Atheists:The Subject is Evidence

[Joe Bruno]

You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.

What evidence do you have for the following historical events:

1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
2.The Wars of the Roses
3.The Hundred Years War
4.The Spanish Inquisition
5.The Crusades
6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
7.The War of the Spanish Succession

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:

What evidence do you have for the following events:

Joe Bruno flunking out of law school.
Joe Bruno practicing law in the Navy.
Joe Bruno studying to be a doctor in the Navy.
Joe Bruno being an engineer in the Navy.
Joe Bruno being a CPA.

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:11:04 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>
> > tales are based on fact.
>
> >
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> > 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> > 5.The Crusades
>
> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What evidence do you have for the following events:
>
>
>

> Joe Bruno flunking out of law school.-Contact the U of Illinois
>
> Joe Bruno practicing law in the Navy.-Contact the Navy Bureau of Personnel
>
> Joe Bruno studying to be a doctor in the Navy-Never did.
>
> Joe Bruno being an engineer in the Navy.-Contact the Navy Bureau of Personnel
>
> Joe Bruno being a CPA.Contact the U of Illinois

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:11:04 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>
> > tales are based on fact.
>
> >
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> > 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> > 5.The Crusades
>
> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What evidence do you have for the following events:
>
>
>

> Joe Bruno studying to be a doctor in the Navy.-

Contact the U of Illinois-I was a pre-med from 1964-66, Joined the Navy in 1971.
>

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>> tales are based on fact.

The serial liar knows that this is only after theists rudely and
stupidly bring it up where it is neither wanted nor needed.

>> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>
>> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 2.The Wars of the Roses

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 3.The Hundred Years War

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 4.The Spanish Inquisition

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 5.The Crusades

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

>> 7.The War of the Spanish Succession

Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
produced - and none has.

> What evidence do you have for the following events:
>
>Joe Bruno flunking out of law school.
>Joe Bruno practicing law in the Navy.
>Joe Bruno studying to be a doctor in the Navy.
>Joe Bruno being an engineer in the Navy.
>Joe Bruno being a CPA.

He's seriously mentally ill. He knows the things he asked about are
conclusions from the historical process, not pre-existing beliefs,
while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.

If he had provided as much evidence for Jesus as there is for those
events, he might have had a point.

Instead he used a standard theist dishonesty that fools nobody, not
even himself.

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:11:04 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>
> > tales are based on fact.
>
> >
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> > 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> > 5.The Crusades
>
> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What evidence do you have for the following events:
>
>
>
> Joe Bruno flunking out of law school.
>

Quote:


> Funny. I left law school in 1970 because I didn't want to be a lawyer.
> Now, more than 40 years later,I find myself reading and quoting Supreme Court cases.
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>
> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> >news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
> >
>
> >> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>
> >> tales are based on fact.
>
>
>
> The serial liar knows that this is only after theists rudely and
>
> stupidly bring it up where it is neither wanted nor needed.
>
>
>
> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >>
>
> >> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
>
> produced - and none has.

That's a narrative, not evidence.

>
>
>
> >> 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources.

That's a narrative, not evidence.

>
>
> >> 3.The Hundred Years War
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources.

That's a narrative, not evidence.

>
>
> >> 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources.

That's a narrative, not evidence.

>
>
> >> 5.The Crusades
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources.

That's a narrative, not evidence.

>
> >> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
>
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> sources.

Those are all personal narratives, not evidence.
>
>
You actually expect anyone, at this late date, to take your word for anything?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.
>
> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066

The Bayeux tapestry
Period weapons
Graves from people who died in the battles.
The Domesday Book.
Several INDEPENDENT reports, collected from different sources from BOTH sides
of the conflict.
etc.

Any one of them ALONE wouldn't be enough. All of them together form a body of
evidence that leads you to believe that the Norman invasion of Britain actually
happened.

Also; the Norman invasion of Britain makes NO SUPERNATURAL CLAIMS. There's
nothing "special" about the Norman invasion. No Gods or God-like creatures
were involved. No worldwide catastrophes were asserted. No prophesies were
made. It's a simple story about how a bunch of invaders came over
and conquered the British isles.

> 2.The Wars of the Roses
> 3.The Hundred Years War
> 4.The Spanish Inquisition
> 5.The Crusades
> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
> 7.The War of the Spanish Succession

Same with all this stuff.

Joe, if you tell us "I had cornflakes for breakfast today", I'll take your word
for it; it's a pretty mundane claim. If you say "I won the lottery! I'm a
millionare!" I might ask to see the ticket, or a picture of you receiving the
novelty oversize cheque, but while this claim is more unusual, it's certainly
possible; people buy lottery tickets all the time. Sooner or later someone has
to win.

If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.

--
(` |) | Kindness is a language which the deaf can hear
_) |) | and the blind can read.
a.a #2171 | -- Mark Twain

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/3/2013 11:03 PM, sbalneav wrote:

> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
> pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.

My question for you is, what makes you think you are expected to have
the same beliefs?

[Virgil]

In article <kh199j$icu$1...@dont-email.me>,

What makes Calvin suppose that anyone should have any beliefs about the
existence of his alleged gods.

There does not seem to be any good reason to believe in such things.

Certainly there is no objective physical evidence supporting the
existence of any gods.

And religions that do not insist on gods, like Buddhism, for instance,
seem to do as much good as any of the theist religions, and a lot less
harm, than the Abrahamic theistic religions.
--

[Yap]

On Mar 4, 11:36 am, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>
> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:

> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
>
> produced - and none has.

WRONG AGAIN:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>
>
>

>
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:


>

> while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
>
> Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.
>
>
>

That's another LIE:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 8:03:20 PM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.
>
> >
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
>
>
> The Bayeux tapestry
>
> Period weapons
>
> Graves from people who died in the battles.
>
> The Domesday Book.
>
> Several INDEPENDENT reports, collected from different sources from BOTH sides
>
> of the conflict.
>
> etc.

Post them.
>
>
>

[Yap]

On Mar 4, 11:36 am, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>
> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:

> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in

> >news:5aef8a96-6cbb-439c...@googlegroups.com:
>
> >> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
> >> tales are based on fact.
>
> The serial liar knows that this is only after theists rudely and
> stupidly bring it up where it is neither wanted nor needed.

Theists want acceptance as well as to believe without facts.

>
> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

It is said that Jesus as a deity can save us....from what?

>
> >> 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

It is said Jesus as a deity can save us...from what?

>
> >> 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

It is said that Jesus can save us....from what?

>
> >> 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

It is said that Jesus can save us....from what?

>
> >> 5.The Crusades
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

The same as above.

>
> >> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

Same as above.

>
> >> 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
> sources. Unlike Jesus which is a belief BEFORE any evidence is
> produced - and none has.

Same as above.

>
> >   What evidence do you have for the following events:
>
> >Joe Bruno flunking out of law school.
> >Joe Bruno practicing law in the Navy.
> >Joe Bruno studying to be a doctor in the Navy.
> >Joe Bruno being an engineer in the Navy.
> >Joe Bruno being a CPA.
>
> He's seriously mentally ill. He knows the things he asked about are
> conclusions from the historical process, not pre-existing beliefs,
> while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
> Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.
>
> If he had provided as much evidence for Jesus as there is for those
> events, he might have had a point.

Don't as for the sky, no theist has ever provide a nano bit of
evidence.

>
> Instead he used a standard theist dishonesty that fools nobody, not
> even himself.

May be he is trying to fool himself.

[Yap]

On Mar 4, 12:03 pm, sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:

> Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> The Bayeux tapestry
> Period weapons
> Graves from people who died in the battles.
> The Domesday Book.
> Several INDEPENDENT reports, collected from different sources from BOTH sides
> of the conflict.
> etc.
>
> Any one of them ALONE wouldn't be enough.  All of them together form a body of
> evidence that leads you to believe that the Norman invasion of Britain actually
> happened.
>
> Also; the Norman invasion of Britain makes NO SUPERNATURAL CLAIMS.  There's
> nothing "special" about the Norman invasion.  No Gods or God-like creatures
> were involved.  No worldwide catastrophes were asserted.  No prophesies were
> made.  It's a simple story about how a bunch of invaders came over
> and conquered the British isles.

An old fool like this fake Jew has no capacity to understand simple
things.
He thought the claims in the bible were the same as any events such as
in Norman invasion.

>
> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
> > 3.The Hundred Years War
> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
> > 5.The Crusades
> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
> Same with all this stuff.
>
> Joe, if you tell us "I had cornflakes for breakfast today", I'll take your word
> for it; it's a pretty mundane claim.  If you say "I won the lottery! I'm a
> millionare!"  I might ask to see the ticket, or a picture of you receiving the
> novelty oversize cheque, but while this claim is more unusual, it's certainly
> possible; people buy lottery tickets all the time.  Sooner or later someone has
> to win.

He can claim anything, but that is his personal business...because he
ain't going to share his wealth even if true.

>
> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
> pretty fantastical claims.  "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.

But, here a deity in the sky is supposed to control all
human......worse, it needs our money to sustain their vast army of
preachers and workers whose professions are as good as Madoff, conman.

[Yap]

What is the use of having a belief the same as yours?
You get to the heaven to face a tyrant for eternity while we have
nothing?

While your deity could not do anything with us, your aim is to try to
charm us into contribution each month with money.

[Syd M.]

Give it up, Bruno.
You are batting minus zero.

PDW

[Syd M.]

Why are you here, then, asshole?

PDW

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/3/2013 10:36 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

> while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
> Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.

Some prominent thinkers in the past tend to disagree with you.

Brooke Foss Wescott (a famed scholar of the 19th century) said: "There
is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the
resurrection of Christ."

Dr. Paul L. Maier (a prominent professor of ancient history) stated: "No
shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy
or archaeology that would disprove that the tomb in which Jesus was
buried was actually empty on the morning of the 1st Easter."

Dr. Simon Greenleaf (a Harvard University professor of Law) proclaimed:
"According to the laws of legal evidence used in courts of law, there is
more evidence for the historical fact of the resurrection of Jesus
Christ than for just about any other event in history."

Dr. Frank Morrison (a rationalistic lawyer) decided to take three years
off from his law practice in order to try to disprove the resurrection
of Jesus Christ. After three years of intense study, he found that the
sheer weight of the evidence compelled him to conclude that Jesus Christ
actually did rise from the dead.

C.S.Lewis (a world famous literary genius) was also interested in the
accuracy of the resurrection. After evaluating the evidence for
Christianity, Lewis concluded that in other religions there was "no such
historical claim as in Christianity."

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:f238edc0-077f-4710...@googlegroups.com:

> On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>>
>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>
>> >>
>>
>>

>> >> 5.The Crusades
>>
>>
>>
>> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>>
>> sources.
>
> That's a narrative, not evidence.

So the castles the crusaders built is not evidence
of the Crusade? How about the roads they built, the
churches they founded, the booty they took to Europe,
all of which still exists. None of that is real?

Amazing...........

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 07:06:11 -0600, Mitchell Holman

<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:f238edc0-077f-4710...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>>>
>>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>> >>
>>> >> 5.The Crusades
>>>
>>> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>>> sources.
>>
>> That's a narrative, not evidence.
>
> So the castles the crusaders built is not evidence
>of the Crusade? How about the roads they built, the
>churches they founded, the booty they took to Europe,
>all of which still exists. None of that is real?
>
> Amazing...........

What's truly pathetic is that he knows all this and was just being
in-your-face, stupidly dishonest.

But that's Art Tandy for you.

[Mitchell Holman]

Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote in
news:8799j8p4a70lmeol4...@4ax.com:

I think he posts just to see his handle in print.

[Mitchell Holman]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote in news:kh25sl$9o2$1@dont-
email.me:

> On 3/3/2013 10:36 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
>> while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
>> Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.
>
> Some prominent thinkers in the past tend to disagree with you.
>
> Brooke Foss Wescott (a famed scholar of the 19th century) said: "There
> is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the
> resurrection of Christ."
>
> Dr. Paul L. Maier (a prominent professor of ancient history) stated: "No
> shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy
> or archaeology that would disprove that the tomb in which Jesus was
> buried was actually empty on the morning of the 1st Easter."
>

1) How does one "disprove" a religious claim?

2) Isn't the burden of proof on those claiming
factual accuracy of their belief?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 07:51:54 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote in news:kh25sl$9o2$1@dont-
>email.me:
>
>> On 3/3/2013 10:36 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>
>>> while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
>>> Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.
>>
>> Some prominent thinkers in the past tend to disagree with you.

Were we talking to them, and did any of them ever provide anything
remotely resembling this alleged evidence?

>> Brooke Foss Wescott (a famed scholar of the 19th century) said: "There
>> is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the
>> resurrection of Christ."

A transparent but all-too-common lie used by Christian con-men posing
as apologists.

They have none. never even try to provide any and just tell the
gullible, stupid and ignorant there is.

Who in turn repeat it to those with a normal IQ.

>> Dr. Paul L. Maier (a prominent professor of ancient history) stated: "No
>> shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy
>> or archaeology that would disprove that the tomb in which Jesus was
>> buried was actually empty on the morning of the 1st Easter."

And this somehow makes up for the fact that none has been found FOR
any of this?

> 1) How does one "disprove" a religious claim?
>
> 2) Isn't the burden of proof on those claiming
>factual accuracy of their belief?

Add Ramsey to the list of posters here with marginal mental
retardation.

[MarkA]

"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony
be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the
fact which it endeavors to establish" --David Hume

Nothing miraculous about the Normans invading Britain, the Crusades, etc.
OTOH, if Jesus weren't supposedly doing miracles, nobody would care if he
lived or not.

--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:21:33 -0500, MarkA <nob...@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:56:13 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
>> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales
>> are based on fact.

The in-your-face, proven serial liar knows we only demand it when
theists rudely and stupidly presume it where it is irrelevant,
off-topic and neither wanted nor needed.

>> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>
>> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>> 2.The Wars of the Roses
>> 3.The Hundred Years War
>> 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>> 5.The Crusades
>> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>> 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
>"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony
>be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the
>fact which it endeavors to establish" --David Hume
>
>Nothing miraculous about the Normans invading Britain, the Crusades, etc.
>OTOH, if Jesus weren't supposedly doing miracles, nobody would care if he
>lived or not.

If the moron had provided as much evidence for Jesus and the Bible
stories as there was for any of these he might have had a point.

Which has been explained to him over and over again.

It amazes me how he or any of the other loonies can manage to piss
without somebody to unzip it and point Percy at the porcelain for
them.

[Don Martin]

To demonstrate his anal magnificence on a daily basis. In this, he has
achieved perfection, as no one here doubts this.

--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/

[Don Martin]

sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>> tales are based on fact.
>>
>> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>
>> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> The Bayeux tapestry
> Period weapons
> Graves from people who died in the battles.
> The Domesday Book.
> Several INDEPENDENT reports, collected from different sources from BOTH sides
> of the conflict.
> etc.

I would add the replacement of Anglo Saxon with Norman French as the
dominant language in Britain, with the eventual fusion of the two producing
the English language.

[Joe Bruno]

Post the evidence .You're as stupid as Lee. YOu don't know what evidence is.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 6:37:01 AM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:21:33 -0500, MarkA
>

> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:56:13 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales
>
> >> are based on fact.
>
>
>
> The in-your-face, proven serial liar knows we only demand it when
>
> theists rudely and stupidly presume it where it is irrelevant,
>
> off-topic and neither wanted nor needed.

Here is the evidence that you are the LIAR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>
>
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 6:37:01 AM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[sbalneav]

Sure.

The Bayeux tapestry:
http://www.bayeuxtapestry.org.uk/

Period weapons:
http://www.historynet.com/weaponry-norman-arms-and-armour.htm

William the Conqueror's Grave:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StEtienne_Tombo_GuillaumeLeC.JPG

The Domesday Book:
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/domesday/

An article about period reports and writing, including how the invasion changed
the language in England.
http://www.historytoday.com/hr-loyn/norman-conquest-english-language

There's LOTS of information online, Joe. That should give you enough to get
started.

--
(` |) | Enjoy every sandwich.
_) |) | -- Warren Zevon
a.a #2171 |

[Joe Bruno]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[sbalneav]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
> On 3/3/2013 11:03 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>

>> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
>> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
>> pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.
>

> My question for you is, what makes you think you are expected to have
> the same beliefs?

I don't. So that pretty much answers your question, doesn't it?

--
(` |) | The imagination is man's power over nature.
_) |) | -- Wallace Stevens
a.a #2171 |

[Joe Bruno]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 5:06:11 AM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:

I denied nothing. I simply asked you for evidence.
DAMN ARE YOU STUPID.

[Calvin Ramsey]

It's easy if you have a brain, and you know how to use it.

You "prove" that the religious claim is false.

But no evidence has been found that can do that.

You got that?

> 2) Isn't the burden of proof on those claiming factual accuracy of
> their belief?

It has already has been proven. There were several eyewitnesses who saw
that the rock had been moved, and the tomb was empty. And they saw
Jesus later.

But it's okay if you, or anyone else, doesn't have the faith to believe the
evidence is real.
That's because you would first have to be given the grace to have enough
faith to believe it.

And God doesn't give everybody the grace necessary to believe.

So now you know the real reason why you don't believe.

You're welcome.

[Calvin Ramsey]

I couldn't help but notice you had nothing to say regarding Drs.
Greenleaf and Morrison.

I would ask why that is, but I'm sure I already know why.

Just as I'm sure you do too.

<smug grin>

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/4/2013 10:19 AM, sbalneav wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> On 3/3/2013 11:03 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>
>>> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
>>> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
>>> pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.
>>
>> My question for you is, what makes you think you are expected to have
>> the same beliefs?
>
> I don't. So that pretty much answers your question, doesn't it?

Well, actually, no.

If anything, it only raises more questions.

Such as, why are you so disconcerted over someone else who chooses to
have those beliefs?

And, what is the purpose of stating that it "ain't enough" just because
they are included in the Bible? What exactly is it that "ain't enough"
to accomplish?

[Alan Ferris]

On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:13:39 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com>
wrote:

>> 1) How does one "disprove" a religious claim?
>
>It's easy if you have a brain, and you know how to use it.
>
>You "prove" that the religious claim is false.
>
>But no evidence has been found that can do that.
>
>You got that?

Keep believing that crap, somebody might take you seriously and not laugh like
everybody else.

--
Ferrit

()'.'.'()
( (T) )
( ) . ( )
(")_(")
Atheist #1211
EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.

SERV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWhXGhv-tTo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7bsUttGho8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60mZsohBr3Q

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/4/2013 11:55 AM, Alan Ferris wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:13:39 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> 1) How does one "disprove" a religious claim?
>>
>> It's easy if you have a brain, and you know how to use it.
>>
>> You "prove" that the religious claim is false.
>>
>> But no evidence has been found that can do that.
>>
>> You got that?
>
> Keep believing that crap, somebody might take you seriously and not laugh like
> everybody else.

For the meek and fearful, having everyone laugh at you may cause you
great distress.

But for the bold and confident, it means that we should keep doing what
we've been doing.

Thanks for the compliment.

[Joe Bruno]

Just because the atheists say they are laughing at you doesn't mean they are.
They are manipulative liars.

[BA...@thinking.com]

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 23:53:31 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 3/3/2013 11:03 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>
>> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and talking snakes,
>> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those are
>> pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.
>
>My question for you is, what makes you think you are expected to have
>the same beliefs?
>
>

Here we go again. The 'pat' answer for Nutboy Ramsey is his god
made you an atheists and pulls all the thinking strings.

Then he sends them to eternal torture. The god of love is like the
religion of peace.

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[Virgil]

In article <kh25sl$9o2$1...@dont-email.me>,

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:

> On 3/3/2013 10:36 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> > while nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided for
> > Jesus, that stands up to the slightest scrutiny.
>
> Some prominent thinkers in the past tend to disagree with you.

Some promiment thinkers in the past thought that the sun moved around
the Earth, too.
--

[Christopher A. Lee]

Was "some prominent thinkers in the past tend to disagree with you"
meant to be evidence?

They're too stupid to grasp that "somebody says so" isn't evidence -
they need to explain just how that person reached their conclusion.

It projects their inability to think for themselves and that they let
others do it for them.

[Virgil]

In article <kh2h33$g8f$1...@dont-email.me>,

Unless those witnesses all wrote down their won observations and their
originally recorded observations still exist and can be validated as to
authorship, all we have now is hearsay.

So those claimed eyewitness accounts are hardly be absolutely
convincing.
--

[Virgil]

In article <kh2mkg$jkd$1...@dont-email.me>,

Only if you keep on giving us good laughs.

As soon as you cease to amuse, you may stop.
--

[Virgil]

In article <kh2i0r$lum$1...@dont-email.me>,

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:

> On 3/4/2013 10:19 AM, sbalneav wrote:
> > Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
> >> On 3/3/2013 11:03 PM, sbalneav wrote:
> >>
> >>> If someone wants to assert a bunch of stuff about Gods existing, and
> >>> talking snakes,
> >>> and worldwide floods, and chosen people, and blah-de-blah, sorry, those
> >>> are
> >>> pretty fantastical claims. "'Cuz my book says so" ain't enough.
> >>
> >> My question for you is, what makes you think you are expected to have
> >> the same beliefs?
> >
> > I don't. So that pretty much answers your question, doesn't it?
>
> Well, actually, no.
>
> If anything, it only raises more questions.
>
> Such as, why are you so disconcerted over someone else who chooses to
> have those beliefs?

It is not that, it is that you seem to expect everyone to have your
beliefs, even though you have no better evidence for them that followers
of other gods have for their claims.
--

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:35a21e13-42d7-4507...@googlegroups.com:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in news:f3b108de-63a8-4aad-a42f-
ee756b...@googlegroups.com:

Did you flunk out of high school
as well as law school?

[Joe Bruno]

You missed the point completely. I'm not surprised.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 3:02:48 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:35a21e13-42d7-4507...@googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Monday, March 4, 2013 5:06:11 AM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
> >> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> >>
>
> >> news:f238edc0-077f-4710...@googlegroups.com:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> > On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee
>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> 5.The Crusades
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> sources.
>
> >>
>
> >> >
>
> >>
>
> >> > That's a narrative, not evidence.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> So the castles the crusaders built is not evidence
>
> >>
>
> >> of the Crusade? How about the roads they built, the
>
> >>
>
> >> churches they founded, the booty they took to Europe,
>
> >>
>
> >> all of which still exists. None of that is real?
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Amazing...........
>
> >
>
> > Post the evidence
>
>
>
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[Joe Bruno]

http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-truth/maps/archaeological-and-external-evidence

[Joe Bruno]

Law school teaches us to answer the question that was asked without letting our imagination go bonkers.

The evidence is YOU CAN'T READ.

[linuxgal]

Aristotle was a very prominent thinker who thought there was no such
thing as a vacuum, and the planets moved in a set of interlocking solid,
transparent spheres with a "prime mover" causing their motion.

[Mitchell Holman]

linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
news:l_ydnUbH1YuKxajM...@giganews.com:

Which proves what, again?

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in news:da0bba7b-02cf-41d6-93bb-
def0a8...@googlegroups.com:

Huh?

What does that have to do with your demands
for proof that the Crusades ever happened?

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:608eb064-ca07-4654...@googlegroups.com:

> On Monday, March 4, 2013 4:16:04 PM UTC-8, Joe Bruno wrote:
>> On Monday, March 4, 2013 3:02:48 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>
>>

>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles
>>


Still denying the Crusades ever happened?

>>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus


As a Jew what do you care about Jesus?


>
> http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-truth/maps/archaeological-and-exte
> rnal-evidence
>


Your cite dodges the biggest holes in your Exodus theory.



"No direct archaeological evidence has been found for
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the 400-plus years in Egypt, or
the Israelites’ miraculous exodus from slavery. No physical
trace has been found of 40 years in the Sinai wilderness,
and nothing outside of the bible shows Moses existed. The
exodus cannot be treated as history because there is no
support for it except the bible. The authors of Exodus would
have been familiar with Egyptian conditions if the book had
been written in Egypt, and exodus first appeared when the
Ptolemies in the third century BC translated the scriptures
into Greek for the library of Alexandria. The exodus was then
composed from a Persian account of Jews being Egyptian slaves
because Canaan had been an Egyptian colony for centuries.
Israelite settlements showed no Egyptian culture in their
archaeological remains. They were uniform with those of the
Canaanites, so they were not immigrants from Egypt but native
Canaanites. A reply to Christians who seek to justify the
biblical exodus."

http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/350Exodus.php

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:f4e43670-4342-4fe2...@googlegroups.com:

And you could not do that so you flunked out.

Yes, we know all that already.

[Smiler]

On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 07:19:19 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:

> On Monday, March 4, 2013 6:37:01 AM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:21:33 -0500, MarkA wrote:

>> >On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:56:13 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>> >
>> >> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>> >> tales are based on fact.
>>

>> The in-your-face, proven serial liar knows we only demand it when
>> theists rudely and stupidly presume it where it is irrelevant,
>> off-topic and neither wanted nor needed.
>
> Here is the evidence that you are the LIAR:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Opinion is NOT evidence.

--
Smiler,

The godless one. a.a.# 2279

All gods are tailored to order. They're made to

exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 03:14:20 +0000, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>

wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 07:19:19 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
>> On Monday, March 4, 2013 6:37:01 AM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:21:33 -0500, MarkA wrote:
>>> >On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:56:13 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical
>>> >> tales are based on fact.
>>>
>>> The in-your-face, proven serial liar knows we only demand it when
>>> theists rudely and stupidly presume it where it is irrelevant,
>>> off-topic and neither wanted nor needed.
>>
>> Here is the evidence that you are the LIAR:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>
>Opinion is NOT evidence.

The LIAR needs to explain why the reasons he has been given why the
standard list (of names only, rarely what they wrote which the LIARS
don't bother to read before citing them) doesn't stand up as evidence.

If the LIAR offers something as evidence he needs to defend it because
just saying something is evidence doesn't make it so. In court this is
known as cross-examination.

[linuxgal]

Being prominent, and even thinking, is trumped by actual observation.

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You missed the point completely. I'm not surprised.

You had no point. You just got spanked.

Again.

--
(` |) | It is the nature of the wise to resist pleasures,
_) |) | but the foolish to be a slave to them.
a.a #2171 | -- Epictetus

[delph...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 3 March 2013 19:56:13 UTC-7, Joe Bruno wrote:
> You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.
>
>
>

> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
>
>

> 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>

> 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> 5.The Crusades
>
> 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> 7.The War of the Spanish Succession

I thought you said you are a lawyer. Have you ever heard of the laws of evidence or peer review? There is enough evidence to suggest that these events are at least plausible or, most likely probable. Though I am not a historian I would sugegst that you take these questions to a good one if you want evidence that these wars , in fact, actually took place. There is no evidence what-so-ever, that there is any truth to the bible. The oldest texts in it were written at least twenty years after the "alleged" death of Jesus, and some up to two hundred years after. Written by a primitive, paranoid and superstitious people, translated through language after language for two thousand years, and deliberately manipulated by the vatican from the Emporer Constantine on up to suit the needs of the church. If this constitutes evidence to you then you had better go back to law school. I have the distinct impression that you simply saw " A Few Good Men " too many times. You are not Tom Cruise. " YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH". At any rate I thought this was an athiest site. Shouldn't you be in church or something? Praying to your imaginary god for your non-existant soul?

[Mitchell Holman]

linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
news:bOOdnVAd7OAS-6jM...@giganews.com:

Science trumps religious dogma, every time.

[Brian E. Clark]

In article <XnsA17948151FE1Enomailverizonnet@
216.196.121.131>, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net>
says...

> So the castles the crusaders built is not evidence
> of the Crusade? How about the roads they built, the
> churches they founded, the booty they took to Europe,
> all of which still exists. None of that is real?

There are also first-hand accounts written by the Crusaders
and their enemies.

This has to be the weakest of Art's challenges yet. It's as
if his goal in life is to make himself look ever stupider.

--
-----------
Brian E. Clark

[Christopher A. Lee]

The moron imagines the Bible is an accurate history.

But if it were, "the Bible sez..." should be enough for him and he
wouldn't need "it sez people saw it therefore there were eyewitnesses
to it therefore it actually happened".

And he's too stupid to grasp the obvious, that people he knows don't
treat the Bible as anything special in the first place, aren't going
you believe it when sez "people saw it".

It's another example of a weak secondary argument actually damaging
whatever case they think they have.

[Joe Bruno]

I know they happened.I've studied them at length.
The point is you accept evidence for things you want to believe, like the Crusades, but refuse to accept evidence for things you don't like, like the existence of Jesus, for which evidence also exists.

It is unrealistic to expect physical evidence of a man who died 2000 years ago.
His corpse is gone,decayed, and unrecognizable. We have no DNA to prove who the corpse was even if we had it.

He was not a builder, so there are no physical structures to prove he did anything.
All we have are personal accounts of him, like those of Josephus and Pliny the Younger. During his lifetime,he was not considered powerful or important.
He was a minor character in an isolated part of the Roman Empire.
Therefore, the number of people who wrote about him can be expected to be small.

The Federal Rules of Evidence admit witness testimony as evidence in court and, in many cases, that is all the evidence available.If it is sufficient to convict murderers and get them capital punishment, it is enough to prove a man existed.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:42:28 PM UTC-8, Randall Ricard wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 March 2013 19:56:13 UTC-7, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>
> >
>
> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
>
> >
>
> > 3.The Hundred Years War
>
> >
>
> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>
> >
>
> > 5.The Crusades
>
> >
>
> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>
> >
>
> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>
>
>
> I thought you said you are a lawyer.

On the contrary, I specifically said I am not a lawyer.
I've reposted that statement numerous times, so you must be lying.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:30:03 PM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You missed the point completely. I'm not surprised.
>
>
>
> You had no point. You just got spanked.
>
>
>
> Again.

I take that as seriously as everything else you post.
In my eyes, your credibility is ZERO.and, the poster who calls himself

"%" agreed with me.

[Joe Bruno]

I thought you said you'd killfiled me.
Since you made that claim, you have responded to more than 10 of my posts.

That was a LIE, wasn't it?
You cannot use the excuse that you read my posts in the body of the posts of others. To truly killfile someone, you must ignore them completely.

YOU ARE A CHRONIC LIAR.

[Joe Bruno]

Here are those rules. Note the section on Witness Testimony:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre

[Yap]

On Mar 4, 11:17 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 5:06:11 AM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> > Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in

>
> >news:f238edc0-077f-4710...@googlegroups.com:
>
> > > On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:36:26 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> > >> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 21:11:04 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>
> > >> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>
> > >> >> What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>
> > >> >> 5.The Crusades
>
> > >> Conclusion from convergence of evidence from multiple independent
>
> > >> sources.
>
> > > That's a narrative, not evidence.
>
> >     So the castles the crusaders built is not evidence
>
> > of the Crusade? How about the roads they built, the
>
> > churches they founded, the booty they took to Europe,
>
> > all of which still exists. None of that is real?
>
> >     Amazing...........
>

> Post the evidence .You're as stupid as Lee. YOu don't know what evidence is.

A collection of existing evidences as listed by Mitchell is what to
you then?

Perhaps you can buy a full fare air ticket and paying all ground
expenses, then Mitchell can schedule his time to take you for a
trip...on the condition that he is comfortable with your subspecies
personality for a starter.

[Yap]

On Mar 5, 1:49 am, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 9:47:19 AM UTC-8, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
> > On 3/4/2013 11:55 AM, Alan Ferris wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:13:39 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com>

>
> > > wrote:
>
> > >>> 1)  How does one "disprove" a religious claim?
>
> > >> It's easy if you have a brain, and you know how to use it.
>
> > >> You "prove" that the religious claim is false.
>
> > >> But no evidence has been found that can do that.
>
> > >> You got that?
>

> > > Keep believing that crap, somebody might take you seriously and not laugh like
>
> > > everybody else.
>
> > For the meek and fearful, having everyone laugh at you may cause you
>
> > great distress.
>
> > But for the bold and confident, it means that we should keep doing what
>
> > we've been doing.
>
> > Thanks for the compliment.
>
> Just because the atheists say they are laughing at you doesn't mean they are.
> They are manipulative liars.

Certainly not as manipulative as you are.......you claimed to be Jew
but did not post evidence, and you are an American fake Jew not real
Jew, claiming to be a Judaist but care more for Christianity........

[Yap]

On Mar 5, 12:43 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:06:35 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> > Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in news:da0bba7b-02cf-41d6-93bb-

>
> > def0a8...@googlegroups.com:
>
> > > On Monday, March 4, 2013 3:02:48 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>

> > >> Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in

>
> > >>news:35a21e13-42d7-4507...@googlegroups.com:
>
> > >> > On Monday, March 4, 2013 5:06:11 AM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>

> > >> >> Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote in

So, being a Judaist, why are you so interested to speak for Jesus's
existence?
I claim you a fake because of what you did.......

[Yap]

On Mar 5, 12:48 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:30:03 PM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:

> > Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > You missed the point completely. I'm not surprised.
>
> > You had no point.  You just got spanked.
>
> > Again.
>
> I take that as seriously as everything else you post.
> In my eyes, your credibility is ZERO.and, the poster who calls himself
>
> "%" agreed with me.

% is your dirty sock and a smelly one.

[Joe Bruno]

Fuck you
fuck your claim
fuck your mother and daddy
fuck your dog and sister
fuck your aunt and all your fucking uncles

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/4/2013 10:58 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> Science trumps religious dogma, every time.

Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the science
of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian Theology,
is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly authentic
method of realizing the only approach in which life could have originated.


The International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design
http://www.iscid.org/

Intelligent Design Undergraduate Research Center
http://www.idurc.org/

Access Research Network
http://www.arn.org/

Design Inference
http://www.designinference.com/

Center for Science and Culture
http://www.discovery.org/csc/

Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness
http://www.ideacenter.org/

Intelligent Design
http://www.intelligentdesign.org/

Intelligent Design Network
http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/

Evolution News and Views
http://www.evolutionnews.org/

Evolution Facts
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com/

Science Against Evolution
http://scienceagainstevolution.org/

God and Science
http://godandscience.org/

[Alan Ferris]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 01:59:42 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Fuck you
>fuck your claim
>fuck your mother and daddy
>fuck your dog and sister
>fuck your aunt and all your fucking uncles

Why not fuck your god as well?
--
Ferrit

()'.'.'()
( (T) )
( ) . ( )
(")_(")
Atheist #1211
EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.

SERV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWhXGhv-tTo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7bsUttGho8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60mZsohBr3Q

[Alan Ferris]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 07:31:33 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com>
wrote:

>Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the science
>of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian Theology,
>is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly authentic
>method of realizing the only approach in which life could have originated.

Only to those who put faith before truth.

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:37:10 AM UTC-8, Alan Ferris wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 01:59:42 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Fuck you
>
> >fuck your claim
>
> >fuck your mother and daddy
>
> >fuck your dog and sister
>
> >fuck your aunt and all your fucking uncles
>
>
>
> Why not fuck your god as well?
>
> --
>
> Ferrit

I don't want to.I've said it before:"I'd rather be dead than be an atheist,".
>
>
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 4:45:29 AM UTC-8, Alan Ferris wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 07:31:33 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the science
>
> >of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian Theology,
>
> >is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly authentic
>
> >method of realizing the only approach in which life could have originated.
>
>
>
> Only to those who put faith before truth.

Truth can be proven with evidence.

[Joe Bruno]

From Judaism 101:

Who is a Jew?

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship.

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 12:23:04 AM UTC-8, Yap wrote:

The Jewish view of Jesus:

http://judaism.about.com/od/judaismbasics/a/Jewish-View-Of-Jesus.htm

[kni...@baawa.com]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 07:31:33 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 3/4/2013 10:58 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> Science trumps religious dogma, every time.
>
>Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the science
>of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian Theology,
>is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly authentic
>method of realizing the only approach in which life could have originated.

Liar.

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[Alan Ferris]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 05:13:09 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >Fuck you
>>
>> >fuck your claim
>>
>> >fuck your mother and daddy
>>
>> >fuck your dog and sister
>>
>> >fuck your aunt and all your fucking uncles
>>
>>
>>
>> Why not fuck your god as well?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Ferrit
>
>I don't want to.I've said it before:"I'd rather be dead than be an atheist,".

But you effectively are, you ignore all the teachings, so why do you consider
yourself religious?

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:3e9f5655-54c1-4027...@googlegroups.com:

> On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:06:35 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:da0bba7b-02cf-41d6-93bb-
>>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>

>> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles
>>
>> >
>>
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>>
>>
>> What does that have to do with your demands
>>
>> for proof that the Crusades ever happened?
>
>
> I know they happened.I've studied them at length.
> The point is you accept evidence for things you want to believe, like
> the Crusades, but refuse to accept evidence for things you don't like,
> like the existence of Jesus, for which evidence also exists.

Huh?

I never said Jesus never existed.

WTF are you talking about?

[Alan Ferris]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 05:15:00 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the science
>>
>> >of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian Theology,
>>
>> >is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly authentic
>>
>> >method of realizing the only approach in which life could have originated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Only to those who put faith before truth.
>
>Truth can be proven with evidence.

Indeed, which is to date lacking in Intelligent Design.

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:18821a4e-b269-4de1...@googlegroups.com:

>
> Fuck you
> fuck your claim
> fuck your mother and daddy
> fuck your dog and sister
> fuck your aunt and all your fucking uncles

Such is how notestreams with
"Joe Bruno" end - in one of his
childish temper tantrums when he
is proven wrong...........

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:54d0b4d2-e557-46bd...@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 4:45:29 AM UTC-8, Alan Ferris wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 07:31:33 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>> <calvin...@live.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Well, actually, it's becoming more and more apparent, with the
>> >science
>>
>> >of Intelligent Design, that "religious dogma", viz. Christian
>> >Theology,
>>
>> >is manifested as being an extremely accurate and a profoundly
>> >authentic
>>
>> >method of realizing the only approach in which life could have
>> >originated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Only to those who put faith before truth.
>
> Truth can be proven with evidence.

Then why do you need faith?

[Joe Bruno]

Man does not live by bread alone.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/5/2013 9:11 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> Then why do you need faith?

Faith is needed to believe anything.

But the faith you're talking about can only come from God, and is only
given to those whom he chooses to give it to.

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 6:07:19 AM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:3e9f5655-54c1-4027...@googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:06:35 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
> >> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> >> news:da0bba7b-02cf-41d6-93bb-
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles
>
> >>
>
> >> >
>
> >>
>
> >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Huh?
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> What does that have to do with your demands
>
> >>
>
> >> for proof that the Crusades ever happened?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I know they happened.I've studied them at length.
>
> > The point is you accept evidence for things you want to believe, like
>
> > the Crusades, but refuse to accept evidence for things you don't like,
>
> > like the existence of Jesus, for which evidence also exists.
>
>
>
>
>
> Huh?
>
>
>
> I never said Jesus never existed.
>
>
>
> WTF are you talking about?

I was referring to other atheists, the ones who deny his existence.

[sbalneav]

Got a troll to agree with you eh? Boy, that sure tells you the validity of
YOUR opinions, doesn't it?

--
(` |) | And, because you have conceived of Gandalf the Grey in your
_) |) | understanding, then he *MUST* exist in this world.
a.a #2171 | -- Calvin Ramsay, in <k37p9v$ivr$1...@dont-email.me>

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:42:28 PM UTC-8, Randall Ricard wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 March 2013 19:56:13 UTC-7, Joe Bruno wrote:
>>
>> > You constantly demand evidence that Jesus existed and that biblical tales are based on fact.

>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > What evidence do you have for the following historical events:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>

>> > 1.The Norman invasion of Britain in 1066
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 2.The Wars of the Roses
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 3.The Hundred Years War
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 4.The Spanish Inquisition
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 5.The Crusades
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 6.The Mongol invasion of Europe
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 7.The War of the Spanish Succession
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought you said you are a lawyer.
>
> On the contrary, I specifically said I am not a lawyer.

EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://alt-atheism.org/doku.php?id=atheism:joebruno

> I've reposted that statement numerous times, so you must be lying.

--
(` |) | A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater
_) |) | than a "Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to
a.a #2171 | avoid trouble. -- Mahatma Ghandi

[Alan Ferris]

If a person named Jesus existed or not is irrelevant.

[Alan Ferris]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 10:10:42 -0500, Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com>
wrote:

>On 3/5/2013 9:11 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> Then why do you need faith?
>
>Faith is needed to believe anything.

So you believe anything. No wonder you like intelligent design.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 08:07:19 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:3e9f5655-54c1-4027...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Monday, March 4, 2013 7:06:35 PM UTC-8, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:da0bba7b-02cf-41d6-93bb-
>>>
>>> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles
>>> >
>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>>
>>> What does that have to do with your demands
>>>
>>> for proof that the Crusades ever happened?
>>
>> I know they happened.I've studied them at length.
>> The point is you accept evidence for things you want to believe, like
>> the Crusades, but refuse to accept evidence for things you don't like,
>> like the existence of Jesus, for which evidence also exists.

Once again the pathological liar's lies reflect himself.

We don't "accept evidence for things we want to believe" - we
"believe" (although it's not actually belief) things on the
preponderance of evidence.

On the other hand, Bruno the Loono refuses to accept evidence for
things _he_ doesn't like - eg that there is no early mention of Jesus
outside the NT apart from the obvious Christian insertion in
Josephus.

He claims there is evidence but all he has ever offered is the
regularly debunked. standard list which is all that is ever offered.

He takes no notice of the problems when they are pointed out, but
instead repeats what he just said and adds personal lies as ad
hominems.

He's too stupid to understand that the Crusades are part of the
historical process and we know about them from a heck of as a heck of
a lot of corroborating sources from thousands of miles apart as well
as buildings, armour, tombs etc.

While he imagines we only "believe" in them because we read it.

> Huh?
>
> I never said Jesus never existed.
>
> WTF are you talking about?

There is no evidence that he did, though. And the balance of the
evidence shows the stories were made up to fit what the Mediterraneans
expected of their hero figures, and to fit cherry-picked "prophecies"
taken from the Greek Septuagint instead of the Hebrew original
including mis-translations. The whole Nativity story was contrived
because the Romans didn't make people travel long distances to be
counted either for taxes or a census.

He'll take no notice this time, either.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 3/5/2013 11:47 AM, Alan Ferris wrote:

> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 3/5/2013 9:11 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>
>>> Then why do you need faith?
>>
>> Faith is needed to believe anything.
>
> So you believe anything. No wonder you like intelligent design.

You are one funny, funny guy.


For those of you with an interest in learning about Intelligent Design,
as well as other fascinating topics, you will find lots of articles to
read or listen to while at home or at work from these websites: