These will be secular spaces for contemplation,

Oh the theists have provided those already..

they are called PARKS! The national ones are great!


"starting with one in London but then spreading
across the country."


How sad that the separation of Church and State will
prevent them from receiving any taxpayer funds. B^]

"The proposed London temple, designed jointly by the architect Tom
Greenall and Jordan Hodgson, will be a huge black tower placed among the
skyscrapers in the City of London.

The Black Tower Of Mordor! PERFECT!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA


"... at its base is a band of gold 1mm thick signifying ..."

Worship of Moloch, The Golden Calf! B^D


De Botton hopes this monument to ...."



" ...... modern egotism and navel-gazing."

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAA!

“Often a religious building plays around with
our perspective: it’s very large, or it’s very old or both.
It recalibrates us in space or time, so you walk in
and feel tiny.”

"De Botton once wrote a book called The Architecture of
Happiness... "

B^D how apt, the atheists just had a thread asking

"What, to you, is fun, in atheism"

and they all answered there was none in atheism per se!


"What would happen inside? "

Hilarious.. like all reactionary atheists, he defines it by
what it ISN'T:

“There isn’t a liturgy, there isn’t a Bible,” he says..."


" The inspirational singing you find in at Sufi shrines or African
churches are very distant from his vision: it all sounds rather sedate
and middle class. De Botton admits as much: “My target of a lot of this
is kind of the sixtysomething male academic from Oxford who attacks
believers and says religion is ridiculous.” "


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAAAAAA Tired old atheism!

"A key indication of the temple’s popularity will come from its
fund-raising."

Yes indeed! B^]


De Botton is personally extremely wealthy (there are rumours of a £200
million trust fund, but he insists he has only £7.25 million – earned
from book sales and teaching), but, rather than calling on rich pals, he
would prefer small donations, “just like Chartres Cathedral”.

I mention that the people who funded Chartres and, in more recent times,
the Hindu Temple in Neasden, west London were doing so for an
established community and with the promise of a heavenly reward. “The
Tate Modern was funded not by people who wanted to go to heaven but
people who thought it was a good project,” he says. (In fact, more than
half of the £134 million it cost came from the lottery or government
agencies.)"

ATHEISTS WANT PUBLIC MONEY FOR *THEIR* TEMPLE! 8^o


HYPOCRITES! What happened to separation of Church and state? B^]

"De Botton wants to reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
figures such as Richard Dawkins."

Of course, doesn't all the thinking rational atheists want that? B^]


" While this is a laudable aim, I can’t help thinking there is something
misconceived about the project. What we find beautiful is inevitably
bound up with the values of the people who made it: a Protestant may
recoil from a rococo Italian church or a Muslim find a synagogue too
plain for his tastes not because of an abstract aesthetic sense but
because it seems foreign to the way they worship. The strict beliefs
that de Botton shies away from are exactly what thrill and terrify
visitors to a sacred space: the thought that it was built in the name of
truth.

There is another possible future for this impressive-sounding Temple for
Atheists. If not enough people wander in, de Botton could hold lectures
there and maybe move the School of Life he already runs to the site.
With his calming voice calling for a renewal of “community, beauty,
sympathy, kindness, a moral structure” – priorities few could disagree
with – he might get a more devoted following than he imagines."

Priceless!

Religion for Atheists is published by Penguin. For details on Temples
for Atheists, visit www.tomgreenall.co.uk and www.houseofjonn.com

So many atheists want to "reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
figures such as Richard Dawkins" but is it worth fighting over?

--

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]

"We already have temples to atheism, Mr de Botton"

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA


Sure, the Worshippers of the Golden Calf, Wall St!

http://pndblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099631d08833014e8bc5de6f970d-800wi

And dreary Grey Soviet achitectural shitpiles:

http://www.cheboksaryrussia.net/apartments-cheboksary-russia

Slavishly copied by the last remaining atheist state:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwfne2Dycg1qcokc4o1_500.jpg

"The atheist 'philosopher' Alain de Botton has undertaken
a (literally) monumental project: he wants to create
in the City a 150-foot-high temple to 'new atheism'.
This is to distinguish it from old, aggressive atheism,
as preached by Richard Dawkins. The two chaps seem to
disagree on tactics, for one struggles to find any
difference of substance.

'Why should religious people have the most beautiful
buildings in the land?' Botton asks. 'It's time
atheists had their own version of the great churches
and cathedrals'."

...



"The Latin inscription on Christopher Wren's tomb
in St Paul's says, 'Reader, if you seek his
monument, look around.' I suggest Mr de Botton
do the same just about anywhere in the West --
he'll find temples to atheism aplenty.
They are the eyesores that disfigure our
cities' skylines, the pickled animals in
our art museums, the nasty warrens of our
council estates, the gangs of empty-eyed
youths harassing our neighbourhoods.

These are the churches in which one can
worship the moral and aesthetic achievements
of atheist modernity.
These are the reflections of the fact,
seen as such by anyone not blinded by
atheist rage, that the choice of cultures
available to the West isn't Christian or atheist.
It's Christian or none."


http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1848/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1848-212046.jpg

"Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals are the most beautiful and
awe-inspiring buildings in the world, Mr Botton, because
they were animated by the most beautiful and
awe-inspiring idea. Remove this inspiration,
and you can still coast on the original propelling
force -- provided you gratefully acknowledge its nature.
An artist or an architect doesn't have to be a
practising Christian to create a masterpiece --
as long as he realises that every Western
masterpiece is at least residually Christian.

The choice between beauty and ugliness in aesthetics
exactly parallels the one between good and evil
in morality. The soulless brutalism of 20th-century
architecture parallels the soulless brutality of
that century, in which more people were killed
than in all other centuries of recorded history
combined. The grey ugliness of the South Bank
or Barbican is the aesthetic equivalent of
Lubianka cellars and Auschwitz ovens.
They are all reminders of the abyss awating
those who worship at the altar of secular gods.

All those physical disasters spring from the
disastrous metaphysical idea that man sits
at the centre of his own universe, rather
than at the periphery of God's. Looking
for God only inside himself, man finds
only himself there. Usually, he is terrified
by what he sees, and this terror colours and
distorts everything he creates. Ugly becomes
new beautiful, virtual new real, vulgar new
profound."

Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2093778/We-temples-atheism-Mr-Botton.html#ixzz1l1aZTtGo

[fasgnadh]

On 31/01/2012 7:59 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>

> Huh?

Can't you read? you illiterate atheist dimwit;

and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!

in which they will worship Prophet Dawkin's Gods:

[fasgnadh]

On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>

> BroilJAB stunned,
> I thought DAMN sure you just made this thing
> up, Dr.Fasgnadh, until I googled and...hilarious!
> Atheism has totally collapsed, wanting Temples then
> wanting US to build em for them. They don't get the
> whole idea of 'government NOT funding religion'. LOL


"No Joke: Alain de Botton Wants To Build Temples To Atheism
Let us now pray to... nothing!"

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA


Priceless!

"Humans have mounted temples to God for thousands of years,
giving concrete form to the confluence of faith and public life."

Atheists have temples where their cult worships
"Dead Atheist in a Box":

http://lilyhonglei.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/maocrystalcoffin.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6U6ZFTcbbU8/SXeKkz_wpfI/AAAAAAAABKY/OBZB_f4XEa8/s400/lenin+2.jpg


"As writer and architecture patron Alain de Botton
tells it, the moment’s ripe for atheists to build
their own shrines."

Sure they could have the Chairman Mao Shrine
for the victims of the Great Leap Backward and the
Cultural Devolution! B^D

Or the Pol Pot memorial Crucifixion of Christians:

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk158/CANDEMIELDA/44camboyano.jpg

"“Why should religious people have the most beautiful
buildings in the land?” he says."

Um, because they have the creative imagination
and energy.

“It’s time atheists had their own versions of the great
churches and cathedrals.”

A temple to the Atheist State Holocausts? they have
those already:

http://andybrouwer.co.uk/geno.html


http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392millones.jpg

"So de Botton has announced plans to build a network of Temples for
Atheists around the U.K. Yup. Houses of God for people who don’t believe
in God."

http://www.killingfieldsmuseum.com/

"To get around that pesky little paradox (for which de Botton
has been mightily ridiculed, with the Guardian going so far
as to suggest that the whole thing is just a publicity stunt
to help push his new book Religion for Atheists), de Botton
argues that, “You can build a temple to anything that’s
positive and good. That could mean: a temple to love,
friendship, calm or perspective.”"

Then it wouldn't be an atheist temple, would it! B^D

In fact it's going to PRETEND to be about atheism,
but becasue there is bugger all to celebrate, it will
really end up being about Science, or secularism, or nature..

NOTHING To Do WITH ATHEISM.. except they DEFINE it to be atheism,
when it SUITS the hypocriticla fucktards, who want to LEECH off
PUBLIC MONIES!

"The first proposed temple to Anything Positive and Good would be a
skinny pigmented concrete tower that rises 46 meters (150 feet) over
central London--that’s 1 centimeter for every million years of the
earth’s existence. “One metre from the ground, a tiny band of gold no
more than a millimetre thick would be inscribed into the interior of the
tower,” architect Tom Greenall tells Co.Design in an email. “This would
represent the short extent of human life on earth. Everything below this
point is the future.”

See, it's not about atheism at all, it's about earth..


http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inline-large/post-inline/06-architecture-shrine-to-perspective3-medium-new.jpg

"The concrete would be poured slowly over a period of years,

so it sets as hard as an atheist tyrants heart.

"instead of months, creating subtle variations in the appearance of the
interior walls that mimic the earth’s stratification. An oculus at the
top would usher natural light and air inside.

Creating the sense of being in one of the Atheist state dungeons,
staring up at a tiny opening, symbolising the hope of ESCAPE.

"As for the exterior: It’d be polished and etched with a
representation of the human genome sequence."

Again, nothing to do with atheism, they are really trying
to distance themselves from Prophet Dawkins and present themselves
as a cult of pseudo-science. Real scientists do the science,
atheists use it to decorate a TEMPLE to their OWN HUBRIS! B^D


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAA

"The point is to encourage visitors to contemplate the
extraordinary history of the planet and humans’ relatively
brief existence thereon. "

Including the glorious civilisations, all inspired and sustained
by the worlds religions... the only atheist contribution
will be the colour of the temple, BLACK as the hearts of the
atheist tyrants who killed over 60,000,000 people

Do a write it, offer to donate if they include symbols of the
Atheist state tyrannies and the atheist holocausts..



"“The tower is intended as a temple to perspective not a tower to
atheism,” Greenall insists. "

Like atheism it SHRINKS To A VANISHING POINT!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA

"“I would agree that atheists do not need temples. However,
many of us could benefit from a bit of perspective in
our lives."

Oh atheists DEFINITELY need to grow a new PERSPECTIVE;

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--5bVY36cKm8/TemlX95ZrVI/AAAAAAAAAWo/bv4VloR-sac/s1600/head+up+ass.jpg

"This might be given to some people through
buildings such as churches or cathedrals. Our tower was
a simple design for an alternative, secular version.”"

B^D Secular isn't ATHEIST!!!

All the free, open progressive SECULAR democracies have
been built by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES!!! not atheist ones.

EVERY atheist regime has been a TOTALITARIAN TYRANNY..

THEY SHOULD BUILD MEMORIALS To THAT!!!!

to the 60,000,000 dead!

"Sure, the secular world already has plenty of its own
monuments--the assorted libraries and labs and museums
where people worship at the altar of evidence-based research."

But they are SECULAR, NOT ATHEIST!

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1668919/no-joke-alain-de-botton-wants-to-build-temples-to-atheism

[Paul David Wright]

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:jIPVq.2633$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:

> On 31/01/2012 7:59 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>
riceless!
>>>
>>> Religion for Atheists is published by Penguin. For details on
>>> Temples for Atheists, visit www.tomgreenall.co.uk and
>>> www.houseofjonn.com
>>>
>>> So many atheists want to "reclaim atheism from strident
>>> anti-religion figures such as Richard Dawkins" but is it worth
>>> fighting over?
>
> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>
> > Huh?
>
> Can't you read? you illiterate atheist dimwit;
>
> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>
> in which they will worship Prophet Dawkin's Gods:
>
>

Don't you ever get tired of lying, Failednuts?

--
PDW

Check out my blog:
The first is a preview of my superhero comic book.
http://incognitoheroes.blogspot.com/
http://corneliusaddaptionproject.blogspot.com/


And my books:
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/pdwright42

[fasgnadh]

On 1/02/2012 11:02 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:

> On 31/01/2012 9:50 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 7:59 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."

>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>

>>>> Religion for Atheists is published by Penguin. For details on Temples
>>>> for Atheists, visit www.tomgreenall.co.uk and www.houseofjonn.com
>>>>
>>>> So many atheists want to "reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
>>>> figures such as Richard Dawkins" but is it worth fighting over?
>>
>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>> Can't you read? you illiterate atheist dimwit;
>>
>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>
>> in which they will worship Prophet Dawkin's Gods:
>>
>
> Don't you ever get tired

Watching you screech hysterically, but be unable to refute
a single fact, gives me renewed energy.

Your baseless opinions, with no evidence make you the
Loonie

> of lying,

Why do you do it when you clearly have no case to argue?

> Failed

try harder

> nuts?

Take your personal problems elsewhere.

[fasgnadh]

On 1/02/2012 10:26 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article
> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

>> BroilJAB said,
>> How much crime, filth, homosexualists, mayhem
>> would there be at such 'centres of enlightenment'?
>
> What's a homosexualist?

A Spelling Flame from weak and desperate atheists avoiding the
questions;

"What's an ATHEIST TEMPLE"? and

"Where's the evidence that Prophet Dawkin's atheist 'Gods

came into being by an explicable scientific progression of

incremental evolution.'"?

[fasgnadh]

On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article

> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:

>> After Prophet Dawkins converted
>
> When did he do that?

Can't you read, or are you just FLEEING from the the
facts, like a typical intellectually dishonest and morally
defective atheist;

>> 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
>

> And what did he convert to?
>

A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:

[Paul David Wright]

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:YMgWq.2478$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com:

>>>>> <b5430732-e52e-45b5-abc3-
7d0daa...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>

Why should we bother, since you obviously hate us with all yer being, as
exemplified by yer contuined lying about us.

>
> > of lying,
>
> Why do you do it when you clearly have no case to argue?
>
>

Like I said, why do you continue to lie about us, asshole?

[Paul David Wright]

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:

>>>>>> <b5430732-e52e-45b5-abc3-
7d0daa...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com

Since you have yet to post any 'facts', no, no one is fleeing from you
at all.

>
>
> >> 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
> >
> > And what did he convert to?
> >
>
> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>

Nope. Doesn't exist, lying asshole.

[fasgnadh]

On 3/02/2012 9:07 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:
> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:YMgWq.2478$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com:
>
>>
>> On 1/02/2012 11:02 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2012 9:50 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:59 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02122/alandebotton_
> 2122
>>>>>> 200b.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "A concept image of the City of London temple,
>>>>>> designed by the architect Tom Greenall and

>>>>>> Jordan Hodgson Photo: © THOMAS GREENALL& JORDAN

Good Question! Your posts reveal a deep inner pointlessness.

.. should I lend you a box of Rusty razor blades
and a Leonard Cohen Album..

"Suzanne takes you down,
and down
and down
and
down... "

> since you obviously hate us

I don't even know WHO you are, Kook? Atheist?

So no, An argument you can't refute is not hate on
my side, but as your empty ad hom shows, on yours.

> with all yer being,

like a child rebuked, you mistake tough love for punishment.

> as exemplified by yer contuined lying about us.

You haven't evidenced any lies, you are the one

>>> lying,
>>
>> Why do you do it when you clearly have no case to argue?
>

> asshole?


Ad hom abuse and an inability to refute the argument
shows you are the hater.

[fasgnadh]

On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:
> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>
>>
>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02122/alandebotton_
> 212
>>>>>>> 2200b.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "A concept image of the City of London temple,
>>>>>>> designed by the architect Tom Greenall and

>>>>>>> Jordan Hodgson Photo: © THOMAS GREENALL& JORDAN

Yes, you simply snipped the evidence of his claim, and are in irrational
denial...

<Unsnip the EVIDENCE>

>>
>>>> # "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

No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception.

>>>> # 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?
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...........................................................
>

Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP
the evidence that Dawkins claims these Atheist "Gods came into being.."
and deny that the evidence exists:

> Doesn't exist,

Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

What does that make you?

> lying asshole.


--

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

[Vurgil]

In article <No%Wq.2761$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:


> 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).

What part of "explicable" does fasgnadh claim means "inexplicable"?

>
> # "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 heąs 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.
> #

> # Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?
> #
> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "Itąs highly plausible that

> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."
> #

> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone around a
> # religious bend. "Itąs very important to understand that these Gods
> # came into being by an EXPLICABLE [emphasis added] scientific
> # progression of incremental evolution."'

> #
> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
> #

> # łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds, łBut I
> # wouldnąt 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,

What is supposed to be INexplicable when Dawkins himself says
"Itąs very important to understand that these Gods came
into being by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
incremental evolution."

What part of "explicable" does fasgnadh claim means "inexplicable"?

[fasgnadh]

On 3/02/2012 9:35 AM, John Baker wrote:
> On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:

>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>>
>>>
>>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>> In article
>>>> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02122/alandebotton_
>> 212
>>>>>>>> 2200b.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "A concept image of the City of London temple,
>>>>>>>> designed by the architect Tom Greenall and

>>>>>>>> Jordan Hodgson Photo: © THOMAS GREENALL& JORDAN

>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> And what did he convert to?
>>>>
>>>
>>> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>>
>> Nope.

Yes, you simply snipped the evidence of his claim, and are in irrational
denial...

<Unsnip the EVIDENCE>

>>>

>>>>> # "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

No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception,
and of Dawkin's Sci Fi Faith in Gods!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

>>>>> # 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?
>>>>>
>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>
>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>
>>>>> ...........................................................

Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP

the evidence that Dawkins claimed these Atheist "Gods came into being.."

and deny that the evidence exists:

>> Doesn't exist,

Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

What does that make you?

>> lying asshole.
>

And you're not alone:

> Free clue,

Usually indicates it's worthless..
go on, lets see if you HAVE A CLUE:

> fagsnuts.

We hear you suck them all the time..

is that all you have to share?

> Dawkins is still an atheist,

Defined as one who believes, and I QUOTE VERBATIM:

"It’s very important to understand that these Gods

came into being.."

So you're another 'ex-atheist' who believes Prophet
Dawkin's God's and Bishop Bukakke who has built an
Altar of Atheism! B^D

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,

# alt.religion,alt.religion.christian

# Subject: Disapproving Creation: Debunking Flatnads

# Juvenile Bullshit Number Whatever

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:

<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>

#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

So if these two are your idea of rational atheism,
what does that make you?

> still an idiot.

At least you aren't still threatening to top yourself
because I kicked your arse;


# 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.

My offer of a free stamp and envelope still stands! B^]

> And who the fuck is Alain de Botton?

An atheist 'philosopher'.

You have to be able to read to have heard of him, and it.

Can you get a friend who has a job and a computer to use
Google for you?

Or would a friend be as hard for you to come by as a job and a
computer?

[fasgnadh]

On 4/02/2012 12:23 PM, Vurgil wrote:

>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> And what did he convert to?
>>>>
>>>> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>
>> Yes, you simply snipped the evidence of his claim, and are in irrational
>> denial...

<Unsnip the EVIDENCE>

>>>>

>>>>>> # "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

No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception.

>>>>>> # 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?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...........................................................
>

> What is supposed to be INexplicable

The part which none of you can Explain, you moron! B^]

Which is ALL of it.. complete FANTASY and unfounded
atheist Belief that God's have evolved.

You can't even explain how your imaginary friends 'came into being'
when immaterial 'bolts of 'moral' energy' can't reproduce sexually,
so their 'evolution' defies natural laws!


B^D


Are you claiming a Virgin Birth was part of Dawkin's Gods
coming in to being?

When are any of you going to come into CONSCIOUSNESS!? B^D

> when Dawkins himself says
> "It¹s very important to understand that these Gods came
> into being

So, when did these atheist Gods come into being?

How many are there?

DO they have names?

How long have you all been secretly aware of them
before outing yourselves as theists?


You are such TRADITIONAL atheists, one Group-Mind:

http://www.thearchetypalconnection.com/images/RedGuardsLow.JPG

You stupid SHEEP can't explain ANY of these beliefs you swallow
from your Prophet, Dawkins, with total credulity....

Do you make offerings to your Gods on Bukakke's Altar of Atheism...

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>

# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
# alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:

<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>

#
#
# come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

...or is that just used as a stage for public gang-banging
of the Bland Lizard and your Warlord?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA

> by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
> incremental evolution."

That's a *claim* that it is explicable, it is not an explanation
in itself. Clearly none of you know the explanation, because it's
TOTAL BULLSHIT! B^]

Please show us all how brilliant you are, and make the rest of Usenet
look like fools, by EXPLAINING **HOW** these God's which Dawkins claims
have 'Came into being', did so.

Start by demonstrating that they ACTUALLY DID, that they EXIST,
and then explain the evidence for them "evolving".

This will be good! B^]

> What part of "explicable" does fasgnadh claim means "inexplicable"

The part you and Prophet Dawkins have LIED about..

the PART (all of it ;-) which YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN!!!!



BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA

>> Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP
>> the evidence that Dawkins claims these Atheist "Gods came into being.."
>> and deny that the evidence exists:
>>
>>> Doesn't exist,
>>
>> Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA
>>
>> What does that make you?
>>
>>> lying asshole.

None of them can explain this because it HASN'T HAPPENED;

-

# "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,

[Vurgil]

In article <H43Xq.2770$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

> >>>>>>>>> In his poem łChurch Going˛, Philip Larkin anticipates

> >>>>>>>>> a time when faith completely vanishes from England.

> >>>>>>>>> łAnd what remains when disbelief has gone?/ Grass,

> >>>>>>>>> weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky˛.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Alain de Botton disagrees. In his new book Religion for Atheists,
> >>>>>>>>> the popular sage argues that, although many in the West have
> >>>>>>>>> little time for organised religion, they still have feel

> >>>>>>>>> nostalgic for its łconsoling, subtle or just charming rituals˛.

> >>>>>>>>> łOften a religious building plays around with
> >>>>>>>>> our perspective: itąs very large, or itąs very old or both.

> >>>>>>>>> It recalibrates us in space or time, so you walk in
> >>>>>>>>> and feel tiny.˛
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "De Botton once wrote a book called The Architecture of
> >>>>>>>>> Happiness... "
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> B^D how apt, the atheists just had a thread asking
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "What, to you, is fun, in atheism"
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> and they all answered there was none in atheism per se!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "What would happen inside?"
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hilarious.. like all reactionary atheists, he defines it by
> >>>>>>>>> what it ISN'T:
> >>>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>>> łThere isnąt a liturgy, there isnąt a Bible,˛ he says..."

> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> " The inspirational singing you find in at Sufi shrines or
> >>>>>>>>> African churches are very distant from his vision: it all sounds

> >>>>>>>>> rather sedate and middle class. De Botton admits as much: łMy

> >>>>>>>>> target of a lot of this is kind of the sixtysomething male
> >>>>>>>>> academic from Oxford who attacks believers and says religion is
> >>>>>>>>> ridiculous.˛ "
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAAAAAA Tired old atheism!
> >>>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>>> "A key indication of the templeąs popularity will come from its

> >>>>>>>>> fund-raising."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yes indeed! B^]
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> De Botton is personally extremely wealthy (there are rumours of a

> >>>>>>>>> Ł200 million trust fund, but he insists he has only Ł7.25 million

> >>>>>>>>> ­ earned from book sales and teaching), but, rather than calling

> >>>>>>>>> on rich pals, he would prefer small donations, łjust like

> >>>>>>>>> Chartres Cathedral˛.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I mention that the people who funded Chartres and, in more recent
> >>>>>>>>> times, the Hindu Temple in Neasden, west London were doing so for
> >>>>>>>>> an established community and with the promise of a heavenly

> >>>>>>>>> reward. łThe Tate Modern was funded not by people who wanted to

> >>>>>>>>> go to heaven but people who thought it was a good project,˛ he

> >>>>>>>>> says. (In fact, more than half of the Ł134 million it cost came

> >>>>>>>>> from the lottery or government agencies.)"
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ATHEISTS WANT PUBLIC MONEY FOR *THEIR* TEMPLE! 8^o
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> HYPOCRITES! What happened to separation of Church and state? B^]
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "De Botton wants to reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
> >>>>>>>>> figures such as Richard Dawkins."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Of course, doesn't all the thinking rational atheists want that?
> >>>>>>>>> B^]
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>>> " While this is a laudable aim, I canąt help thinking there is

> >>>>>>>>> something misconceived about the project. What we find beautiful
> >>>>>>>>> is inevitably bound up with the values of the people who made it:
> >>>>>>>>> a Protestant may recoil from a rococo Italian church or a Muslim
> >>>>>>>>> find a synagogue too plain for his tastes not because of an
> >>>>>>>>> abstract aesthetic sense but because it seems foreign to the way
> >>>>>>>>> they worship. The strict beliefs that de Botton shies away from
> >>>>>>>>> are exactly what thrill and terrify visitors to a sacred space:
> >>>>>>>>> the thought that it was built in the name of truth.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> There is another possible future for this impressive-sounding
> >>>>>>>>> Temple for Atheists. If not enough people wander in, de Botton
> >>>>>>>>> could hold lectures there and maybe move the School of Life he
> >>>>>>>>> already runs to the site. With his calming voice calling for a

> >>>>>>>>> renewal of łcommunity, beauty, sympathy, kindness, a moral

> >>>>>>> tells it, the momentąs ripe for atheists to build

> >>>>>>> their own shrines."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sure they could have the Chairman Mao Shrine
> >>>>>>> for the victims of the Great Leap Backward and the
> >>>>>>> Cultural Devolution! B^D
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Or the Pol Pot memorial Crucifixion of Christians:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>> http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk158/CANDEMIELDA/44camboyano.jpg
> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> "łWhy should religious people have the most beautiful

> >>>>>>> buildings in the land?˛ he says."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Um, because they have the creative imagination
> >>>>>>> and energy.
> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> łItąs time atheists had their own versions of the great

> >>>>>>> churches and cathedrals.˛
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A temple to the Atheist State Holocausts? they have
> >>>>>>> those already:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://andybrouwer.co.uk/geno.html
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>> http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392mill
> >>>>>>> ones.jpg
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "So de Botton has announced plans to build a network of Temples for

> >>>>>>> Atheists around the U.K. Yup. Houses of God for people who donąt

> >>>>>>> believe in God."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.killingfieldsmuseum.com/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "To get around that pesky little paradox (for which de Botton
> >>>>>>> has been mightily ridiculed, with the Guardian going so far
> >>>>>>> as to suggest that the whole thing is just a publicity stunt
> >>>>>>> to help push his new book Religion for Atheists), de Botton

> >>>>>>> argues that, łYou can build a temple to anything thatąs

> >>>>>>> positive and good. That could mean: a temple to love,
> >>>>>>> friendship, calm or perspective.˛"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Then it wouldn't be an atheist temple, would it! B^D
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In fact it's going to PRETEND to be about atheism,
> >>>>>>> but becasue there is bugger all to celebrate, it will
> >>>>>>> really end up being about Science, or secularism, or nature..
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> NOTHING To Do WITH ATHEISM.. except they DEFINE it to be atheism,
> >>>>>>> when it SUITS the hypocriticla fucktards, who want to LEECH off
> >>>>>>> PUBLIC MONIES!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "The first proposed temple to Anything Positive and Good would be a
> >>>>>>> skinny pigmented concrete tower that rises 46 meters (150 feet)

> >>>>>>> over central London--thatąs 1 centimeter for every million years of
> >>>>>>> the earthąs existence. łOne metre from the ground, a tiny band of

> >>>>>>> gold no more than a millimetre thick would be inscribed into the
> >>>>>>> interior of the tower,˛ architect Tom Greenall tells Co.Design in

> >>>>>>> an email. łThis would represent the short extent of human life on

> >>>>>>> earth. Everything below this point is the future.˛
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> See, it's not about atheism at all, it's about earth..
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>> http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inli
> >>>>>>> ne-large/post-inline/06-architecture-shrine-to-perspective3-medium-
> >>> n
> >>>>>>> ew.jpg
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "The concrete would be poured slowly over a period of years,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> so it sets as hard as an atheist tyrants heart.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "instead of months, creating subtle variations in the appearance of

> >>>>>>> the interior walls that mimic the earthąs stratification. An oculus

> >>>>>>> at the top would usher natural light and air inside.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Creating the sense of being in one of the Atheist state dungeons,
> >>>>>>> staring up at a tiny opening, symbolising the hope of ESCAPE.
> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> "As for the exterior: Itąd be polished and etched with a

> >>>>>>> representation of the human genome sequence."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Again, nothing to do with atheism, they are really trying
> >>>>>>> to distance themselves from Prophet Dawkins and present themselves
> >>>>>>> as a cult of pseudo-science. Real scientists do the science,
> >>>>>>> atheists use it to decorate a TEMPLE to their OWN HUBRIS! B^D
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAA
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "The point is to encourage visitors to contemplate the

> >>>>>>> extraordinary history of the planet and humansą relatively

> >>>>>>> brief existence thereon. "
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Including the glorious civilisations, all inspired and sustained
> >>>>>>> by the worlds religions... the only atheist contribution
> >>>>>>> will be the colour of the temple, BLACK as the hearts of the
> >>>>>>> atheist tyrants who killed over 60,000,000 people
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Do a write it, offer to donate if they include symbols of the
> >>>>>>> Atheist state tyrannies and the atheist holocausts..
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> "łThe tower is intended as a temple to perspective not a tower to

> >>>>>>> atheism,˛ Greenall insists. "
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Like atheism it SHRINKS To A VANISHING POINT!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA
> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> "łI would agree that atheists do not need temples. However,

> >>>>>> # silicon destiny. And heąs 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.
> >>>>>> #

> >>>>>> # Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?
> >>>>>> #
> >>>>>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "Itąs highly plausible that

> >>>>>> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."
> >>>>>> #

> >>>>>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone around a
> >>>>>> # religious bend. "Itąs very important to understand that these Gods

> >>>>>> # came into being
>
> No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception.
>
> >>>>>> # by an explicable scientific progression of
> >>>>>> # incremental evolution."'
> >>>>>> #
> >>>>>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
> >>>>>> #

> >>>>>> # łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds, łBut I
> >>>>>> # wouldnąt 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?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ...........................................................
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ...........................................................
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ...........................................................
> >
> > What is supposed to be INexplicable
>
> The part which none of you can Explain, you moron! B^]
>
> Which is ALL of it.. complete FANTASY and unfounded
> atheist Belief that God's have evolved.
>
> You can't even explain how your imaginary friends 'came into being'
> when immaterial 'bolts of 'moral' energy' can't reproduce sexually,
> so their 'evolution' defies natural laws!
>
>
> B^D
>
>
> Are you claiming a Virgin Birth was part of Dawkin's Gods
> coming in to being?
>
> When are any of you going to come into CONSCIOUSNESS!? B^D
>
> > when Dawkins himself says

> > "It1s very important to understand that these Gods came

> # silicon destiny. And heąs 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.
> #

> # Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?
> #
> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "Itąs highly plausible that

> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."
> #

> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone around a
> # religious bend. "Itąs 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.
> #

> # łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds, łBut I
> # wouldnąt 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,

Something that might happen in the far future, according to Dawkins,
does not need explanation until it occurs, but according to Dawkins,
it will be the case that "these Gods will have came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution", just like
us.

[Vurgil]

In article <j70Xq.2766$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:


> >>>>> 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

Actually, for those who can read more accurately than faasgnadh, those
god-like beings are only potential, in the sense that they may exist at
some ambiguous but distant future time, but are not claimed to exist at
present.



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 heąs 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.

Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?
łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly plausible that in
the universe there are God-like creatures.˛
He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone around a
religious bend. łItąs 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.

łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds, łBut I wouldnąt want to be too
dogmatic about that.˛


A version of this article appeared in print on September 20, 2011, in

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?

Since according to the original Dawkins quote such god-like beings'
existence is only postulated for some "millions of speculative years
into the future", no explanation of them now is required.

> Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP
> the evidence that Dawkins claimed these Atheist "Gods came into being.."
> and deny that the evidence exists:

"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 exist, at lesat not yet.

>
> Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

See the unsnipped version above saying "millions of speculative years
into the future".


On the contrary, it is fasgnadh who is claiming the present existence of
something which only may exist in some distant future.

And thus needs no present explanation.

But his/her/its misrepresentatains do need an explanation.

> Usually indicates it's worthless..
> go on, lets see if you HAVE A CLUE:
>
> > fagsnuts.
>
> We hear you suck them all the time..
>
> is that all you have to share?
>
> > Dawkins is still an atheist,
>
> Defined as one who believes, and I QUOTE VERBATIM:
>

"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."

If you are going to quote verbatim, it is customary to quote entire
context instead of cutting out the parts you do not want others to see.

To those who can read what was written in the article Dawkins was quoted
as speculating on a time in the distant future when such beings MAY by
then have come into existence.

fasgnadh's claiming that Dawkins was talking about the present shows how
incompetent fasgnadh's reading skill are.

Either that or how sneaky and underhanded fasgnadh's lying skills are.

Or both!

>
> So you're another 'ex-atheist' who believes Prophet
> Dawkin's God's and Bishop Bukakke who has built an

> Altar of Atheism! Bad^Dog

No, I am a present atheist beleives that Dawkins got it right andwho
believes fasgnadh is trying vainly to counter the good effects of what
Dawkins actually said.
>

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil snips the complete text and LIES about it:

<unsnip, to restore the COMPLETE text of the Dawkins article>;

>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>

>>>>>> And what did he convert to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>
>> Yes, you simply snipped the evidence of his claim, and are in irrational
>> denial...
>>
>> <Unsnip the EVIDENCE>

And, just as Abu Baker Bashir SNIPPED all the evidence, so does this
other devious atheist fraud Virgil!

This is the full text RESTORED

>>>>>
>>>>>>> # "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins
>>>>>>> # walks farafield.
>>>>>>> # 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


Atheists think they have souls? BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAA

>>>>>>> # 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.


So, DYSON's work of fiction speculates about beings of 'intelligent
moral energy' Dawkins is asked "like God/" and he replies CERTAINLY!

>>>>>>> # 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."

THAT IS **DAWKINS CLAIM, NOT DYSONS! Dyson's speculation about
imaginary beings in the future morph into God-like creatures that are
"highly plausible" (sure just like the Spaghetti Monster! B^D

And then he takes it further and asserts they EXIST.. that they CAME
INTO BEING by some process of God Evolution which NO-ONE can explain!! B^D

This is worse RANTING RUBBISH than El-Ron (the Bare-Faced Messiah)
Hubbard's screwy Scientology!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA

>>>>>>> # 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

>
> Actually, for those who can read more accurately than faasgnadh, those
> god-like beings are only potential, in the sense that they may exist
> at some ambiguous but distant future time, but are not claimed
> to exist at present.

Bullshit, you atheist LIAR:

"It’s very important to understand that these Gods came into being...**"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If it's so important to understand that they CAME INTO BEING.. not
WILL COME INTO BEING "at some blah blah bullshit blah time.."
then how come you and the other atheist dipshits are TOO SPUPID
to understand what tense he is using?

Game, Set, Match.

>> No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception,
>> and of Dawkin's Sci Fi Faith in Gods!
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA
>>
>>>>>>> # 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?

All this fuckwit can offer for what dawkins claims is EASILY EXPLAINED is:

> no explanation

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAA

Prophet Dawkins and his Acolytes are LIARS.

>> Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP
>> the evidence that Dawkins claimed these Atheist "Gods came into being.."
>> and deny that the evidence exists:
>
> "Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years into the future.

That's DYSON, not DAWKINS you fuckwit! B^D

No one is accusing Dyson of making Prophet Dawkins claim that
these atheist "Gods came into being..."

>>>> Doesn't exist, at lesat not yet.
>>
>> Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA
>
> See the unsnipped version above saying "millions of speculative years
> into the future".

Where it has ALWAYS BEEN, IN **MY** POST, until you LYING SLEAZEBAGS
SNIPPED IT!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAA

> who is claiming the present existence of
> something which only may exist in some distant future.

Your Prophet Dawkins, when he claimed "It’s very important to understand
that **these Gods came into being** "

And when he claimed this is EXPLICABLE by evolution,
NO LYING ATHEIST ACOLYTE OF HIS CAN ACTUALLY EXPLAIN
HOW (immaterial 'MORAL ENERGY") GOD'S could possibly
have EVOLVED.. (a process of BIOLOGY.. NOT THE ATHEIST
SUPERNATURAL B^)

The atheists not only have no evidence of these Gods they
claim Came into being.. they have no explanation how
immaterial gods COULD 'evolve'

> no present explanation.


What, you might think up some bullshit by next Thursday!?


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAA

> misrepresentatains do need an explanation.

So where is YOURS?

When did these Gods Dawkins claims 'Came into Being' Manifest?

Did YHWH manifest? Allah? Jehova?

There is more EVIDENCE for those "bolts of superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" existing than YOURS!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAAA

>> Usually indicates it's worthless..
>> go on, lets see if you HAVE A CLUE:
>>
>>> fagsnuts.
>>
>> We hear you suck them all the time..
>>
>> is that all you have to share?
>>
>>> Dawkins is still an atheist,
>>
>> Defined as one who believes, and I QUOTE VERBATIM:
>>

>> "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
>> came into being.."

>
> If you are going to quote verbatim, it is customary to quote entire
> context

I DID, it's there, COMPLETE in my post ABOVE, where YOU SNIPPED IT
YOU DEVIOUS LYING SHITPIG .. and I REPLACED it. B^)

Now I am simply Reprising KEY points.

> To those who can read what was written in the article
> Dawkins was quoted as speculating on a time in the distant future

NO, DYSON WAS, his work of FICTION speculates about "something

like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy"

Dawkins is asked if these are "an awful lot like God" and


Dawkin's took it way further, Stated CATEGORICALLY

>> So you're another 'ex-atheist' who believes Prophet
>> Dawkin's God's
>> and Bishop Bukakke who has built an

>> So you're another 'ex-atheist' who believes Prophet
>> Dawkin's God's and Bishop Bukakke who has built an
>> Altar of Atheism!
>

> No, I am a present atheist beleives that Dawkins got it right

Dawkin's claimed God's are plausible, then went on they CAME INTO BEING.

And Bishop Bukakke has built an Altar of Atheism to worship them.

And on that Altar, you sacrifice TRUTH to your Atheist God's
of denial, lies deception and despair.. just like EVERY ATHEIST
REGIME IN HISTORY.

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil wants to avoid the literal truth in Prophet Dawkin's text
and FORGES fake Dawkins quotes instead:

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAH


But that's how the ATHEISTS READ OTHER PEOPLE'S TEXTS! B^]

>>>>>>>>>>> In his poem ³Church Going², Philip Larkin anticipates

>>>>>>>>>>> a time when faith completely vanishes from England.

>>>>>>>>>>> ³And what remains when disbelief has gone?/ Grass,

>>>>>>>>>>> weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky².
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Alain de Botton disagrees. In his new book Religion for Atheists,
>>>>>>>>>>> the popular sage argues that, although many in the West have
>>>>>>>>>>> little time for organised religion, they still have feel

>>>>>>>>>>> nostalgic for its ³consoling, subtle or just charming rituals².

>>>>>>>>>>> ³Often a religious building plays around with
>>>>>>>>>>> our perspective: it¹s very large, or it¹s very old or both.

>>>>>>>>>>> It recalibrates us in space or time, so you walk in
>>>>>>>>>>> and feel tiny.²
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton once wrote a book called The Architecture of
>>>>>>>>>>> Happiness... "
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> B^D how apt, the atheists just had a thread asking
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "What, to you, is fun, in atheism"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and they all answered there was none in atheism per se!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "What would happen inside?"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hilarious.. like all reactionary atheists, he defines it by
>>>>>>>>>>> what it ISN'T:
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> ³There isn¹t a liturgy, there isn¹t a Bible,² he says..."

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> " The inspirational singing you find in at Sufi shrines or
>>>>>>>>>>> African churches are very distant from his vision: it all sounds

>>>>>>>>>>> rather sedate and middle class. De Botton admits as much: ³My

>>>>>>>>>>> target of a lot of this is kind of the sixtysomething male
>>>>>>>>>>> academic from Oxford who attacks believers and says religion is
>>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous.² "
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAAAAAA Tired old atheism!
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> "A key indication of the temple¹s popularity will come from its

>>>>>>>>>>> fund-raising."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes indeed! B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> De Botton is personally extremely wealthy (there are rumours of a

>>>>>>>>>>> £200 million trust fund, but he insists he has only £7.25 million

>>>>>>>>>>> ­ earned from book sales and teaching), but, rather than calling

>>>>>>>>>>> on rich pals, he would prefer small donations, ³just like

>>>>>>>>>>> Chartres Cathedral².
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I mention that the people who funded Chartres and, in more recent
>>>>>>>>>>> times, the Hindu Temple in Neasden, west London were doing so for
>>>>>>>>>>> an established community and with the promise of a heavenly

>>>>>>>>>>> reward. ³The Tate Modern was funded not by people who wanted to

>>>>>>>>>>> go to heaven but people who thought it was a good project,² he

>>>>>>>>>>> says. (In fact, more than half of the £134 million it cost came

>>>>>>>>>>> from the lottery or government agencies.)"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ATHEISTS WANT PUBLIC MONEY FOR *THEIR* TEMPLE! 8^o
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> HYPOCRITES! What happened to separation of Church and state? B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton wants to reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
>>>>>>>>>>> figures such as Richard Dawkins."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, doesn't all the thinking rational atheists want that?
>>>>>>>>>>> B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> " While this is a laudable aim, I can¹t help thinking there is

>>>>>>>>>>> something misconceived about the project. What we find beautiful
>>>>>>>>>>> is inevitably bound up with the values of the people who made it:
>>>>>>>>>>> a Protestant may recoil from a rococo Italian church or a Muslim
>>>>>>>>>>> find a synagogue too plain for his tastes not because of an
>>>>>>>>>>> abstract aesthetic sense but because it seems foreign to the way
>>>>>>>>>>> they worship. The strict beliefs that de Botton shies away from
>>>>>>>>>>> are exactly what thrill and terrify visitors to a sacred space:
>>>>>>>>>>> the thought that it was built in the name of truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is another possible future for this impressive-sounding
>>>>>>>>>>> Temple for Atheists. If not enough people wander in, de Botton
>>>>>>>>>>> could hold lectures there and maybe move the School of Life he
>>>>>>>>>>> already runs to the site. With his calming voice calling for a

>>>>>>>>>>> renewal of ³community, beauty, sympathy, kindness, a moral

>>>>>>>>> tells it, the moment¹s ripe for atheists to build

>>>>>>>>> their own shrines."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sure they could have the Chairman Mao Shrine
>>>>>>>>> for the victims of the Great Leap Backward and the
>>>>>>>>> Cultural Devolution! B^D
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or the Pol Pot memorial Crucifixion of Christians:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk158/CANDEMIELDA/44camboyano.jpg
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "³Why should religious people have the most beautiful

>>>>>>>>> buildings in the land?² he says."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Um, because they have the creative imagination
>>>>>>>>> and energy.
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> ³It¹s time atheists had their own versions of the great

>>>>>>>>> churches and cathedrals.²
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A temple to the Atheist State Holocausts? they have
>>>>>>>>> those already:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://andybrouwer.co.uk/geno.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392mill
>>>>>>>>> ones.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "So de Botton has announced plans to build a network of Temples for

>>>>>>>>> Atheists around the U.K. Yup. Houses of God for people who don¹t

>>>>>>>>> believe in God."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.killingfieldsmuseum.com/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "To get around that pesky little paradox (for which de Botton
>>>>>>>>> has been mightily ridiculed, with the Guardian going so far
>>>>>>>>> as to suggest that the whole thing is just a publicity stunt
>>>>>>>>> to help push his new book Religion for Atheists), de Botton

>>>>>>>>> argues that, ³You can build a temple to anything that¹s

>>>>>>>>> positive and good. That could mean: a temple to love,
>>>>>>>>> friendship, calm or perspective.²"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then it wouldn't be an atheist temple, would it! B^D
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In fact it's going to PRETEND to be about atheism,
>>>>>>>>> but becasue there is bugger all to celebrate, it will
>>>>>>>>> really end up being about Science, or secularism, or nature..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> NOTHING To Do WITH ATHEISM.. except they DEFINE it to be atheism,
>>>>>>>>> when it SUITS the hypocriticla fucktards, who want to LEECH off
>>>>>>>>> PUBLIC MONIES!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The first proposed temple to Anything Positive and Good would be a
>>>>>>>>> skinny pigmented concrete tower that rises 46 meters (150 feet)

>>>>>>>>> over central London--that¹s 1 centimeter for every million years of
>>>>>>>>> the earth¹s existence. ³One metre from the ground, a tiny band of

>>>>>>>>> gold no more than a millimetre thick would be inscribed into the
>>>>>>>>> interior of the tower,² architect Tom Greenall tells Co.Design in

>>>>>>>>> an email. ³This would represent the short extent of human life on

>>>>>>>>> earth. Everything below this point is the future.²
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See, it's not about atheism at all, it's about earth..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.fastcodesign.com/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/inli
>>>>>>>>> ne-large/post-inline/06-architecture-shrine-to-perspective3-medium-
>>>>> n
>>>>>>>>> ew.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The concrete would be poured slowly over a period of years,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> so it sets as hard as an atheist tyrants heart.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "instead of months, creating subtle variations in the appearance of

>>>>>>>>> the interior walls that mimic the earth¹s stratification. An oculus

>>>>>>>>> at the top would usher natural light and air inside.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Creating the sense of being in one of the Atheist state dungeons,
>>>>>>>>> staring up at a tiny opening, symbolising the hope of ESCAPE.
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "As for the exterior: It¹d be polished and etched with a

>>>>>>>>> representation of the human genome sequence."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Again, nothing to do with atheism, they are really trying
>>>>>>>>> to distance themselves from Prophet Dawkins and present themselves
>>>>>>>>> as a cult of pseudo-science. Real scientists do the science,
>>>>>>>>> atheists use it to decorate a TEMPLE to their OWN HUBRIS! B^D
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The point is to encourage visitors to contemplate the

>>>>>>>>> extraordinary history of the planet and humans¹ relatively

>>>>>>>>> brief existence thereon. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Including the glorious civilisations, all inspired and sustained
>>>>>>>>> by the worlds religions... the only atheist contribution
>>>>>>>>> will be the colour of the temple, BLACK as the hearts of the
>>>>>>>>> atheist tyrants who killed over 60,000,000 people
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do a write it, offer to donate if they include symbols of the
>>>>>>>>> Atheist state tyrannies and the atheist holocausts..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "³The tower is intended as a temple to perspective not a tower to

>>>>>>>>> atheism,² Greenall insists. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like atheism it SHRINKS To A VANISHING POINT!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "³I would agree that atheists do not need temples. However,

>>>>>>>> # silicon destiny. And he¹s 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.
>>>>>>>> #

>>>>>>>> # Doesn¹t that description sound an awful lot like God?
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It¹s highly plausible that

>>>>>>>> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."
>>>>>>>> #

>>>>>>>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he¹s gone around a
>>>>>>>> # religious bend. "It¹s very important to understand that these Gods

>>>>>>>> # came into being
>>
>> No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception.
>>
>>>>>>>> # by an explicable scientific progression of
>>>>>>>> # incremental evolution."'
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
>>>>>>>> #

>>>>>>>> # ³Probably not.² He smiles and adds, ³But I
>>>>>>>> # wouldn¹t want to be too dogmatic about that.²"

I'm the one that says IT HASN'T HAPPENED, Dawkins says it HAS!

>>
>> # "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 he¹s 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.

Dyson's work of fiction speculates about these "bolts of superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" Asked if that sounds
like God's Dawkins replies Certainly,

>> # Doesn¹t that description sound an awful lot like God?
>> #
>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It¹s highly plausible that

>> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."

Then he moves from the plausibility of Gods (something theists
and more thoughtful non-believers have told him for YEARS! B^)
to a claim they have evolved and Came into being, but offers
no evidence of where, or how that happened.

>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he¹s gone around a
>> # religious bend. "It¹s very important to understand that these Gods
>> # came into being

I'm the one that says IT HASN'T HAPPENED, Dawkins says it HAS!

>> # by an explicable scientific progression of
>> # incremental evolution."'
>> #
>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
>> #

>> # ³Probably not.² He smiles and adds, ³But I
>> # wouldn¹t want to be too dogmatic about that.²"

>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
>>
>>
>> So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
>
>
> Something that might happen in the far future,

You telling the truth? unlikely before Hell freezing over.

"These Gods came into being"

> according to Dawkins,

So When did they come into being?

How many?

What are their names?

How do immaterial beings of energy 'come into being'
as energy can neither be created nor destroyed, merely
transformed?

How can immaterial beings have evolved when they have no
PHYSICAL attributes on which Natural Selection could work?????

> does not need explanation

Yes it does.. YOUR PROPHET, Dawkins the Deist, claims it's
EXPLICABLE.. and you are PROVING he LIED!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

You lying atheist God-Botherers have not thought any of this out
have you? You have NO EXPLANATION for your opinions WHATSOEVER..

THAT MAKES THEM UNPROVEN BELIEFS!


You are officially THEISTS !

When is the next worship session at Bishop Bukakke's Altar
or are you all waiting till the Atheist Temple is built?

> until it occurs,

In the meantime you will just KEEP LYING eh?

> according to Dawkins,
> it will be the case that "these Gods will have came into being

Dawkins never said that, you lying atheist shitpig

When you use a quote you should place it in context,
but you haven't used a quote..

YOU HAVE MANUFACTURED FALSE TEXT!


Fu8ck off, you atheist FORGER and FRAUD!

--

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?

...........................................................

...........................................................

...........................................................

[Vurgil]

In article <tW6Xq.2776$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Vurgil wants to avoid the literal truth in Prophet Dawkin's text
> and FORGES fake Dawkins quotes instead:
>
> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAH
>

> Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
> intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible

But not necessarily actual, unlike you theists claims.
.

Since Dawkins only concedes plausibility, not actuality, no one but you
theists are claiming actuality, so no one but your lot needs any proofs.

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil snips the evidence of his post forging:

> On 4/02/2012 8:31 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Vurgil wants to avoid the literal truth in Prophet Dawkin's text
>> and FORGES fake Dawkins quotes instead:
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAH
>>
>>

>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And what did he convert to?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, you simply snipped the evidence of his claim, and are in
>>>>>> irrational
>>>>>> denial...
>>>>
>>>> <Unsnip the EVIDENCE>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>

>>>> No wonder the atheist LIAR had to hide the evidence of his deception.
>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> # by an explicable scientific progression of

>>>>>>>>>> # incremental evolution."'
>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>> # ³Probably not.² He smiles and adds, ³But I
>>>>>>>>>> # wouldn¹t want to be too dogmatic about that.²"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>> # "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 he¹s 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.
>>
>>

>> Dyson's work of fiction speculates about these "bolts of superpowerful
>> intelligent and moral energy" Asked if that sounds
>> like God's Dawkins replies Certainly,
>>

>>>> # Doesn¹t that description sound an awful lot like God?
>>>> #
>>>> # "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It¹s highly plausible that
>>>> # in the universe there are God-like creatures."
>

> But not necessarily actual, unlike you theists claims.

I'm an agnostic, you atheist liar, you are the ones claiming
Gods are Plausible and then going further to claim they actually
"CAME INTO BEING..":

>> Then he moves from the plausibility of Gods (something theists
>> and more thoughtful non-believers have told him for YEARS! B^)
>> to a claim they have evolved and Came into being, but offers
>> no evidence of where, or how that happened.
>>

>>>> # He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he¹s gone around a
>>>> # religious bend. "It¹s very important to understand that these Gods
>>>> # came into being
>>

>> I'm the one that says IT HASN'T HAPPENED, Dawkins says it HAS!
>>

>>>> # by an explicable scientific progression of

>>>> # incremental evolution."'
>>>> #
>>>> # Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
>>>> #
>>>> # ³Probably not.² He smiles and adds, ³But I
>>>> # wouldn¹t want to be too dogmatic about that.²"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
>>>
>>>

Where in that article did Dawkins say any such thing?

You lying shitpigs sink to EVER LOWER DEPTHS of despicable dishonesty!

>> Dawkins never said that, you lying atheist shitpig
>>
>> When you use a quote you should place it in context,
>> but you haven't used a quote..
>>
>> YOU HAVE MANUFACTURED FALSE TEXT!
>>
>>

>> Fuck off, you atheist FORGER and FRAUD!

>
> Since Dawkins only concedes plausibility,

So you all think God's are Plausible, eh?

I think that should go on some T-Shirts?


"God is plausible" - Dawkins

along with my favourite..

"These Gods Came into being" - Arch-Deacon Dawkins!

> not actuality,

No no of course he's not an ACTUAL Arch-Deacon,
he's more of a Cake Boi in a Nun's habit at Gay Mardi Gras

Has anyone seen the atheist Gods anywhere?

> no one

> but you theists

I'm not a theist, you have reached your Limit of LIES;


falsus in uno, falsis in omnibus

> no one but your lot

...the rational humans,

> needs any proofs.

Yes, we insist on them, and you run away from the task.

Atheists never have any, they just have unfounded BELIEFS! B^D

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7842769.stm

An atheist UK bus campaign which uses the slogan
"There's probably no God, So Don't Worry, Be Happy"
has been found by the Advertising Standards Authority
to be OPINIONS which cannot be objectively substantiated!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHA

"the ASA ruled the adverts were an expression of the advertiser's
opinion and that the claims in it were not capable of objective
substantiation."

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

It's just as I said.. Atheists have BELIEFS,

they put them on bus signs!

And they CAN'T PROVE THEM!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!

PRICELESS!

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

--


Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims that some atheist
"Gods have come into being.." 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,

http://www.vectorsite.net/taevo_07_01.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5BV_YADVD7o/R3KMsQ0usrI/AAAAAAAABHU/qup-8dKPbEs/s400/pope+b16.jpg


# 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

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

# by an explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution."'


Explain how IMMATERIAL and SUPERNATURAL entities, "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" can be affected by Natural Selection,
which occurs in BIOLOGICAL species subject to physical mutations!?

# 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?

[fasgnadh]

The lemon of Net Nanny doily crocheting snips the evidence of Atheist
forgery and whines like an old geriatric about "netiquette" FFS!:

BTW surreptitious snippage of newsgroups is a breach of NetNanniquette,
why don't you write a post whining about yourself? B^D

> On 6/02/2012 12:58 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Vurgil snips the evidence of his post forging:
>>> On 4/02/2012 8:31 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vurgil wants to avoid the literal truth in Prophet Dawkin's text
>>>> and FORGES fake Dawkins quotes instead:
>>>>
>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But that's how the ATHEISTS READ OTHER PEOPLE'S TEXTS! B^]
>>>>

....

>>>>> according to Dawkins,
>>>>> it will be the case that "these Gods will have came into being

Virgul and and his Kook Sucker believe they can forge text
and if they are exposed they will just snip the evidence,
repeat their lies, and complain "The Evidence of atheist lies
is just too BIG"

>> Where in that article did Dawkins say any such thing?
>>

Vurgul has fucked off.. he has no answer, he lied about
what Dawkins said and the Kook-Sucker steps in to do the big snip
for him..

It's like a tag team composed of a liar and self-styled style consultant
(Net Nazi) for Usenet..

They really deserve each other.

>> You lying shitpigs sink to EVER LOWER DEPTHS of despicable dishonesty!
>>

here's what Dawkins actually said and what the Lying
atheist and his Kook Sucking, arse licking, bum boy snipped;

...
# "It’s very important to understand that these Gods

# came into being

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

>>>> Dawkins never said that, you lying atheist shitpig
>>>>

>>>> YOU HAVE MANUFACTURED FALSE TEXT!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fuck off, you atheist FORGER and FRAUD!
>>
>>>
>>> Since Dawkins only concedes plausibility,
>>

>> So you atheists all think "God's are Plausible", eh?
>>
>> I think that should go on some T-Shirts!?

>>
>> "God is plausible" - Dawkins
>>
>> along with my favourite..
>>
>> "These Gods Came into being" - Arch-Deacon Dawkins!
>>
>>> not actuality,
>>
>> No no of course he's not an ACTUAL Arch-Deacon,
>> he's more of a Cake Boi in a Nun's habit at Gay Mardi Gras
>>
>> Has anyone seen the atheist Gods anywhere?
>>
>>> no one
>>
>>> but you theists
>>
>> I'm not a theist, you have reached your Limit of LIES;
>>
>>
>> falsus in uno, falsis in omnibus

The Kook Suckers, like Lemon, can't operate at a level higher
than weak flames about post-size, and Net Nanny whining;
pouting, stamping it's little hoof and demanding no one
posts more ideas in a thread than it will allow!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAA

Priceless!

> It's called, "having even a smidgeon of respect

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAH

You defend that post forging, Quote fabricating, lying
atheist maggot and you want to lecture me about RESPECT!?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAA

> for the concept of netiquette,"

"Netiquette"?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

Why don't you go and crochet a fucking Doily, you
ridiculous pink-frock-wearing geriatric wannabe Net Nazi!

http://www.smart-knit-crocheting.com/crochet-doilies.html

You are whining about bourgeois POLITENESS in defence
of a FRAUD, a liar and and a post forging atheist shitpig!?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHA

and you think anyone will pay you the slightest bit of notice?

B^D

Ok, Grandma, so forging a quote and presenting it as Dawkin's words
is your idea of netiquette, and "big posts" are the target of
YOUR Crusade to Make Usenet a Better Place! BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

So you defend the forgery and whine about

"too many wurds hurts Lemon's brane."

Aw.. sorry Grandma, did we spill our lemonade on your needlepoint!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAAA

Fuck off back to kook land.. you have nothing to say worth hearing.

> people who don't want to scroll through over nine hundred fucking
> lines

usually those that don't want to read my posts simply DON'T..
just like no one reads your endless Kook Sucker mass-debates...
but apparently your Life's Work is to read my posts, have nothing
to say about the content.. tell us you haven't read it because,
like penises and brains, no one should have a BIGGER ONE
than you.. and then spend your entire post WHINING about it!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAA


< Snipped empty rhetoric, ad hom and whining.. nothing left>.


> Snarky

I suspect it's because you don't get laid.

I have passed your professional Net Nanny Whining
on to the Nanny Authority, who think they may
have a job for you in the Department of Kook
Krossposting to Komplain about Krossposting;


# From: carol moore <carolmo...@gmail.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.nanny.helpme.help.help.help
# Subject: High profile Nanny job from the Nanny Authority
# Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 03:31:41 -0700 (PDT)
# Message-ID: <967cbd11-e760-466f-
ba49-4a5...@b13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
#
# Looking for a Nanny Job? The Nanny Authority is here to
# guide you throughout your search for the ideal job
# as a professional nanny. At The Nanny Authority,
# we not only recognize the importance of caring
# for children, but the importance of the fine caregivers
# that take on a job as a nanny.
#
# For more information, visit :
http://www.nannyauthority.com/nannies_seeourjobs.html

Take the Bland Lizard with you as a Willy Warmer.




--

[fasgnadh]

On 5/02/2012 9:14 AM, Vurgil wrote:
> On 5/02/2012 12:02 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> On 4/02/2012 12:10 PM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>> "shiny" <a@b.ç> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9FEECCA...@208.90.168.18...
>>>> Mark Morgan <mo...@nospam4me.invalid> sez 03 Feb 2012:
>>>>
>>>>> Rusty Tavek <grand...@safe-mail.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:CB5038B8.192A%grand...@safe-mail.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/2/12 11:48 AM, in article jgeeot$43t$1...@dont-email.me, "Mark
>>>>>> Morgan" <mo...@nospam4me.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rick Sabian's All-Star Canadian Assworm Zydeco Band
>>>>>>> <Bung...@Squeeze.Box> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:MPG.29945c231...@news.alt.net:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark Morgan put forth the notion that...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "çu" <a@b.ç> wrote in news:Xns9FECD84...@208.90.168.18:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mark Morgan <mo...@nospam4me.invalid> sez 01 Feb 2012:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Clayton McGill (aka Demon of Mockery, aka Pope Snarky)looks like
>>>>>>>>>>> a tiny penis.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> See him with a butt plug on his head -
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://i39.tinypic.com/23jfx1l.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As you can plainly see<SLAP!>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> oh, shuddup.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you try your best to make me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure it was just a suggestion, Mark. No need to get all uppity
>>>>>>>> about it. Why don't you get yourself some kelp, then help yourself
>>>>>>>> to a big hot cup of shut-the-fuck-up?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Howz about you eat shit and die.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://ipunce2.blogspot.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Grand Wizard appreciates your campaign speeches, which are
>>>>>> appropriately grunting, profane and monosyllabic. But you must
>>>>>> realize my client Emmett Gulley, the Pissbum Powerhouse, has the
>>>>>> Pathetic Anal Pineapple award in the bag for this month. Still, your
>>>>>> efforts are not in vain. If you keep working hard, I'm sure you will
>>>>>> yourself (or is that yourselves?) rewarded for your efforts next
>>>>>> month. And if Pope Snarky would be so kind as to post evidence that
>>>>>> the MMFC is a one-man band, the Grand Wizard might even be able to get
>>>>>> you drummed into the prestigious Order of the Holey Sockpuppet. I have
>>>>>> some expertise on this topic, being as how I am a sock atop a sock and
>>>>>> wearing a sparkly turban to boot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Grand Wizard of AUK has spoken. Thank you all for listening.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> No one gives a flying fuck, rusty trombone.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> are you the princess in charge of this group?
>>>
>>>
>>> It's a crying shame how Mr. Tavek turned into just another trite and
>>> boring stAUKer.
>>
>> What was he before he became a bore?
>>
>>> He used to be worth reading, now he's a waste of time.
>>
>> You mean he wasn't always a whiney little Sook who spends his days
>> making pissy crossposted complaints about crossposting and
>> churning out Post-Style and -size flames aimed at those whose
>> threads get more attention than his? Hilarious! B^D
>>
>> Is stAUKer how they self-title themselves..
>>
>> in reality they are just little puppies that yap at one's heels.

> Professor Dawkins replies.
...

> "It¹s very important to understand that

> these Gods came into being
>
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all


Bukakke thinks it's so important she built an Altar
of Atheism to worship them;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,

alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

I told you atheists you were in decline:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

"At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half of the world's
population identified itself as either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant,
Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of secularism, and technological
advancement, and scientific progress later and that number is now
two thirds.

So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
it's not happening at all.

People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
and religion itself is also evolving"



- Dr Reza Aslan

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm


--

# "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

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

# by an explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution."'


Explain how IMMATERIAL and SUPERNATURAL entities, "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" can be affected by Natural Selection,
which occurs in BIOLOGICAL species subject to physical mutations!?

# 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

[fasgnadh]

On 25/02/2012 10:33 PM, DanielSan wrote:

> On 2/25/2012 3:30 AM, Loirbaj wrote:

>> After Prophet Dawkins converted
>>
>> and declared
>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>

> He didn't say that.


Liar

# "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being
# - Richard Dawkins

>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>

# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

> Maybe you should join Zach in a tent filled with bugspray.


Maybe you should stop lying and telling people you want
them poisoned, you malignant atheist thug.



---------

Atheists are in retreat:

Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

..Atheist activist Bukakke has built an Atheist altar to worship them;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>

# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

...and national atheist bodies have formally applied to be recognised
as a religion:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

[fasgnadh]

On 26/02/2012 1:04 AM, default wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:30:34 -0800 (PST), Loirbaj
> <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>

> Wouldn't surprise me. Stupidity is not limited

In fact every atheist who has responded has accepted,
without ANY evidence whatsoever, that Dawkin's Gods are REAL!


--

---------

Atheists are in retreat:

Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:

# "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being
# - Richard Dawkins

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

..Atheist activist Bukakke has built an Atheist altar to worship them;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>

# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

...and national atheist bodies have formally applied to be recognised
as a religion:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

[Vurgil]

In article <pC62r.3625$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 26/02/2012 1:04 AM, default wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:30:34 -0800 (PST), Loirbaj
> > <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> >
> >> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
> >> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
> >> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
> >> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
> >
> > Wouldn't surprise me. Stupidity is not limited
>
> In fact every atheist who has responded has accepted,
> without ANY evidence whatsoever, that Dawkin's Gods are REAL!
>
>
> --
>
> ---------
>
> Atheists are in retreat:
>
> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:

Actually what Dwkins says, when read in context, is that god-like
creatures might evolve into existence in some far future time.

But fa alwasys quote mines out of context so as to mislead.

See for yourselves:

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 heąs
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."

[So the context of discussion is now established as being
in Dyson's far future, and the following must be interpreted
in that context]

"Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?"

[Again establishing that the context is Dyson's future universe]

łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly

plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there

are God-like creatures.˛

He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone

around a religious bend. łItąs very important to
understand that these [future] Gods came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.˛

Could they be immortal?

The professor shrugs. łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds ,

łBut I wouldnąt want to be too dogmatic about that.˛


The complete article appeared in print on September 20, 2011, in

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

[Vurgil]

In article <T862r.3445$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 25/02/2012 10:33 PM, DanielSan wrote:
> > On 2/25/2012 3:30 AM, Loirbaj wrote:
>
> >> After Prophet Dawkins converted
> >>
> >> and declared
> >> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
> >
> > He didn't say that.
>
>
> Liar
>

> # "Itąs very important to understand that these Gods

> # came into being
> # - Richard Dawkins

Or to complete the quoted sentence"

łItąs very important to
understand that these [future] Gods came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.˛

See below for the entire conversation!

> ---------
>
> Atheists are in retreat:

Only in fasgnadh's tiny mind.

>
> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:

Does he?

Actually, if one reads the whole, Dawkins only speculates on what might
be plausible in a distant future.

See for yourselves:

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 heąs
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."

[So the context of discussion is now established as being
in Dyson's far future, and the following must be interpreted
in that context]

"Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?"

[Again establishing that the context is Dyson's future universe]

łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly
plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there
are God-like creatures.˛

[Note that "plausible' does not imply "actual"]

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved: B^D
> On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard of AUK wrote:

>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/02/2012 12:23 PM, Vurgil wrote:
>>>>> On 4/02/2012 11:57 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:
>>>>>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>>>>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>>>>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA

>> ...

>>>>>>>>>>>>> "de Botton has come up with ambitious scheme that he calls
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Temples for Atheists. "
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> # From: Budikka666<budi...@netscape.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism

>>>>>>>>>>>>> # alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Subject: Disapproving Creation:
>>
>> Bukakke CREATED a post to disprove Creation! B^D

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Message-ID:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <b5430732-e52e-45b5-abc3-
>>>>>>> 7d0daa...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>>>>> #> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,
>>

>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAA
>>
>> Priceless!

>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "These will be secular spaces for contemplation,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh the theists have provided those already..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are called PARKS! The national ones are great!

>> .....

>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The proposed London temple, designed jointly by the architect
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Greenall and Jordan Hodgson, will be a huge black tower
>>>>>>>>>>>>> placed among the skyscrapers in the City of London.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Black Tower Of Mordor! PERFECT!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "... at its base is a band of gold 1mm thick signifying ..."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Worship of Moloch, The Golden Calf! B^D
>>

>> B^D

>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton once wrote a book called The Architecture of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Happiness... "
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> B^D how apt, the atheists just had a thread asking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "What, to you, is fun, in atheism"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and they all answered there was none in atheism per se!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>

>> Now they want to build a temple yo atheist HUBRIS! B^D
>>
>> .......

>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ATHEISTS WANT PUBLIC MONEY FOR *THEIR* TEMPLE! 8^o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> HYPOCRITES! What happened to separation of Church and state?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> B^]

>> ...... 8^o
>>
>> No answers from Crusty the Bland Lizard?

>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton wants to reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
>>>>>>>>>>>>> figures such as Richard Dawkins."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, don't all the thinking rational atheists want that?
>> .....
>> ........

>>>>>>>>>>> "As writer and architecture patron Alain de Botton
>>>>>>>>>>> tells it, the moment’s ripe for atheists to build
>>>>>>>>>>> their own shrines."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure they could have the Chairman Mao Shrine
>>>>>>>>>>> for the victims of the Great Leap Backward and the
>>>>>>>>>>> Cultural Devolution! B^D
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Or the Pol Pot memorial Crucifixion of Christians:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk158/CANDEMIELDA/44camboyano.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "“Why should religious people have the most beautiful
>>>>>>>>>>> buildings in the land?” he says."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Um, because they have the creative imagination
>>>>>>>>>>> and energy.
>>
>>

>> B^D
>> ........

>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "“The tower is intended as a temple to perspective not a tower to
>>>>>>>>>>> atheism,” Greenall insists. "
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Like atheism it SHRINKS To A VANISHING POINT!
>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Our tower was
>>>>>>>>>>> a simple design for an alternative, secular version.”"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> B^D Secular isn't ATHEIST!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All the free, open progressive SECULAR democracies have
>>>>>>>>>>> been built by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES!!! not atheist ones.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> EVERY atheist regime has been a TOTALITARIAN TYRANNY..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> THEY SHOULD BUILD MEMORIALS To THAT!!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> to the 60,000,000 dead!
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And what did he convert to?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A belief in Atheist God's, apparently:
>>

>>>>>>>>>> # Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible
>>>>>>>>>> # that in the universe there are God-like creatures."
>>
>> Atheists have been DENYING that for centuries.. B^D
>>
>> Now they have become AGNOSTICS! B^D
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>> # "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
>>>>>>>>>> # came into being
>>
>> How come none of the atheists can proivide evidence of when where and
>> how these atheist "Gods came into being...?"

>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>> # by an explicable scientific progression of
>>>>>>>>>> # incremental evolution."'
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>
>>>>> What is supposed to be INexplicable
>>>>
>>>> The part which none of you can Explain, you moron! B^]
>>>>
>>>> Which is ALL of it.. complete FANTASY and unfounded
>>>> atheist Belief that God's have evolved.
>>>>
>>>> You can't even explain how your imaginary friends 'came into being'
>>>> when immaterial 'bolts of 'moral' energy' can't reproduce sexually,
>>>> so their 'evolution' defies natural laws!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B^D
>>>>
>>
>>>>

>>>> How long have you all been secretly aware of them
>>>> before outing yourselves as theists?
>>

>> This moron just repeats the QUESTION when their problem
>> is THE atheist Kook-Suckers can't answer it!
>>
>>> What is supposed to be INexplicable when Dawkins himself says

>>>
>>>>> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came
>>>>> into being
>>>>
>>>> So, when did these atheist Gods come into being?
>>>>
>>>> How many are there?
>>>>
>>>> DO they have names?
>>
>>> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came
>>> into being
>>

>> Explain where the EVIDENCE is! B^]
>>

Bland Lizard, the Kook-Sucker blowhard, did a runner.

NONE of the atheist imbeciles can explain their theory of
Gods EVOLVING:

>>> by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
>>> incremental evolution."
>>

>> Explain how IMMATERIAL beings of "intelligent energy' can
>> have evolved by a process, natural selection, which operates on
>> natural selection in BIOLOGICAL systems which have mutated during
>> reproductive cell divisions!
>>
>> ...............................................................
>>
>> ...............................................................
>>
>> ...............................................................
>>
>>
>>> What part of "explicable" does fasgnadh claim means "inexplicable"?
>>
>> The part you can't explain.. all of it! B^]

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA

The atheist Kook-suckers have their heads so far up
their arses they have all stopped oxygen getting to their brains...

....and NO ONE HAS NOTICED!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA

>>> My friends,
>>
>> There is no more evidence you have any, than there is for your
>> Atheist Gods!
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA

No wonder Bland Lizard fucked off, he couldn't argue his way
out of a paper bag!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

>>
>>> if this isn't Global Village Pump-worthy screed,
>>
>> I agree, we should skip it <snip>

Let's leave the kooks alone so they can continue doing
the only thing they can do..


blowing each other. B^]

>> ---------
>>
>> Atheists are in retreat:
>>

>> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:
>

> Only to those who believe

The atheist sheep who swallow this shit, without ANY
evidence, and believe it: B^D

>> # "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
>> # came into being

>> # - Richard Dawkins
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
>>
>> When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
>> Do they have names?
>>
>> WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

They have none! It's Blind Beleif! BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

>> ..Atheist activist Bukakke has built an Atheist altar to worship them;
>>

>> # From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
>> # Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,

>> alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
>> # Subject: Disapproving Creation:
>> # Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
>> # Message-ID:
>> <b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
>> #
>> #
>> #> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,
>

> fasgnadh's quote mining.

No mining required, these atheist sheep leave their shit droppings
all over the paddock!

B^D

All I do is QUOTE them, VERBATIM, and cite the source.

As anyone can see, my quotes are absolutely faithful to what
the atheist idiots have babbled!

No wonder they get so upset! B^D

>> ...and national atheist bodies have formally applied to be recognised
>> as a religion:
>>
>> # It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
>> #
>> #
>> # "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
>> # of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
>> #
>> # "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
>> # The Age 29/1/2009

They certainly talk endlessly about the God's they believe in,
but they can't explain how non-biological God's EVOLVED: B^D

> humans have evolved into something like bolts of superpowerful
> intelligent and moral energy."

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA

Scientifically illiterate atheist imbeciless will believe ANYTHING!

How can energy evolve intelligence, it doesn't biologically
reproduce, so it can't have natural selection of mutations
which lend it an advantage over other forms of 'energy' (The
Atheist Believer's term for "Spirits" that "evolve"(sic) into Gods
B^D

> "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."

As all the theists have been telling the atheists for centuries! B^D

Then he conflates 'God-Like' with 'Gods', who he claims have already
"evolved" (sic)

> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came
> into being"

No they didn't.. atheist liars are FULL OF SHIT! B^D

> "by an explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution."

Atheists are so CLUELESS about evolution they think DREAMS
and FANTASIES can evolve into Gods!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAAA

> Could they be immortal?


They could be Bug-Eyed beans from Venus, they could be
huge flying Spaghetti monsters.. they could be ANY FANTASY
the atheist IMAGINATION could conjure to feed their obvious,
OBSESSIVE, desire to find God!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAA

> The professor shrugs.

He doesn't care, truth is not important to Profit Dawkins!

He Actually believes "There is no God", but to make
more money from his self-promotion and book business
he agreed to misrepresent his beliefs by putting the
word "PROBABLY" in front of it.

He's a media whore.

Can he ever be honest with the public?

> "Probably not." He smiles and adds ,

So now he's got his atheist sheep defending his latest nonsense
claiming that atheist 'Gods came into being.."

> "But I wouldn't want to be too dogmatic about that."

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all


Without EVIDENCE for his claims, that's ALL Dawkins, Vurgil, Bland
Lizard, Lemon of Mockery and the other Atheist Kook-Suckers are:

DOGMATISTS!


Woof woof! B^D

--

---------

Atheists are in retreat:

Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:

# "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being

# - Richard Dawkins

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

..Atheist activist Bukakke has built an Atheist altar to worship them;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,

alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

...and national atheist bodies have formally applied to be recognised
as a religion:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

[Waldo Tunnel]

On Mar 3, 11:38 pm, fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved:  B^D
>
> > On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard  of AUK wrote:

> >>> fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/02/2012 12:23 PM, Vurgil wrote:
> >>>>> On 4/02/2012 11:57 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >>>>>> On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:

> >>>>>>> fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote in

> >>>>>>>news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>
> >>>>>>>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article

> >>>>>>>>> <bd582085-1863-4774-b3ad-4a922f224...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

>
> >>>>>>>>> Loirbaj<Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:

[...]

>
> Bland Lizard, the Kook-Sucker blowhard,  did a runner.

WTF?

> NONE of the atheist imbeciles can explain their theory of
> Gods EVOLVING:

You are surprised by "imbeciles" being unable to explain something to
you? Maybe you need a new business manager.

> >>> by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
> >>> incremental evolution."
>
> >> Explain how IMMATERIAL beings of "intelligent energy' can
> >> have evolved by a process, natural selection, which operates on
> >> natural selection in BIOLOGICAL systems which have mutated during
> >> reproductive cell divisions!

I don't think you are quite up to speed regards evolution, Ms.
fasgnadh.

[...]

[fasgnadh]

Giving Waldo Tunnel a reading/comprehension lesson:

> On 4/03/2012 6:38 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved: B^D
>>> On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard of AUK wrote:

^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now Walso, pay attention!

lesson 1: read posts before commenting, otherwise you look foolish!

>>>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/02/2012 12:23 PM, Vurgil wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/02/2012 11:57 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:

>>>>>>>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in

>>>>>>>>> news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article

>>>>>>>>>>> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>> Bland Lizard, the Kook-Sucker blowhard, did a runner.
>
> WTF?

Can't you read, you illiterate?

Bland Lizzard, the Kook-suckers self appointed blowhard
claimed Dawkins claims that "These God's came into being"
was explicable.

But challenged for the explanation he did a runner.

Hasn't been seen since. Apparently he finds Dawkins fantasy
as inexplicable as all the other atheists and Kooks.. as
none of them can offer any rational explanation of atheists
who believe the existence of God is plausible, that atheist
God's can evolve from their imaginations{snicker) and why Bukakke
has built them an Altar:

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

>> NONE of the atheist imbeciles can explain their theory of
>> Gods EVOLVING:
>>

>>>>> by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
>>>>> incremental evolution."
>>>>
>>>> Explain how IMMATERIAL beings of "intelligent energy' can
>>>> have evolved by a process, natural selection, which operates on
>>>> natural selection in BIOLOGICAL systems which have mutated during
>>>> reproductive cell divisions!
>>>>

>>>> ...............................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...............................................................
>>>>
>>>> ...............................................................

>
> You are surprised by "imbeciles" being unable to explain something

who said anyone was surprised by the imbeciles being unable to do so?

The reason I put the blank lines there is so that everyone could see
the imbeciles have NO RATIONAL EXPLANATION for their belief in Dawkin's
God's which 'evolved' from crossbreeding between bolt's of "intelligent
energy'(sic .. ask them WTF that is! B^) being buttfucked by donkeys..
much the same as the atheists own genesis! B^D

Are you a bit 'tetched' in the head yourself? You seem to have trouble
working out what's going on!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

> to you?

As you can see by the blank space they left, they can't explain their
Kooky beliefs to ANYONE! B^D

> Maybe you need a new business manager.

Sorry, didn't realise you are unemployed and touting for a job..

Do you have an MBA? [ ]
Bachelor degree? [ ]
completed college? [ ]
passed grade school[ ]
able to tie shoes [ ]

>>>>
>>>>> What part of "explicable" does fasgnadh claim means "inexplicable"?
>>>>
>>>> The part you can't explain.. all of it! B^]
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA
>>
>> The atheist Kook-suckers have their heads so far up
>> their arses they have all stopped oxygen getting to their brains...
>>
>> ....and NO ONE HAS NOTICED!
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>

It amazes me that people like Waldo come into a public space, and make a
complete fool of themselves, snip a clear exposition of the
imbecilic behaviour of others, viz the atheist Kook-suckers,
reveal that he can't comprehend the issues, let alone respond
intelligently to them,

...and then expect to get a job!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAA

>> NONE of the atheist imbeciles can explain their theory of
>> Gods EVOLVING:
>
> You are surprised by "imbeciles" being unable to explain something to
> you? Maybe you need a new business manager.
>
>>>>> by an EXPLICABLE scientific progression of
>>>>> incremental evolution."
>>
>>>> Explain how IMMATERIAL beings of "intelligent energy' can
>>>> have evolved by a process, natural selection, which operates on
>>>> natural selection in BIOLOGICAL systems which have mutated during
>>>> reproductive cell divisions!
>
> I don't think you are quite up to speed regards evolution, Ms.
> fasgnadh.
>
> [...]

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil attempts time travel by inserting his head in a black hole:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPYdES4/s1600/Head-Up_Ass.png

> In article<pC62r.3625$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On 26/02/2012 1:04 AM, default wrote:
>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:30:34 -0800 (PST), Loirbaj
>>> <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>
>>> Wouldn't surprise me. Stupidity is not limited
>>
>> In fact every atheist who has responded has accepted,
>> without ANY evidence whatsoever, that Dawkin's Gods are REAL!

Now we have well known atheists suggesting that to try and raise some
public interest in atheism they should build temples, and COPY religion
in other ways!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA


But other atheists are way ahead of them:

- Claiming atheism IS a religion (Dawkin's claim is clearly part of
this OFFICIAL atheist push to become more relevant and acceptable:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."

# - The Age


- and Bukakke has built an Atheist Altar to worship Profit Dawkin's
atheist God's;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

Ah, no thanks, as a rational agnostic, ..

.. what? ...Spell it?

sure, I like to teach athesits new words, that's R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L,

I would rather hang myself with an eel than worship these stupid
atheist Demons mating with Goats on Bukakke's Altar of Anal Atheism
in Alain de Bottom's "Temple to Atheist Hubris" !


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAA




"Alain de Botton's atheist temple is a nice idea, but a defunct one"

[view image of the Dark Towr of Mordor, complete with vultures: ;-]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/02/alain-de-botton-atheist-temple-defunct

"De Botton's atheist temple call does not need to be realised
– our existing places of worship can be appreciated by all"

Of course, they give inspiration not only to believers,
but as the atheists plan to IMITATE religion shows, they
are also the (only) creative source for the dull, unoriginal,
atheist sheep who follow! B^]

"Alain de Botton has reinvigorated the conversation on religion."

Well, clearly atheism has nothing to talk about, and has to
'borrow' from the creative theists! B^D

"His new book moves away from the tedious debates of recent years
to a more reflective consideration of the role of religion in sustaining
values many people share."

And that was an excellent realisation on the part of one of the
most intelligent atheists on the planet, that religion provides
enormous inspiration to mankind, soaring beauty, magnificent music
art and architecture, spiritual values and experiences with which
people can connect... and he acknowledges that atheism lacks all
of that.

"Religion as a human phenomenon is too vast, pervasive and complicated
to be discussed in simple binary terms of belief and unbelief."

Absolutely. And that is the problem for atheists, the PAUCITY of
their intellectual life and their contribution to the community,
to the human spirit, to civilisation and to mankind.

"The evangelical atheists of the past few years may not be notable
for sceptical doubt, but religious practitioners are often quite
uncertain in their beliefs. De Botton is writing for the sceptics,
whether they belong in any religion or not. It's a welcome shift of focus.

Atheists who aren't bigoted enemies of religion will agree
that it has made many positive contributions."

You won't find many of those, certainly not among the rabid,
violent, hate filled militant atheists such as the BAAWA beastie
boys, or the mindless atheist sheep in alt.atheism

"They are less likely to accept that they should have a religion of
their own – complete with a temple in the City – as de Botton goes on to
propose. Establishing atheist places of worship isn't exactly a new
idea. As de Botton himself notes, an ambitious programme of atheist
church-building was part of the Religion of Humanity, invented by the
19th-century French thinker Auguste Comte."

Atheists are "The Men who Come Behind" - Henry Lawson

"An obsessive and at times unbalanced personality, Comte – a fervent
believer in phrenology, like many atheists at the time – developed an
elaborate daily ritual that included tapping the forehead at the points
where science had supposedly located the impulses of progress, altruism
and order. He also created a "virgin mother of humanity", based on a
married woman whom he had fallen in love with. When she died, he
appointed her grave a place of pilgrimage."


Atheism doesn't change much, does it! B^D

"Such eccentricities were not destined to last, but a number of atheist
temples were established – not only in Paris, Comte's base, but in Rio
de Janeiro, New York, Liverpool and London, where a church of humanity
opened on Lamb's Conduit Street in 1870. In line with Comte's creed,
these were temples where disciples could worship the new supreme being –
humanity. As far as I know, none of the buildings is used for religious
purposes today, though the Brazilian church seems to have been active
until some time late in the 20th century.

None of the atheist 'eccentricities' are destined to last! B^p

"When he proposes building a temple for unbelievers, de Botton is
reinventing a wheel that never really turned. The fad for atheist
temples lasted for perhaps 60 years, while places of worship dedicated
to something bigger than humanity have been around for many millennia.
There is a nice irony here. For all his loony notions, Comte was more
intelligent than most of the atheists who came after him. He saw clearly
that religion is an enduring human need that cannot be denied. Yet
despite the formative influence it had on writers and philosophers such
as George Eliot and John Stuart Mill, Comte's religion of humanity
disappeared leaving hardly a trace – just a handful of sites, whose
history as places of worship practically nobody remembers.

Even if Comte's church was ephemeral, he was right in predicting that
religion would not die out."



# "At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half
# of the world's population identified itself as either Muslim,
# Catholic, Protestant, Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of
# secularism, and technological advancement, and scientific
# progress later and that number is now two thirds.
#
# So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
# conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to
# change the subject! It's time to talk about something else ,
# because it's not happening at all.
#
# People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
# and religion itself is also evolving"
#
# - Dr Reza Aslan
#
# http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm


"The world is awash with formless religiosity, much of it flowing
through non-traditional channels. During most of the last century,
politics was the principal vehicle for religion. Communism and
the cult of the free market are examples of large, flimsy ideas
being turned into articles of faith."

And it has been the SECULAR ideologies, Fascism, Atheistic Communism,
Colonialism, Nazism, etc which have been FAR MORE DEADLY than any
religion!

"Today, faith is more often channelled through science. Not only the
pseudo-science of crop circle enthusiasts and UFO cultists, but genuine
advances in science and technology are being used to promote hopes and
dreams that are quintessentially religious."

See Dyson on the fantasy of humans evolving into Gods! B^D

"People who believe that the human mind can be uploaded into virtual
space and so be immune to death are recycling the fantasies of
19th-century spiritualists, who also argued that their beliefs were
based on science.

Comte wanted his new religion to be based on science, so the temples of
humanity pointed only as far as science could reach. That is why his new
church failed. The very idea of a science-based religion is an
absurdity. The value of religion is that it points beyond anything that
can be known by the methods of science, showing us that a mystery would
remain even if everything could be finally explained. The heart of
religion isn't belief, but something more like what Keats described as
negative capability: "being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without
any irritable reaching after fact and reason".

Rather than trying to invent another religion surrogate, open-minded
atheists should appreciate the genuine religions that exist already."

Amen to that! B^D

"London is full of sites – churches, synagogues, mosques and other
places of worship – that are evocative of something beyond the human
world. Better spend the money that is being raised for the new temple on
religious buildings that are in disrepair than waste it on a monument to
a defunct version of unbelief."

Excellent article, absolute common sense.





Atheism has NEVER been more RIDICULOUS! B^D

>> --
>>
>> ---------
>>
>> Atheists are in retreat:
>>
>> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:
>
>
> Actually what Dwkins says,

Please take Steve Knight's cock from your mouth before speaking,
you are even more garbled than usual.

> But fa alwasys quote

Virgil, once an atheist Kook-sucker, always an atheist Kook-sucker!

B^D

> See for yourselves:

> "Certainly" Professor Dawkins replies. "It's highly
> plausible that in the universe there
> are God-like creatures."

The theists have been telling you that for CENTURIES, are you
atheists just S-L-O-W L-E-A-R-N-E-R-S !!?!!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAA


>
> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came

> into being by an explicable scientific progression of
> incremental

fantasies by atheists indulging in Group-think!

> Could they be immortal?

Have you misspelt immoral?

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

--

---------

Atheists are in retreat:

Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:

[Vurgil]

In article <t_E4r.4110$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:


> >> Atheism is in advance:
> >>
> >> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods may someday exist:
: B^D
>
> >> # "Itąs very important to understand that these Gods # come into
> >> being by an explicable scientific progression of incremental
> >> evolution.˛ # - Richard Dawkins

Here it all is!

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 heąs
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."

[So the context of discussion is now established as being
in Dyson's far future, and the following must be interpreted
in that context]

"Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?"

[Again establishing that the context is Dyson's future universe]

łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly
plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there
are God-like creatures.˛

He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone

around a religious bend. łItąs very important to
understand that these [future] Gods came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.˛

Could they be immortal?

[Vurgil]

In article <f3G4r.4114$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Giving fasgnadh a reading/comprehension lesson:

> > On 4/03/2012 6:38 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved:

No one but fasgnadh even claims they exist yet, but if they ever do it
will be because they have evolved from lesser beings.

>
lesson 1: read posts before commenting, otherwise you look foolish!

A lesson that fasgnadh honors only in the breach.



For those, unlike fasgnadh , who can read what is actually written
rather than only what they want to see, here is the original from which
fasgnadh has been creating his lies:

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 heąs
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."

[So the context of discussion is now established as being
in Dyson's far future, and the following must be interpreted
in that context]

"Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?"

[Again establishing that the context is Dyson's future universe]

łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly
plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there
are God-like creatures.˛

He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone

around a religious bend. łItąs very important to
understand that these [future] Gods come into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.˛

Could they be immortal?

[Vurgil]

In article <ctI4r.4121$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Vurgil attempts time travel by inserting his head in a black hole:

I merely quoted the original article from which fasgnadh the futile by
quote-mining attempted to argue that white equals black.


Here is the complete original, much of which fasgnadh the futile has
been careful NOT to cite, allowing readers to decide for themselves.

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 heąs
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."

[So the context of discussion is now established as being
in Dyson's far future, and the following must be interpreted
in that context]

"Doesnąt that description sound an awful lot like God?"

[Again establishing that the context is Dyson's future universe]

łCertainly,˛ Professor Dawkins replies. łItąs highly
plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there
are God-like creatures.˛

He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks heąs gone
around a religious bend. łItąs very important to
understand that these [future] Gods came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.˛

Could they be immortal?

The professor shrugs. łProbably not.˛ He smiles and adds ,
łBut I wouldnąt want to be too dogmatic about that.˛

The complete New York Times article, which ends with the above
conversation appeared in print on September 20, 2011, in

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all


Note that in that same article
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all
also says:

Arenąt the theologianąs questions ‹ Why are we here?
Is there something larger than us? Why do we die? ‹
central to the human project?

Professor Dawkins shakes his head before the question is out.
His impatience with religion is palpable, almost wriggling alive
inside him. Belief in the supernatural strikes him as incurious,
which is perhaps the worst insult he can imagine.

łReligion teaches you to be satisfied with nonanswers,˛
he says. łItąs a sort of crime against childhood.˛

And please spare him talk of spiritualism, as if that were the
only way to meditate on the wonder of the universe. łIf you
look up at the Milky Way through the eyes of Carl Sagan, you
get a feeling in your chest of something greater than yourself˛,
he says. łAnd it is. But itąs not supernatural.˛

[Paul David Wright]

fasgnadh wrote:

> Giving Waldo Tunnel a reading/comprehension lesson:
>> On 4/03/2012 6:38 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved: B^D
>>>> On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard of AUK wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Now Walso, pay attention!
>
> lesson 1: read posts before commenting, otherwise you look foolish!
>

You first, hateful bigot.

PDW

[Paul David Wright]

fasgnadh wrote:

> Vurgil attempts time travel by inserting his head in a black hole:
>

And Failednuts pretends that his irrational, hysterical hatred is
intelligent.

PDW

[fasgnadh]

On 4/02/2012 6:21 PM, US4ZION wrote:

> On Feb 4, 1:07 am, Vurgil<Vur...@arg.erg> wrote:

>> On 4/02/2012 12:47 PM, fasgnadh wrote:

>>> On 3/02/2012 9:35 AM, John Baker wrote:
>>>> On 3/02/2012 9:09 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:
>>>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:hdhWq.2696$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/02/2012 1:37 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <bd582085-1863-4774...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>> Loirbaj<Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 10:21 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:38 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 7:20 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Alain de Botton puts faith in temples for atheists"
>>>>>>>>>>>
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02122/alandebotton_
2122200b.jpg

>>>>>>>>>>> In his new book Religion for Atheists,

Priceless!

Dawkins, Bukakke, Vurgil and de Botton are all on the same page,

as EX-atheists!

>>>>>>>>>>> the popular sage argues that, although many in the West have
>>>>>>>>>>> little time for organised religion, they still have feel
>>>>>>>>>>> nostalgic for its “consoling, subtle or just charming rituals”.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Priceless!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Atheists are Interested in the Fruit without the Tree! B^D
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton, who was raised an atheist ,"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...most people grow out of as they develop rational
>>>>>>>>>>> thinking skills and become mature adults...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "..likewise feels an affinity for religiously inspired
>>>>>>>>>>> architecture – especially old churches."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, the architecture, music, sculpture, science and
>>>>>>>>>>> secular democracies inspired built and sustained by majority
>>>>>>>>>>> religious societies provide immense beauty and have created
>>>>>>>>>>> the very civilisations we all enjoy.. atheist states have
>>>>>>>>>>> all been bleak, grey, dull, monotonous TOTALITARIAN TYRANNIES..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> you would think atheists could draw the appropriate
>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions! B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "de Botton has come up with ambitious scheme that he calls
>>>>>>>>>>> Temples for Atheists. "
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAA

Bukakke has built an atheist Altar to go in it;

>>>>>>>>>>> # From: Budikka666<budi...@netscape.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> # Newsgroups:alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism

>>>>>>>>>>> #,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
>>>>>>>>>>> # Subject: Disapproving Creation:

>>>>>>>>>>> # Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
>>>>>>>>>>> # Message-ID:
>>>>>>>>>>> <b5430732-e52e-45b5-abc3-
>>>>> 7d0daa...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>>>>> #> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

Most rational people would rather be hung by an eel. B^p

de Botton certainly has the demographic right!

>>>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAAAAAA Tired old atheism!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "A key indication of the temple’s popularity will come from its
>>>>>>>>>>> fund-raising."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes indeed! B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> De Botton is personally extremely wealthy (there are rumours of a
>>>>>>>>>>> £200 million trust fund, but he insists he has only £7.25 million
>>>>>>>>>>> – earned from book sales and teaching), but, rather than calling
>>>>>>>>>>> on rich pals, he would prefer small donations, “just like
>>>>>>>>>>> Chartres Cathedral”.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I mention that the people who funded Chartres and, in more recent
>>>>>>>>>>> times, the Hindu Temple in Neasden, west London were doing so for
>>>>>>>>>>> an established community and with the promise of a heavenly
>>>>>>>>>>> reward. “The Tate Modern was funded not by people who wanted to
>>>>>>>>>>> go to heaven but people who thought it was a good project,” he
>>>>>>>>>>> says. (In fact, more than half of the £134 million it cost came
>>>>>>>>>>> from the lottery or government agencies.)"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ATHEISTS WANT PUBLIC MONEY FOR *THEIR* TEMPLE! 8^o
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> HYPOCRITES! What happened to separation of Church and state? B^]

Church's are state funded because they run charities, the atheists
want to such on the public teat just for their own self-aggrandisement..
taxpayers dollars funding atheist religion! B^p

>>>>>>>>>>> "De Botton wants to reclaim atheism from strident anti-religion
>>>>>>>>>>> figures such as Richard Dawkins."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, doesn't all the thinking rational atheists want that?
>>>>>>>>>>> B^]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> " While this is a laudable aim, I can’t help thinking there is
>>>>>>>>>>> something misconceived about the project. What we find beautiful
>>>>>>>>>>> is inevitably bound up with the values of the people who made it:
>>>>>>>>>>> a Protestant may recoil from a rococo Italian church or a Muslim
>>>>>>>>>>> find a synagogue too plain for his tastes not because of an
>>>>>>>>>>> abstract aesthetic sense but because it seems foreign to the way
>>>>>>>>>>> they worship. The strict beliefs that de Botton shies away from
>>>>>>>>>>> are exactly what thrill and terrify visitors to a sacred space:
>>>>>>>>>>> the thought that it was built in the name of truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is another possible future for this impressive-sounding
>>>>>>>>>>> Temple for Atheists. If not enough people wander in, de Botton
>>>>>>>>>>> could hold lectures there and maybe move the School of Life he
>>>>>>>>>>> already runs to the site. With his calming voice calling for a
>>>>>>>>>>> renewal of “community, beauty, sympathy, kindness, a moral
>>>>>>>>>>> structure” – priorities few could disagree with – he might get a
>>>>>>>>>>> more devoted following than he imagines."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Priceless!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Religion for Atheists is published by Penguin. For details on
>>>>>>>>>>> Temples for Atheists, visit www.tomgreenall.co.uk and
>>>>>>>>>>> www.houseofjonn.com
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> So, many atheists want to "reclaim atheism from strident

>>>>>>>>> but because there is bugger all to celebrate, it will

>>>>>>>>> really end up being about Science, or secularism, or nature..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> NOTHING To Do WITH ATHEISM.. except they DEFINE it to be atheism,
>>>>>>>>> when it SUITS the hypocriticla fucktards, who want to LEECH off
>>>>>>>>> PUBLIC MONIES!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The first proposed temple to Anything Positive and Good would be a
>>>>>>>>> skinny pigmented concrete tower that rises 46 meters (150 feet)
>>>>>>>>> over central London--that’s 1 centimeter for every million years of
>>>>>>>>> the earth’s existence. “One metre from the ground, a tiny band of
>>>>>>>>> gold no more than a millimetre thick would be inscribed into the
>>>>>>>>> interior of the tower,” architect Tom Greenall tells Co.Design in
>>>>>>>>> an email. “This would represent the short extent of human life on
>>>>>>>>> earth. Everything below this point is the future.”
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See, it's not about atheism at all, it's about earth..

Atheists really have NOTHING to celebrate, so they STEAL from others,
they pretend there is a connection between atheism and science, but
there is none. And now they want to steal the ideas of the RELIGIOUS,
as they have done for centuries!

B^D

>>>>>>>>> Do a write-in, offer to donate if they include symbols of the

>>>>>>>>> Atheist state tyrannies and the atheist holocausts..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "“The tower is intended as a temple to perspective not a tower to
>>>>>>>>> atheism,” Greenall insists. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like atheism it SHRINKS To A VANISHING POINT!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "“I would agree that atheists do not need temples. However,
>>>>>>>>> many of us could benefit from a bit of perspective in
>>>>>>>>> our lives."
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> O h atheists DEFINITELY need to grow a new PERSPECTIVE;

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/5bVY36cKm8/TemlX95ZrVI/AAAAAAAAAWo/bv4Vlo

R-sac/s1600/head+up+ass.jpg

>>>>>>>>> "This might be given to some people through
>>>>>>>>> buildings such as churches or cathedrals. Our tower was
>>>>>>>>> a simple design for an alternative, secular version.”"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> B^D Secular isn't ATHEIST!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All the free, open progressive SECULAR democracies have
>>>>>>>>> been built by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES!!! not atheist ones.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> EVERY atheist regime has been a TOTALITARIAN TYRANNY..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> THEY SHOULD BUILD MEMORIALS To THAT!!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> to the 60,000,000 dead!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Sure, the secular world already has plenty of its own
>>>>>>>>> monuments--the assorted libraries and labs and museums
>>>>>>>>> where people worship at the altar of evidence-based research."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But they are SECULAR, NOT ATHEIST!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.fastcodesign.com/1668919/no-joke-alain-de-botton-wants-
to-build-temples-to-atheism
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> 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

>>> <Unsnip the EVIDENCE>


>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> # 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
>>>

>>> No wonder the atheist LIAR had to snip to hide the evidence

>>> of his deception, and of Dawkin's Sci Fi Faith in Gods!
>>>
>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA
>>>

>>>>>>>> # 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, God evolved?
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...........................................................

>>>
>>> Now these poor irrational atheist liars think they can SNIP
>>> the evidence that Dawkins claimed these Atheist "Gods came into being.."
>>> and deny that the evidence exists:
>>>

>>>>> Doesn't exist,

>>>
>>> Yes it does, you merely SNIPPED IT! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

>>>

>>> > Dawkins is still an atheist,
>>>
>>> Defined as one who believes, and I QUOTE VERBATIM:
>>>

>>> "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
>>> came into being.."

>>>
>>> So you're another 'ex-atheist' who believes Prophet
>>> Dawkin's God's and Bishop Bukakke who has built an

>> I am a present atheist beleives that Dawkins got it right

Sure, you all BELIEVE, but you can't PROVE your your atheist
God's EXIST! B^D

> No, no, no. The very best you could say is that Dawkins supports the
> idea of a super-naturally evoled type of E.T. semi-god based on a
> silicone lifeform.

Nope, Dawkins claims they evolved from invisible "intelligent energy"!

pffft!

unscientific blather!

> I've read it all.

Then your problem must be comprehension:

> Those guys worship computers as if they were gods
> so they naturally think that an evolved god would be
> a silicone based semi god.

Do you mean silicon? Perhaps you have breast implants on your mind.
Which would make you very wierd, because usually they implanted
elsewhere. B^p


Dyson: "humans have evolved into something like bolts of

superpowerful intelligent and moral energy."

Reporter "Doesn¹t that description sound an awful lot like God?"

"Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It¹s highly plausible that in

the universe 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

The God's that Dawkin's, Vurgil, Bukakke, and the Net Kooks all worship
are, according to Profit Dawkin's, their Guru, immaterial entities
which, the atheists believe, EVOLVED from humans, not silicon.

> In their perfect universe view escaping tribulation is as simple as
> muttering the words "beam me up, Scotty".

The atheists are fascinated by Sci Fi because

a) they are pimply adolescents who take it all seriously

b) they can't tell the difference between psuedo scientific bullshit
and real science

c) they are scientifically illiterate and

d) it satisfies their deep desire for the Supernatural, the just
pretend it comes from a Lab, and thinks that makes it o.k.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAA

Jung was right about atheist's and their cognitive dissonance;

"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."

-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul

Even the atheists admit they need psychiatric help;

# From: Steve Knight <skni...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists


B^D

Shouldn't your therapist have to hear that, not us!?

B^D

> u4z


BTW, when you snip all the arguments from my post
then the atheists feel you have gutted my argument
and that makes them feel emboldened to respond,
lie about what is no longer there, and go off on
their usual tangents, as with Bukakke who will
try and run the usual weak STRAWMAN, attacking
'Creationism'.. NOTHING to do with this thread AT ALL!
And the pathetic coward knows I don't support creationism,
but they can't refute WHAT I SAY, do they have to attack what
I DONT say! B^p

Bukakke is still smarting from the latest defeat at my hands
where they claimed to disprove *Creation* by CREATING a
stupid post, realised they had blundered, and RAN AWAY!

AGAIN!

B^D


Runaway chicken!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0kPQiQufpE

--

---------

Atheists are in retreat:

Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:


# "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being
# - Richard Dawkins

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

When did that happen? where? How many 'came into being'?
Do they have names?

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?!??

..Atheist activist Bukakke has built an Atheist altar to worship them;

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,

alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:

# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,

...and national atheist bodies have formally applied to be recognised
as a religion:

# It's Official, Atheists claim to be a persecuted RELIGION: B^D
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009

[fasgnadh]

On 5/03/2012 11:22 AM, Paul David Wright wrote:

>>> I don't think

Then you don't get the job, dipshit! B^D

>>> you are quite up to speed regards evolution

Yes, that's why I challenged those kook-sucking atheist cretins
to explain how their New Age babble about immaterial entities of
'intelligent energy' (Atheist for "Spirits'? B^) can 'evolve'
when they have no cells to mutate and form the basis for Natural Selection.

Dawrin would be turning in his grave to hear those fuckwits fantasising
about the EVOLUTION of immaterial spirits!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

> You first

It's not my claim, you moron.

> hateful bigot.

Your sig suits you.


> PDW

>>>>> humans have evolved into something like bolts of superpowerful
>>>>> intelligent and moral energy."
>>>>
>>>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>>>

>>>> Scientifically illiterate atheist imbeciles will believe ANYTHING!

[fasgnadh]

Paul David Wright snips the rational argument, posts hysterical whining:

> On 4/03/2012 10:36 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Vurgil attempts time travel by inserting his head in a black hole:
>>

>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPYdES4/s1600/Head-Up_Ass.png

>
> irrational, hysterical hatred is intelligent.

only to you atheist fuckwits, that's why your atheist regimes
terrorised, tortured and killed over 80,000,000 people.

> PDW

<unsnip all the reasoned debate the atheists can't refute: >

[fasgnadh]

Vurgil continues to Robo-post his FORGED misquotes:

> On 4/03/2012 10:36 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> Vurgil attempts time travel by inserting his head in a black hole:
>>

>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/TMHO0nh9GAI/AAAAAAAAEEg/rZYicPYdES4/s1600/Head-Up_Ass.png
>>
>>
>>> In article<pC62r.3625$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
>>> fasgnadh<fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2012 1:04 AM, default wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:30:34 -0800 (PST), Loirbaj
>>>>> <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> After Prophet Dawkins converted and declared
>>>>>> his Atheist "Gods came into being..."
>>>>>> and Bukakke started building an Altar to worship
>>>>>> them at, now atheists plan TEMPLES FOR ATHEISTS!
>>>>>
>>>>> Wouldn't surprise me. Stupidity is not limited
>>>>
>>>> In fact every atheist who has responded has accepted,
>>>> without ANY evidence whatsoever, that Dawkin's Gods are REAL!

here's one of the Atheist God-botherers now: B^D

> "humans have evolved into something like bolts of
> superpowerful intelligent and moral energy."

Not you, Vurgil, now any of the other atheist sheep who believe
this psycho-babble from Profit Dawkin's Sci Fi FANTASIES! B^D

> [So the context of discussion is now established

...
Atheists believing FICTION! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAAAA

> "Doesn¹t that description sound an awful lot like God?"
...
Is there anything atheists would rather talk about!?!!!!

Is the Bear a Catholic? Does the Pope shit in the woods? B^D

> "Certainly,"Professor Dawkins replies. "It's highly
> plausible that in the universe there are God-like creatures."
...
Sure, all you theists say that.. BUT YOU HAVE NO PROOF!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

> "It's very important to understand that these
> Gods came into being

Pure fantasy.. no proof whatsoever! B^D

That, kiddies, is what an UNFOUNDED RELIGIOUS BELIEF looks like!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA

> by an explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution."

As no atheist can actually EXPLAIN how immaterial entities can
have cell mutations that can be favoured by Natural Selection,
that Claim also lacks any proof whatsoever.. it's just a LUNATIC

ATHEIST BELIEF!

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

> The professor shrugs.

> Why are we here?

To provide amusement for the rest of us! B^]

> Is there something larger than us?

Elephants, planets...

> Why do we die?

God gets tired of listening to your WHINING!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAA

> central to the human project?

Atheism? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAAAAA

You're funny!

> Professor Dawkins shakes his head

Oh no.. not another one of his religious Trance states!!!

Last time he had one of those he became a THEIST!

> religion is palpable,

"Certainly,"Professor Dawkins replies. "It's highly
plausible that in the universe there are God-like creatures."

> almost wriggling alive inside him.

Perhaps he's mistaken Demonic possession for a revelation ! B^

> Belief in the supernatural strikes him

And Bukakke too!

# From: Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.talk.creationism,
alt.religion,alt.religion.christian
# Subject: Disapproving Creation:
# Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
# Message-ID:
<b5430732-e52e-45b5...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
#
#
#> come worshiping at the altar of atheism,
>

> ³Religion teaches you to be satisfied with nonanswers,²

It's certainly the case with these atheist sheep and their
BLIND FAITH in Profit Dawkin's Atheist Gods!

Duping those infantile atheists is a low act by Profit Dawkins

> "It's a sort of crime against childhood."

>
> him talk of spiritualism, as if that were the
> only way to meditate on the wonder of the universe.

Well, you knew he was disappearing up his own New-Age Hippy Vortex
when he claimed these atheist Gods "came into being"! B^D

> "If you look up at the Milky Way through the eyes of Carl Sagan,

via transplant or another atheist fantasy they ack people to BELIEVE
without a SHRED of EVIDENCE! pfffft! B^D

Why can't you atheists find a SINGLE piece of evidence to prop up
your ridiculous story about Gods existing?!? B^D

> you get a feeling in your chest of something greater than yourself",

That's not proof of atheist Gods existing, you cretin!

Your 'Feelings' are not PROOF!

And besides, if you're a gullible atheist SHEEP, EVERYTHING
is greater than you!


> "And it is."

> But it's not supernatural.

>>> "Certainly" Professor Dawkins replies. "It's highly
>>> plausible that in the universe there
>>> are God-like creatures."
>>

>> The theists have been telling you that for CENTURIES, are you
>> atheists just S-L-O-W L-E-A-R-N-E-R-S !!?!!!!
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAA
>>
>>
>>>

>>> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came

>> > into being by an explicable scientific progression of
>> > incremental
>>

[Waldo Tunnel]

Contd.

On Mar 4, 12:52 am, fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Giving Waldo Tunnel a reading/comprehension lesson:> On 4/03/2012 6:38 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved: B^D
> >>> On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >>>> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard of AUK wrote:

[...]

> >>>> Explain how IMMATERIAL beings of "intelligent energy' can
> >>>> have evolved by a process, natural selection, which operates on
> >>>> natural selection in BIOLOGICAL systems which have mutated during
> >>>> reproductive cell divisions!
>
> >>>> ...............................................................
>
> >>>> ...............................................................
>
> >>>> ...............................................................
>
>  >
>  >   You are surprised by "imbeciles" being unable to explain something
>
> who said anyone was surprised by the imbeciles being unable to do so?

You acted surprised. You said: "NONE of the atheist imbeciles can
explain their theory of Gods EVOLVING:" Why should imbeciles be able
to explain anything? And if you can't explain this, what would that
make you?

> The reason I put the blank lines there is so that everyone could see

^^^^^^^^^
And *everyone* _needs_ to see. You got a real message to spread,
right?

> the imbeciles have NO RATIONAL EXPLANATION for their belief in Dawkin's
> God's which 'evolved' from crossbreeding between bolt's of "intelligent
> energy'(sic  .. ask them WTF that is! B^)  being buttfucked by donkeys..
>   much the same as the atheists own genesis!    B^D

I don't want to criticize but I think you could use more ALL CAPS
and !!!!! marks if you really want to convince the masses.

>
> Are you a bit 'tetched' in the head yourself?

Some people would say so merely for giving you the time of day.

>You seem to have trouble working out what's going on!

I guess we'll find out.

>
> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

Maybe you need to knock off the Super Burritos, fat ass.

>  > to you?
>
> As you can see by the blank space they left, they can't explain their
> Kooky beliefs to ANYONE!     B^D

Isn't that a little like saying "I haven't seen a god therefore no god
exists?"

>
>  > Maybe you need a new business manager.
>
> Sorry, didn't realise you are unemployed and touting for a job..

I'm a corporate "head hunter" man. I have a few clients in your neck
of the outback who might fit the bill.

>
> Do you have an MBA? [ ]

Do they have those in Australia?

>   Bachelor degree?   [ ]
>   completed college? [ ]
>   passed grade school[ ]
>   able to tie shoes  [ ]

I'm from the United States of America, you see. But I'm sure my
clients have at least 50% of the above down _pat_. And I understand
they speak English in that part of world too (no extra charge for
that).

[...]

>
> It amazes me that people like Waldo come into a public space, and make a
> complete fool of themselves,

Whoa, whoa! Are you saying there are "people like Waldo" here
pretending to be me?

> snip a clear exposition of the
> imbecilic behaviour of others, viz the atheist Kook-suckers,
> reveal that he can't comprehend the issues, let alone respond
> intelligently to them,
>
>      ...and then expect to get a job!

Well I hope we cleared that up.
>
> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAAA

The #2 reason you never married?

[Waldo Tunnel]

On Mar 4, 12:52 am, fasgnadh <fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Giving Waldo Tunnel a reading/comprehension lesson:> On 4/03/2012 6:38 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >> Vurgil still can't explain HOW the imaginary atheist Gods evolved: B^D
> >>> On 26/02/2012 1:50 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
> >>>> Rusty Tavek, Bland Lizard of AUK wrote:
>
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Now Walso, pay attention!
>
>     lesson 1: read posts before commenting, otherwise you look foolish!

What looks foolish is using exclamation marks to (try to) amp up banal
prose.

[...]

>
> >>>>>> So, when did these atheist Gods come into being?
>
> >>>>>> How many are there?
>
> >>>>>> DO they have names?
>
> >>>>> "It's very important to understand that these Gods came
> >>>>> into being
>
> >>>> Explain where the EVIDENCE is! B^]
>
> >> Bland Lizard, the Kook-Sucker blowhard, did a runner.
>
>  >
>  > WTF?
>
> Can't you read, you illiterate?

Huh? Whut?

>
> Bland Lizzard, the Kook-suckers self appointed blowhard
> claimed Dawkins claims that "These God's came into being"
> was explicable.

So in Australia you can bail from school at 13?

> But challenged for the explanation he did a runner.

I'm touched that you need me to know all about this.

> Hasn't been seen since.

Maybe he died? Or maybe your tactics (bitter attack, dishonest
editing, a million lines of old text, etc) wore him down, as intended?
Do you take responsibility for your actions? Or admit to them? Ever?
Just wonderin.'

> Apparently he finds Dawkins fantasy
> as inexplicable as all the other atheists and Kooks..

Your inclusion of "apparently" certainly helped me decide to believe
this.

as
> none of them can offer any rational explanation of atheists
> who believe the existence of God is plausible,

Why do you think that your limited experience with atheists
represents universal truths about them? Yes I know you could spew a
tirade on the subject. But just answer the question. Is it possible
for you to be wrong (about them)? Just like it is possible for
atheists to be wrong. Right?

I know you can go all irrational on me and run away. But try candor,
like I'm doing. It's hard to do. It leaves you wide open to sarcasm
and attack. But if what you say has merit, candor works.


[...]

Contd

[Vurgil]

In article <bm25r.4178$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Atheists are in retreat:
>
> Pope Dawkins declares Atheist Gods exist:
>
>
> # "It¹s very important to understand that these Gods
> # came into being
> # - Richard Dawkins

Which is an example of fasgnadh's quote-mining lies, since he cuts off
the interesting part of the sentence:
"by an explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.²


SO that the uncut comments reads

³It¹s highly plausible that in the [Dyson future] universe there
are God-like creatures.²

He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he¹s gone
around a religious bend. ³It¹s very important to
understand that these [future] Gods came into being by an
explicable scientific progression of incremental evolution.²

The complete article appeared in print on September 20, 2011, in

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all

In which you may verify that fasgnadh's quote mining is a futile attempt
to make it appear that Dawkins said things he never said.

[Waldo Tunnel]

On Mar 5, 1:31 pm, Vurgil <Vur...@arg.erg> wrote:
> In article <bm25r.4178$%E2.1...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,

Come on. Don't _you_ also expend effort on things that are important
to you? That's all fasgnadh is doing.