Is this an Atheist convention?

[The Starmaker]

Is this an Atheist convention?

Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs. (the audience must be all dummies if they didn't know he is quoting Augustine)

“What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?”

http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w



Big Bang without God, ...where have I heard this before? Is this a re-run?


Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he? He cannot get that Guy out-of-his-mind.



The Starmaker


Why do you think God put him in that wheel chair? There is a reason, did you know that?? It's where he belongs..people
like him all they do is build atomic bombs.

According to him, you got a thousand years to live.

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >Big Bang without God, ...where have I heard this before? Is this a re-run?
>
> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he? He cannot get that Guy out-of-his-mind.
>

> No I dont think he does
> Dumbmass...

>
> >Why do you think God put him in that wheel chair? There is a reason, did you know that?? It's where he belongs..people
> >like him all they do is build atomic bombs.

> So So lame. God did not put him in a wheel chair. only a god fearing
> fool would ever say something as freakin mean hateful and just plain
> stupid as that. Ya know if you actually believed in a god and the
> values that your god stood for you would not ever say something like
> that, unless of course your god was a mean hateful vengeful prejudiced
> dumbass. Oh wait let me gues you are your own god
> Dumbass...

> >According to him, you got a thousand years to live.
>

> I dont think he ever said anything like that
> Dumbass...


It's right there...dummie...estupido, imbelcile! (probably another atheist)

“I don’t think we will survive another thousand years without escaping our fragile planet.”

http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite

[Martin]

On 18/04/2013 19:16, The Starmaker wrote:
> Is this an Atheist convention?
>
> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs.

Who is Hawkings?

[The Starmaker]

He is the Oral Roberts, The Robert Shuller, The Pope of Atheist!

[Martin]

Strange, you'd think everyone would have heard of him in that case

[Virgil]

In article <51706F...@ix.netcom.com>,

He is much better known for his cosmology than for his atheism.
--

[The Starmaker]

Well look at the Headline: Stephen Hawking lays out case for Big Bang without God

http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w


Is that about cosmology or about atheism?


His introduction is about atheism

“What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?”

Why does he want to know what God was doing before the divine creation? That's a stupid question. God was watching TV!!!!
I'm guessing he got bored with what they were showing on TV.

Now he can watch American Idol!

Download movies...

Come on already, He was simply bored!


The Starmaker



He probably had only one channel on Tv...

Now he's got cable!



You're on TV, get it?

[xxein]

On Apr 18, 2:16 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Is this an Atheist convention?
>
> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs. (the audience must be all dummies if they didn't know he is quoting Augustine)
>
> “What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?”
>

> http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-...

>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w
>
> Big Bang without God, ...where have I heard this before? Is this a re-run?
>
> Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he? He cannot get that Guy out-of-his-mind.
>
> The Starmaker
>
> Why do you think God put him in that wheel chair? There is a reason, did you know that?? It's where he belongs..people
> like him all they do is build atomic bombs.
>
> According to him, you got a thousand years to live.

xxein: Do you promote a God or deny such an existence? I don't
really care about your personal beliefs but what taints them?

And now I see you in your final ignorance. Play in your mud. I don't
care except that you are trying to poison the minds of others. You
are a wannabe Hitler.

[SkyEyes]

Maybe, but his name is "Hawking," no "s" on the end, dumbass. I think
you're probably conflating the name with that of Richard Dawkins, the
*other* Pope of Atheists.

--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
--

[Martin]

On 19/04/2013 00:26, The Starmaker wrote:
> Virgil wrote:
>>
>> In article <51706F...@ix.netcom.com>,
>> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 18/04/2013 19:16, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>> Is this an Atheist convention?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs.
>>>>
>>>> Who is Hawkings?
>>>
>>>
>>> He is the Oral Roberts, The Robert Shuller, The Pope of Atheist!
>>
>> He is much better known for his cosmology than for his atheism.
>> --
>>
>>
>
>
> Well look at the Headline: Stephen Hawking lays out case for Big Bang without God

What's that got to do with Stephen Hawkings who you were talking about
^up there^ ?

>
> http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w
>
>
> Is that about cosmology or about atheism?
>
>
> His introduction is about atheism
>

> �What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?�

[Les]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>Is this an Atheist convention?

If the answer was no would you consider it good or bad?

>
>Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs. (the audience must be all dummies if they didn't know he is quoting Augustine)


>“What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?”
>
>http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w
>
>
>
>Big Bang without God, ...where have I heard this before? Is this a re-run?

Well I do not recall Fred Hoyle mentioning a god when he coined this
comical phrase. (but then he was a detractor of the theory)

>Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he? He cannot get that Guy out-of-his-mind.

Are you sure it is not the* notion* there is such a thing as god that
he is concerned with?

We know this notion exists indeed there are thousands of such notions
all like 'my father house with many rooms' all looking alike with many
twisty passages.

>Why do you think God put him in that wheel chair?

I think no such thing.

> There is a reason, did you know that?? It's where he belongs..people
>like him all they do is build atomic bombs.

Well we have already placed Hawkins on the list of great Britons
alongside Shakespeare, Darwin, Newton and Adam Smith but whether he
will be interned in Westminster Abbey alongside such greats as
Darwin we will have to wait and see.

i guess he will end up pictured on our bank notes which would
be nice.

>According to him, you got a thousand years to live.

--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu

[raven1]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?

No, and he's expressed that quite clearly. BTW, his name is "Hawking".
No "s".

[The Starmaker]

Martin wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2013 00:26, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Virgil wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <51706F...@ix.netcom.com>,
> >> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Martin wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 18/04/2013 19:16, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>>>> Is this an Atheist convention?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Who is Hawkings?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> He is the Oral Roberts, The Robert Shuller, The Pope of Atheist!
> >>
> >> He is much better known for his cosmology than for his atheism.
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Well look at the Headline: Stephen Hawking lays out case for Big Bang without God
>
> What's that got to do with Stephen Hawkings who you were talking about
> ^up there^ ?

This is Augustine:
http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1427207-confessiones
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo

and this is Stephen Hawking
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_waHqo7COehs/TPwpBpIsBxI/AAAAAAAAHJk/KCFRfXDFaco/s1600/the-grand-design.jpg

What's the problem here?

>
> >
> > http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w
> >
> >
> > Is that about cosmology or about atheism?
> >
> >
> > His introduction is about atheism
> >

> > “What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who asked such questions?”

[The Starmaker]

raven1 wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
>
> No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.

He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.

There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
to be atheist.

But deep down inside....they cannot get God out of their hearts.

They are at war with themselves.

Have you notice, atheist don't mention...The Devil? Cause atheist want
to go to Heaven.


Who wants to go to Hell?

[Martin]

On 19/04/2013 18:14, The Starmaker wrote:
> Martin wrote:
>>
>> On 19/04/2013 00:26, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> Virgil wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In article <51706F...@ix.netcom.com>,
>>>> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Martin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18/04/2013 19:16, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>> Is this an Atheist convention?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who is Hawkings?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> He is the Oral Roberts, The Robert Shuller, The Pope of Atheist!
>>>>
>>>> He is much better known for his cosmology than for his atheism.
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well look at the Headline: Stephen Hawking lays out case for Big Bang without God
>>
>> What's that got to do with Stephen Hawkings who you were talking about
>> ^up there^ ?
>
>
> This is Augustine:
> http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1427207-confessiones
> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
>
> and this is Stephen Hawking
> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_waHqo7COehs/TPwpBpIsBxI/AAAAAAAAHJk/KCFRfXDFaco/s1600/the-grand-design.jpg
>
> What's the problem here?

You were talking about Stephen Hawkings, as I said I have no idea who
that is. Then suddenly with no explanation you start talking about a
different chap called Stephen Hawking, I've heard of him (obviously) but
don't know what he has to do with the bloke ^up there^.

Is it REALLY so hard to comprehend?

[raven1]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:24:43 -0700, The Starmaker

<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>raven1 wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
>> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
>>
>> No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.
>
>He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.
>
>There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
>to be atheist.

Oh my, you're one of those theists who are so terrified that we're
right that you have to try to convince yourself that we're just
pretending to not believe in your silly Bronze Age myth. How amusing.

[suzeeq]

Hawkings was a misspelling, I think they were talking about Stephen
Hawking who is supposedly an atheist. Or not. Many scientists are theists.

[Free Lunch]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:52:13 -0600, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote in
alt.atheism:

When you are engaged in science, religion does not matter. If your
religion does matter, you have abandoned science.

[The Starmaker]

raven1 wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:24:43 -0700, The Starmaker
> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >raven1 wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
> >> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
> >>
> >> No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.
> >
> >He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.
> >
> >There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
> >to be atheist.
>
> Oh my,

Weren't you're about to say..."Oh my God"? No one says "Oh my," anymore...

You got to let that "God" out. You cannot hide...everyone here can see the God inside you
burning to get out from within.

Try, "OH MY GAWD"...it doesn't matter...we all know deep down inside you're Love God.


God be with you, my child.

God lives inside you. God lives inside of us all.

You have eternal life.

You will live forever.



The Starmaker

[The Starmaker]

This is all about one letter 's'???

Hawkings, Dawkings, Schmawkings, what difference does it make????

[Martin]

If you're going to talk bull-shit about someone the very least you can
do is to get their fucking name right. Especially when it's the one
scientist everyone in the bloody world has heard of.

It might not make any difference to you, but if you're doctor didn't
prescribe you the right drug you'd fucking whinge

[raven1]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:10:42 -0700, The Starmaker

<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>raven1 wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:24:43 -0700, The Starmaker
>> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >raven1 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
>> >> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
>> >>
>> >> No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.
>> >
>> >He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.
>> >
>> >There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
>> >to be atheist.
>>
>> Oh my,
>
>Weren't you're about to say..."Oh my God"? No one says "Oh my," anymore...

Seriously? Do you live in a cave, or have you really never heard of
George Takei...?


---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight

[The Starmaker]

You're want people to believe you're impersonating a chineese gay
guy????

[The Starmaker]

Syd M. wrote:

> My, how arrogant of you.
>
> PDW

"My,"? Who says "My," anymore???

Where are all these God fearing atheist coming from????

[Bill Graham]

Have you heard of (Sir) Issac Newton? Well, Stephan Hawking has Newton's old
job......

[Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway]

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
news:XOidnbz0-vK1RezM...@giganews.com...

Have you heard of (Sir) Issac Newton?

===================================
No, but I have heard of Sir Isaac Newton.

Well, Stephan Hawking has Newton's old
job......

=====================================
Haven't heard of him either, did you mean Stephen Hawking?
In case you did, that idiot can't hold a candle to Newton.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway.
When the fools chicken farmer Wilson and Van de faggot present an argument I
cannot laugh at I'll retire from usenet.

[Uncle Vic]

The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:5171C0...@ix.netcom.com:

Wow. The conversation evolved from Stephen Hawking to homosexuality in
five posts! Is that some kind of record?

--
Uncle Vic
aa# 2011
BAAWA

AA Quotemeister

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[raven1]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:08:18 -0700, The Starmaker

<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>raven1 wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:10:42 -0700, The Starmaker
>> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >raven1 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:24:43 -0700, The Starmaker
>> >> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >raven1 wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
>> >> >> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.
>> >> >
>> >> >He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.
>> >> >
>> >> >There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
>> >> >to be atheist.
>> >>
>> >> Oh my,
>> >
>> >Weren't you're about to say..."Oh my God"? No one says "Oh my," anymore...
>>
>> Seriously? Do you live in a cave, or have you really never heard of
>> George Takei...?
>

>You're want people to believe you're impersonating a chineese gay
>guy????

Oh, so you're also a racist and a homophobe? Color me shocked.

[Bill Graham]

Oh, I see. You are a typo debater. Well, I'm sorry, but at 77, I can't be
bothered with you, so you have to go into my kill file. I make too many
typo's to be able to handle your kind. I apologize, be3cause you might share
my general philosophy and I reallky hate to turn you off....

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <47q3n8h8po2d2tqb7...@4ax.com>,

And such a moron that he doesn't know the difference between Chinese and
Japanese.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[benj]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 18:34:17 -0700, Bill Graham wrote:

> Oh, I see. You are a typo debater. Well, I'm sorry, but at 77, I can't
> be bothered with you, so you have to go into my kill file. I make too
> many typo's to be able to handle your kind. I apologize, be3cause you
> might share my general philosophy and I reallky hate to turn you off....

Andro "might" share your philosophy? At 77 you can't really be THAT
stooopid, can you? You have Andro right where he belongs!

[SkyEyes]

There's as much evidence for consciousness persisting after death as
there is for a god, i.e., none at all. There's only the mind, which
is the product of the brain. When the brain is ill or injured, the
personality changes. When the brain dies, consciousness winks out.
No heaven. No hell. Just oblivion, which is nothing to be afraid of.

There is no evidence of either a god or a devil. The reason we don't
mention the devil is that is, essentially, just another god: a being
of begotten of fantasy and ignorance, banished by the bright light of
reason.

[SkyEyes]

Takei is Japanese, not Chinese. That's three things you've gotten
horrifically wrong in this thread. How many more things are your
horribly wrong about?

[Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway]

"Bill Graham" wrote in message

news:IoKdnbKhM_kAbezM...@giganews.com...

===========================================
There are two kinds of typos that are unforgivable.
Equations and Names.
*plonk*

[benj]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:04:24 -0700, SkyEyes wrote:

>> Who wants to go to Hell?

Obviously this does not scare atheists.

> There's as much evidence for consciousness persisting after death as
> there is for a god, i.e., none at all. There's only the mind, which is
> the product of the brain. When the brain is ill or injured, the
> personality changes. When the brain dies, consciousness winks out. No
> heaven. No hell. Just oblivion, which is nothing to be afraid of.

See? I told you so. The only problem is that while the above is an
excellent synopsis of the beliefs of Social Darwinism, it's nothing but
imaginative assertion with no effort to examine any evidence suggestive
of other ideas. In other words the above is nothing but religious belief
presented as such. It's true because the faithful SAY it is true.

> There is no evidence of either a god or a devil. The reason we don't
> mention the devil is that is, essentially, just another god: a being of
> begotten of fantasy and ignorance, banished by the bright light of
> reason.

Obviously your assertion of "no evidence" is clearly based on ignorance
either natural or chosen. Of course, you expect me to assert the polar
opposite to your faith, but in science that isn't how it works.

To say that there is "no" evidence of the persistence of consciousness
after death or for functions of mind beyond those of the brain is simply
a statement that you have no knowledge of what has been studied in these
matters. There is much evidence that has been accumulated and developed
that provide strong suggestions that your simplistic views are dead wrong
even if politically correct in certain circles.

The fact that this body of evidence has not established credibility for
OTHER religious theories does not discredit the observations. It only
discredits your assumptions.

Attempting to prove a negative with mere bluster and personal assertion
is hardly convincing debate.

[casey]

On 19 Apr, 23:04, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> [...]

> There's as much evidence for consciousness persisting after death as
> there is for a god, i.e., none at all.  There's only the mind, which
> is the product of the brain.  When the brain is ill or injured, the
> personality changes.  When the brain dies, consciousness winks out.
> No heaven.  No hell.  Just oblivion, which is nothing to be afraid of.

And yet when your brain developed your consciousness winked in?

If it can wink in once why can't it wink in again?

[raven1]

I'm sure he's scratching his head over that...

[Mason Barge]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:06:22 +0100, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of

Better a type than someone who can't quote and post normally.

[Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway]

"Mason Barge" wrote in message
news:p5g5n8pbq39b7j7v1...@4ax.com...

==============================================
*plonk*

[The Starmaker]

SkyEyes wrote:
>
> On Apr 19, 10:24 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > raven1 wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700, The Starmaker
> > > <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he?
> >
> > > No, and he's expressed that quite clearly.
> >
> > He's lying. He cannot stop talking and thinking about God.
> >
> > There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
> > to be atheist.
> >
> > But deep down inside....they cannot get God out of their hearts.
> >
> > They are at war with themselves.
> >
> > Have you notice, atheist don't mention...The Devil? Cause atheist want
> > to go to Heaven.
> >
> > Who wants to go to Hell?
>
> There's as much evidence for consciousness persisting after death as
> there is for a god, i.e., none at all. There's only the mind, which
> is the product of the brain. When the brain is ill or injured, the
> personality changes. When the brain dies, consciousness winks out.
> No heaven. No hell. Just oblivion, which is nothing to be afraid of.
>
> There is no evidence of either a god or a devil.

Of course there is evidence of a god and a devil. God is positive, the Devil is negative. Plus, Minus. +, -. Good, Evil.

You might as well just say there is no evidence of positive and negative.

Every person born is incorporated a positive and a negative. The positive is on one side, the negative is on the other.
The good is on one side, the bad is on the other.
God is on your right side, and the devil is on your left side.
Your right side is your positive side. Your left side is your negative side.
There is only Love and Hate, there is no inbetween.

There is only a positive charge and a negative charge.

If you're looking for evidence of God, you need to look inside you.


(on the right side)

no, no, no, no...a little bit more to the left...that's it.

It's very simple...God is good.


The Starmaker

> The reason we don't
> mention the devil is that is, essentially, just another god: a being
> of begotten of fantasy and ignorance, banished by the bright light of
> reason.

banished? He's on your left side!


Take a look in the mirror. The evidence is there. Which is your pretty side.....Brenda?

[The Starmaker]

Did I write it down wrong? Okay, I'm talking about 'the people with the slanted eyes'...in this case he's gay also, probably a genetic defect.

[The Starmaker]

linuxgal wrote:
>
> bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
> > but the real problem is the fact that the people who are complaining
> > ie. starmaker, are so offended because he is so afraid that his god
> > may not be real.
>
> They are literally afraid of nothing.


where everything is supposely suppose to come from...

[raven1]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:44:38 -0700, The Starmaker

*Yawn*. Go away, child.

<plonk>

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >Have you notice, atheist don't mention...The Devil? Cause atheist want
> >to go to Heaven.
>

> No actually if you would use your brain.. If there is no god then
> there is no devil. atheists dont talk about god either unluess queued
> to do so

If there is
no god no devil
then there is
no good or evil
no positive or negative
no right or wrong
no plus or minus
no + or -
no good or bad
no love or hate

God is not bad. God is not evil. God is not negative. God is not wrong.


God is good.
God is positive.
God is Love.


The Starmaker

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 12:01:56 -0700, The Starmaker
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

>bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>>
>> >Have you notice, atheist don't mention...The Devil? Cause atheist want
>> >to go to Heaven.
>>
>> No actually if you would use your brain.. If there is no god then
>> there is no devil. atheists dont talk about god either unluess queued
>> to do so
>
>If there is
> no god no devil
>then there is
>no good or evil

So you claim. Please support your assertion.

[The Starmaker]

_.-._ ..-.. _.-._
(_-.-_) /|'.'|\ (_'.'_)
.\-/. \)\-/(/ ,-.-.
__/ /-. \__ __/ ' ' \__ __/'-'-'\__
( (___/___) ) ( (_/-._\_) ) ( (_/ \_) )
'.Oo___oO.' '.Oo___oO.' '.Oo___oO.'

see no evil hear no evil talk no evil

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:16:28 -0700

The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Is this an Atheist convention?

No. This is the "alt.atheism" newsgroup.

> Hawkings quotes from Augustine, and the audience laughs. (the
> audience must be all dummies if they didn't know he is quoting
> Augustine)

That's a fallacious ad hominem attack against the audience, unless the
audience was supposed to have a minimum set of scholarly qualifications
of some sort (please clarify if that's the case).

Who is "Hawkings?" (Please clarify.)

> “What was God doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell
> for people who asked such questions?”

What divine creation are you referring to? As far as I'm aware, there
aren't any.

> http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/17/17797756-stephen-hawking-lays-out-case-for-big-bang-without-god?lite
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqG33AOG97w
>
> Big Bang without God, ...where have I heard this before? Is this a
> re-run?

Science class in elementary school? That's one place where most people
hear about it at least once in their lives in most technologically
advanced modern civilizations that value education and freedom.

> Stephen Hawkings *still* believes in God, doesn't he? He cannot get
> that Guy out-of-his-mind.

Who is "Stephen Hawkings?" (He's obviously not "Stephen Hawking,"
clearly an atheist, who you mentioned earlier.)

> The Starmaker
>
> Why do you think God put him in that wheel chair? There is a reason,
> did you know that?? It's where he belongs..people like him all they
> do is build atomic bombs.

Who is "The Starmaker?" (Please clarify.)

If a deity permanently confines any able-to-walk person into a
wheelchair without their consent, then that deity is cruel and
oppressive.

Are you implying that those who engage in the activity of "building
atomic bombs" are malevolent? (My own anecdotal experience with people
who work with this type of technology is that they're not malevolent.)

> According to him, you got a thousand years to live.

Are you repeating something that "The Starmaker" suggested?

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"This year? A factory of semiconductors. Next year? A factory of
whole conductors!"
-- Todor Zhivkov

[Steve O]

On 20/04/2013 20:01, The Starmaker wrote:
> bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>>
>>> Have you notice, atheist don't mention...The Devil? Cause atheist want
>>> to go to Heaven.
>>
>> No actually if you would use your brain.. If there is no god then
>> there is no devil. atheists dont talk about god either unluess queued
>> to do so
>
> If there is
> no god no devil
> then there is
> no good or evil

Non sequiteur.
The rest fails.

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >If there is
> > no god no devil
> >then there is
> >no good or evil
> >no positive or negative
> >no right or wrong
> >no plus or minus
> >no + or -

> Your god is not an eletric charge

> >God is not bad. God is not evil. God is not negative. God is not wrong.

> Yes your god is mean bad hateful yada yada
> I have already said this but I will say it again. any entity that
> would allow others to kill torture murder and mame in its name is all
> those things.. IE. almost every war every suicide bomber you fill in
> the rest.

> >God is good.
> >God is positive.
> >God is Love.

> How so?
> dude you are a scared dumbass.


What does God have to do with religion?

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >There is no such thing as an athiest, ..there are only people *claiming*
> >to be atheist.
> >
>

> Yes there is such a thing


No, there is no such thing..


It's just self-hypnosis.

God lives inside us all, that includes atheist..

that includes Dolly Parton and idi amin.


The Starmaker

[linuxgal]

The Starmaker wrote:

> God lives inside us all, that includes atheist..
>
> that includes Dolly Parton

Plenty of room in THERE.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:38:25 -0700, The Starmaker
> <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Where are all these God fearing atheist coming from????
>
> I dont have a fear of your god I have a fear of the people that
> believe in a god. and use thier god to kill people and start wars ie.
> WWII, The world trade centers, and now the boston bombings. and that
> is just to name a few.


I know guys that use God to get into girls panties...I might have use that
technique a few times myself.

You should be more concern somebody using god to get into your sister panties.


In Israel, whenever they want to kill their neigbors women and children at lands
near them, they dig up Jesus Christs artifacts and say, "We found Jesus grave!"
Then they go about killing their neigbors.


Everyone uses God to get into girls panties. Whats wrong with that? I don't even think it's against the law.

And since God lives in us all, He is one of the guys pulling down your sister's panties.


I really think people don't understand God. He is not even that religious...


The Starmaker

[The Starmaker]

I don't how you people can tell the difference...
they all have slanted eyes!

Is it slanted a different way? Sorry, they don't tech this stuff in skool.

Is there a class people take that explains how to tell the difference?

There is this girl, chinese, japaneese, korean, I don't know which...
she wears a t-shirt that reads:

Why Are You Staring At Me?


The Starmaker


Does anyone know the answer to that question, or am I the only one as usual?

[linuxgal]

The Starmaker wrote:
> I know guys that use God to get into girls panties...I might have use that
> technique a few times myself.

Other guys just raid girls' panty drawers when they want to get into
girls' panties.

[William December Starr]

In article <5172E6...@ix.netcom.com>,

The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> said:

> God is not bad. God is not evil. God is not negative. God is not wrong.
>
> God is good.
> God is positive.
> God is Love.
> The Starmaker

If God allows you to exist, he can't be very good.

Now please go kill yourself. Thank you.

-- wds

[Tom McDonald]

On 4/21/2013 4:15 PM, linuxgal wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>> I know guys that use God to get into girls panties...I might have use
>> that
>> technique a few times myself.
>
> Other guys just raid girls' panty drawers when they want to get into
> girls' panties.
>

I just buy them myself...

erm., I have said too much...

[Mitchell Holman]

linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in news:74qdnVR_-pGP0-
nMnZ2dnUV...@giganews.com:

> The Starmaker wrote:
>
>> God lives inside us all, that includes atheist..
>>
>> that includes Dolly Parton
>
> Plenty of room in THERE.

"You have no idea how much
money it costs to look this cheap"

- Dolly Parton

[The Starmaker]

You're missing the whole thing.

God is good.
God is positive.

Devil is bad
Devil is negative.

That's two, count them, *two* different sides.

One side is good
the other side is bad.

God is on the good side! He's alllll goood!

I already pointed out, God lives in us all...
He just happens to live on one side only.

The good side!

The + side.

Is this for some reason not clear? I thought I made it simple to understand.



The Starmaker

[The Starmaker]

Someone asked a question and I seem to be the only one in the world with the answer...

A baby in Brazil is born with two heads. They usually remove one head...
The question they asked was:
"If both their brains are functioning, how are we going to choose which head to remove?"


The answer is simple! The head on the left side.


The Starmaker

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >You're missing the whole thing.

> What you dont realize is that you are missing the whole thing

>
> >God is good.
> >God is positive.
> >Devil is bad
> >Devil is negative.
>

> No god created evil
> god created bad AND
> god created the devil

> >That's two, count them, *two* different sides.
> >
> >One side is good
> >the other side is bad.

> 2+2=4
> in other words according to your rules and standards your god is good
> and evil
> kinda hipocritical.. LOL does that sound famaliar? dude you are
> digging yourself a hole deeper and deeper just give up while you have
> a change You have Lost the God argument like 3243434y39 times already


Where did you get this idea God created the Devil?


God is good. God was created Good.

[SkyEyes]

Who created God, good or otherwise?

[The Starmaker]

SkyEyes wrote:
>
> On Apr 22, 3:19 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
> >
> > > >You're missing the whole thing.
> > > What you dont realize is that you are missing the whole thing
> >
> > > >God is good.
> > > >God is positive.
> > > >Devil is bad
> > > >Devil is negative.
> >
> > > No god created evil
> > > god created bad AND
> > > god created the devil
> > > >That's two, count them, *two* different sides.
> >
> > > >One side is good
> > > >the other side is bad.
> > > 2+2=4
> > > in other words according to your rules and standards your god is good
> > > and evil
> > > kinda hipocritical.. LOL does that sound famaliar? dude you are
> > > digging yourself a hole deeper and deeper just give up while you have
> > > a change You have Lost the God argument like 3243434y39 times already
> >
> > Where did you get this idea God created the Devil?
> >
> > God is good. God was created Good.
>
> Who created God, good or otherwise?

What difference does it make who His parents are, Brennda? Do you go around asking your friends "Who Created You?"

[SkyEyes]

Yes, it absolutely *does*. I know who created my friends - their
biological parents did.

You claim your god was created. I want to know who created him. Put
up or shut up.

And while you're at it, you can provide logical, objective, verifiable
evidence that this god of yours *actually exists*. Until and unless
you do that, you're just blowin' smoke.

[The Starmaker]

I don't understand the question! You know your friends were created by their biological parents, it's the same thing..
God was created by His biological parents. They brought up a nice good kid, what else can I say? Don't aks me what
high school he went to, please....i don't exactly keep track on everyone in the universe.

God lives in us all. You don't have to go too far to search for him, do you? He's right inside you. I already told
where to look...if you're looking for his exact location inside you...look in the mirror and look at the pretty side of you.

God is on the pretty side.

The good side.

You want to see God, look right in the mirror...you can dsraw a straight line down, ...He's on the pretty side.

I don't want to get on your bad side, Brennnda.


The Starmaker

[casey]

On 23 Apr, 13:00, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> [...]

> You want to see God, look right in the mirror...you can dsraw a straight line down, ...He's on the pretty side.

So in my case God is on both sides :)

[SkyEyes]

You've been on my bad side since you came in here spouting your
horseshit, Starmaker.

[The Starmaker]

Okay, do you know which side is your bad side on, on your left side or on your right side? Maybe you need help, Brenda...
take a sheet of white paper and cover half of your face while looking in the mirror. Your bad side is the side that
doesn't look so pretty. It's the opposite of your pretty side..

Everybody has the same side, good on one side, bad on the other. Now, which side is the good side, left or right? There is only one answer!

I'm trying to make it simple. I know I have a tendency to sometimes to make things...tooo simple. It's just my advertising executive nature.

We in the advertising business like to keep thing...simple. That way all the consumers understand us.

Our motto is KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).

Now, once you discover which side is your good side, then you found God.


The Starmaker




I honestly don't know how I got on your bad side, ...Brenda. I'm only trying to show people...God.

[SkyEyes]

I'll tell you how you got on my bad side, Starmaker: you came in here
spouting gibberish that has no objective evidence to back it up.

From what I can gather from your drivel, your claim is the *everyone*
is "God," a definition that renders the concept effectively
meaningless. I can just as easily say that God is my deaf, blue-eyed
white cat. What's the difference?

[The Starmaker]

I didn't say "*everyone* is "God,", ....I said "God lives in us
all".....dwell - reside - exist - inhabit..


You have a deaf cat? I wonder why? How does your voice sound? Is it "The
Irritator"?
http://s.wsj.net/media/HowYouReallyTalk0423.jpg



The Starmaker

[SkyEyes]

Fine. Next question is this: Got any logical, objective, verifiable
evidence that this god-critter of yours *actually exists*? Don't
respond with your usual platitudes about people's "pretty side" or god
"living in us." Present some *evidence* that what you assert is
actually true?

>
> You have a deaf cat? I wonder why?

Yes. In both cats and dogs, the gene that triggers the formation of
the inner ear is linked, oddly enough, to the gene that specifies coat
and eye color. If the gene for coat and eye color is turned off, then
the inner ear never forms and you get a white, blue-eyed animal who is
stone deaf.

How does your voice sound? Is it "The
> Irritator"?http://s.wsj.net/media/HowYouReallyTalk0423.jpg

To Snowy, my voice doesn't "sound" at all. I communicate with her
using hand signals.

[Mason Barge]

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:39:40 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net>
wrote:

Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
exist?

[William December Starr]

In article <ismgn8pcsmgqv5gin...@4ax.com>,
Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:

> SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Fine. Next question is this: Got any logical, objective,
>> verifiable evidence that this god-critter of yours *actually
>> exists*? Don't respond with your usual platitudes about people's
>> "pretty side" or god "living in us." Present some *evidence*
>> that what you assert is actually true?
>
> Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
> exist?

The burden of proof is on the party making the claim. Trollmaker
has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God doesn't exist?

-- wds

[Mason Barge]

On 24 Apr 2013 19:05:40 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December

Starr) wrote:

>In article <ismgn8pcsmgqv5gin...@4ax.com>,
>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>
>> SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Fine. Next question is this: Got any logical, objective,
>>> verifiable evidence that this god-critter of yours *actually
>>> exists*? Don't respond with your usual platitudes about people's
>>> "pretty side" or god "living in us." Present some *evidence*
>>> that what you assert is actually true?
>>
>> Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
>> exist?
>
>The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.

SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.

>Trollmaker
>has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God doesn't exist?

That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"

[The Starmaker]

god-critter? God is not a cat!

> Don't
> respond with your usual platitudes about people's "pretty side" or god
> "living in us." Present some *evidence* that what you assert is
> actually true?

We're talking about God here...He is a very complex individual.

You haven't told me which side is your pretty side! Your right side or your left side?
I'm trying to help you find God within you. In order for me to "Present some *evidence*",
I have to give you His location..His exact location.

He's on your Good side!

Your positive side
Your Pretty side

In order for me to "Present *evidence*",
you need to be able to recognize Him when you look at Him.

I have to help you recognize what God looks like, otherwise
you won't see Him even if you're looking at Him.

And the best way to help you see Him is to first
tell you where exactly he is located...on your pretty side!!!!

Did you bother to look????

Okay, maybe this stuff is a little too hard.

I'll make it easy for you...

God lives inside us all.

You can recognzie Him easily because He is Good, ...He looks Good.

Your pretty side is on your Right side. Your Good side is on your right side.

God lives, reside, inhabits, dwells on your right side of you, not your left side.

Take your lipstick and draw a line from the top of your head in the middle and
draw a straight line all the way down. You know can see your right side and your left side.

God is on the right side!

Take a look!



The Starmaker


He's on *everybody's* right side!

Do you have a boyfriend Brenda? Take a white sheet of paper and scotch tape it to half of his face.
Look at his right side, then cover the right side and look at his left side.

I have to warn you first....what you will see on his left side might frighten you.

[raven1]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:37:51 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 24 Apr 2013 19:05:40 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December
>Starr) wrote:
>
>>In article <ismgn8pcsmgqv5gin...@4ax.com>,
>>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>>> SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fine. Next question is this: Got any logical, objective,
>>>> verifiable evidence that this god-critter of yours *actually
>>>> exists*? Don't respond with your usual platitudes about people's
>>>> "pretty side" or god "living in us." Present some *evidence*
>>>> that what you assert is actually true?
>>>
>>> Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
>>> exist?
>>
>>The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>
>SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.

No "proof" is required to dismiss an unsupported existential claim.

[duke]

On 24 Apr 2013 19:05:40 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:

>> Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
>> exist?

>The burden of proof is on the party making the claim. Trollmaker
>has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God doesn't exist?

We see the effects of God's presence. Like electricity which we also can't see.

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[duke]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:37:51 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 24 Apr 2013 19:05:40 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December
>Starr) wrote:
>
>>In article <ismgn8pcsmgqv5gin...@4ax.com>,
>>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>>> SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fine. Next question is this: Got any logical, objective,
>>>> verifiable evidence that this god-critter of yours *actually
>>>> exists*? Don't respond with your usual platitudes about people's
>>>> "pretty side" or god "living in us." Present some *evidence*
>>>> that what you assert is actually true?
>>>
>>> Got any logical, objective, verifiable evidence that God *doesn't*
>>> exist?
>>
>>The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>
>SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.

She can't even offer evidence much less proof.

[The Starmaker]

Olrik wrote:
>
> Le 2013-04-24 18:25, Mason Barge a �crit :

> First, define what you mean by �god�.


Can you imagine this this Girl telling me not to use "pretty side" and "living in us", telling me what
*criterias* to use to define God! The Audacity!....


I'm the fuckin God Expert here!!! What does an *atheist* know about God, they don't even believe in one!!!

God is the consciousness of the universe.


The nerveeee, i'm telling you....these these women...when a guy slaps a woman on her face, ...to to make sure she is obedient,
he takes his right hand (the good side of himself) and slaps her left side of here face, (the bad side of herself).

You have to contain the Bad. Because...sometimes the bad takes over, and wins. Good doesn't always win, but more times than Bad does.

We all have out good and bad.

Good is on the right side, Bad is on the left side.

I like to watch that TV show Cheaters...and when the girl goes after the Cheater, she always tries to slap his cheating side.

And she always hits the left side...

the badass side.

God will always tell you when you start to cheat, "Why are you cheating on her?"

And you have to ignore Him if you want to have some fun, youknowwatimean?


The Starmaker


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dsUXAEzaC3Q#t=67s

[William December Starr]

In article <dqmin81b7gkblovnd...@4ax.com>,

Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:

> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
>> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>
> SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.

Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
that requires proof.

>> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
>> doesn't exist?
>
> That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"

I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I believe
that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."

I don't know which camp Brenda is in.

-- wds

[Christopher A. Lee]

On 25 Apr 2013 20:40:16 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December

Starr) wrote:

>In article <dqmin81b7gkblovnd...@4ax.com>,
>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>>> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>>
>> SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>
>Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
>that requires proof.
>
>>> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
>>> doesn't exist?
>>
>> That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>
>I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
>whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I believe
>that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."
>
>I don't know which camp Brenda is in.
>
>-- wds

You've been around long enough to know that the "blurriness" is
because theists who can't think outside their religious paradigm
imagine they get to define atheists as though their god were real
_and_ that we believe it doesn't exist.

We're simply people who aren't theist and cannot be described
according to theistic presumptions that are only granted inside the
theist's religious paradigm.

That would be like Hindus defining Christians in terms of believing
Krishna doesn't exist instead of what they actually are.

Yes - most dictionaries include both definitions, and yes - there is
argument over them.

But it's theists arguing for one and atheists actually describing
ourselves for the other.

If only the hard of thinking could think outside the box they would
accept that we are outside and cannot be described as if we were
inside it, and all their misconceptions and misrepresentations would
go away.

[Les]

On 25 Apr 2013 20:40:16 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December

Starr) wrote:

>In article <dqmin81b7gkblovnd...@4ax.com>,
>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>>> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>>
>> SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>
>Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
>that requires proof.
>
>>> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
>>> doesn't exist?
>>
>> That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>
>I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
>whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I believe
>that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."
>
>I don't know which camp Brenda is in.

Brenda is either in the:
A: 'I do not believe gods exist' camp
or
B: "I do not believe gods exists and also believe they do
not exist' camp

It would be illogical to believe gods do not exist whilst at
the same time believe they do exist!

but it is perfectly logical to not believe gods exists without
actually believing they do not exist.

People who believe there are gods have a special word
to describe them. That word is 'theist'

Those of us without any god beliefs need no special
word to descibe us we are simply 'not theist' (which is often
abbreviated to a- theist or atheist)

That is because believing gods exists is a belief
that you adopt after you are born usually in adolescence
and from parents who also believe. Increasing people
are abandoning such beliefs when they are more mature
and returning to the natural state they were born with.

Very few people adopt a god belief relgion in maturity
(where they had none before).

If you think you are now a mature person you might
like think about that and consider dropping something
for which you can offer no justification. You were
asked above for some and dodged the question. Think about
why you needed to do that.

--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu

[Les]

Sorry it was Mr. Anonymous (hiding behind the mask 'starmaker')
this last paragraph was addressed to.

He is the one who seriously needs to rethink his life
though I doubt he has matured yet. He comes across
as a silly adolescent thinking he is playing games with us.

[The Starmaker]

I think it should go without saying...
that the Left side is the Bad side..
the negative side
the evil side

The Left side is..The Devil.


The Devil lives inside of everyone.

Take a piece of paper
cover the right side
and you will see The Devil.

Cover the left side and you will see God.

God is Good, the Devil is Bad...
i mean this is simple stuff.


Now, how can it be possible for anyone to be an atheist if God is right there inside of him, ...on his right side?


Someone posted here in this thread that he was pretty on both sides...that's IMPOSSIBLE!!!

The Devil isn't pretty. In fact The Devil is completely Evil.

Scary too!

You have people in the 'scientific community' who have inside them, good and evil...
the evil part of them are the ones that build atomic bombs, computer viruses, and medicine that kill people.

Ever see those commercials on TV of Good drugs that can help you, read the disclaimer...or they say it very very fast.


If your mother tells you Spinach is good for you, slap her!


The Starmaker

[Mason Barge]

On 25 Apr 2013 20:40:16 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December

Starr) wrote:

>In article <dqmin81b7gkblovnd...@4ax.com>,
>Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> said:
>
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>>> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>>
>> SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>
>Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
>that requires proof.
>
>>> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
>>> doesn't exist?
>>
>> That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>
>I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
>whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I believe
>that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."

Okay, this from dictionary.com:

"Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined
toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An
atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine
beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything
about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from
commitment to any religious doctrine. "

And really, I find the distinction razor-thin, anyway.

But I think I should apologize for being disingenuous myself, really.
There is no scientific proof that God exists, and there is no
scientific proof possible that God does not exist. To the best of my
knowledge, at least.

[SkyEyes]

On Apr 25, 5:40 pm, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> In article <dqmin81b7gkblovndmq8hcr18ir63su...@4ax.com>,
> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> said:

>
> > wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
> >> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>
> > SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>
> Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
> that requires proof.
>
> >> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
> >> doesn't exist?
>
> > That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>
> I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
> whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I  believe
> that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."
>
> I don't know which camp Brenda is in.
>
> -- wds

Brenda is in the "I do not believe that God exists" camp. I lack a
belief in any deities because I have never seen any evidence that they
*do* exist. I believe that makes me a "weak" atheist.

--

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist

[linuxgal]

SkyEyes wrote:
> Brenda is in the "I do not believe that God exists" camp.

Nice campfire, girl. Here's a stick with a marshmallow.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:19:23 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net>
wrote:

>On Apr 25, 5:40 pm, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>> In article <dqmin81b7gkblovndmq8hcr18ir63su...@4ax.com>,
>> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>> > wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>> >> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>>
>> > SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>>
>> Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
>> that requires proof.
>>
>> >> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
>> >> doesn't exist?
>>
>> > That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>>
>> I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
>> whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I  believe
>> that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."
>>
>> I don't know which camp Brenda is in.
>>
>> -- wds
>
>Brenda is in the "I do not believe that God exists" camp. I lack a
>belief in any deities because I have never seen any evidence that they
>*do* exist. I believe that makes me a "weak" atheist.
>

Weak, strong... it matters not, Brenda. I feel all Yoda when I say
"There is theism, and there is atheism. And that is all."

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[The Starmaker]

You don't actually believe *everything* that exist is for...nothing, 'about' nothing?

I gave proof, what more proof do you require? You want me to send Him over to you house and walk through the door without knocking? You'll\
claim He's David Copperfield! You couldn't handle the proof. You cannot even dscribe what the proof should be!

He's right inside you, what do you want...Pictures? Is that it, you want to see a picture of God? Will that satisfied you?

Cause I have no problem uploading photos of what God looks like.



The Starmaker


But first you got to be able to recognize Him when you see Him. God is Good....do you know "what good looks like"?

I mean, do you know "what Good looks like"??

I'll even show you what Bad looks like, ...he looks like the Devil.

What else would Bad look like?....


That is why when that baby in Brazil was born with two heads and the doctors asked:
"If both their brains are functioning, how are we going to choose which head to remove?"


The answer was simple for me, the left head, it's the Devil!!!

My Gosh, you don't want to remove the right head, that's God!!!!


I'm beggining to come to the conclusion, you guys don't get it!!!!

[Mason Barge]

"It was God's wisdom that decided the world could not know Him by its
intelligence; it pleased God to save those who believe by the
irrationality of preaching."

1 Corinthians 1:20

[casey]

On Apr 27, 7:46 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Mason Barge wrote:
>

> > On 25 Apr 2013 20:40:16 -0400, wdst...@panix.com (William December

> > Starr) wrote:
>
> > >In article <dqmin81b7gkblovndmq8hcr18ir63su...@4ax.com>,
> > >Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> said:
>

And I am coming to the conclusion you are irrational and dangerous.

[Alex W]

Arguably, there is also a third position: the "Never thought
about it one way or the other" attitude. That's people who
couldn't give a toss either way because they never worked up
the energy to consider the question in the first place. I
do believe I have met folks like that: so caught up in the
immediacy of their own lives that those "bigger questions"
are an unwanted intrusion into their busy life. If asked,
they will look and go "ah, whatever, dude" and continue
right on with what they were doing.

[casey]

On Apr 27, 9:14 am, Alex W <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:34:41 -0400, Dreamer In Colore wrote:

> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:19:23 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net>

For every declared atheist I suspect there are hundreds of
educated people, even those that, for social and family
reasons, might attend church, that have their doubts about
this god thing but see no value in making an issue of it.

[The Starmaker]

bil...@microsoft.com wrote:
>
> >So you would say joy is a lack of fear?
>
> correct. if you are not afraid of anything then you are happy or at
> least content. when it is situational and your fear spikes in the
> negative then you will precieve that as joy
>
> >Is envy the fear or missing out on something?
>
> envy or jealousy can be described in that manner or you may fear that
> the next person has something you dont. something that may have an
> effect on your survival. you precieve this as envy
>
> >
> >There has been significant research into the role
> >emotions play in how the brain works. A book I
> >have read on the subject is,
> >"The Emotional Brain", Joseph LeDoux.
> >
> >The role of emotion in making intelligent decisions
> >is also being recognized and explained in books
> >like "Emotional Intelligence" Daniel Goleman
> >which starts with this quote:
>
> The role of emotion making intelligent decesions. The title says it
> all. If you make a decision about something you dont feel good about
> your fear is telling you that something is wrong with the situation.
> As I said you have to go back to when humans were not homo sapians yet
> but perhaps still in the homo stage of evoultion. All there is was
> fear. Fear about reproduction about the next meal fears about
> offspring and at later stages fears about the future and the like.
>
> >
> >"Anyone can become angry - that is easy. But to
> >be angry with the right person, to the right
> >degree, at the right time, for the right purpose,
> >and in the right way - that is not easy."
> >Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics.


There is only Love and Hate, ...nothing else exist.


You either love a person or you hate them, ...there is no..right degree or any other degrees.

God is Love. God doesn't hate.

The Devil is not Love...the devil is hate.

These are simple concepts...everything else is garbage.


The Starmaker

I Love Dolly Parton!


and I don't remember ever listening to her music..

I hate Barbara Striesand, but I love her music.


There is only Love and Hate, ...nothing else exist.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:04:49 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Because God is a weird little sky pixie whose omniscience and
omnipotence require bolstering by the supplication of weaker
creatures, right?

Why would an omniscient, omnipotent supernatural being need
worshippers or preaching? If they were capable of creating universes,
the notion that they would require anything from weaker creatures is
laughable at best, and dangerously crazy at worst.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[Dreamer In Colore]

Well, according to the current definitions, that would be agnosticism.
And I'm starting to lean towards Sam Harris' notion that agnosticism
is de facto atheism.

Theism is the active position of belief. Atheism is the lack of
belief. Anti-theism is the active position of disbelief.

For those people that don't give a toss... none of this has meaning
anyway, so as far as the philosophical arguments go, we're just as
batshit loony as theists for arguing at all.

What they haven't considered yet are the consequences of "live and let
live", and I fully accept that I'm in a truly lucky position of
privilege to even begin to talk about this kind of thing.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[casey]

On Apr 27, 11:36 am, Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincol...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> [...]

> Theism is the active position of belief. Atheism is the lack of
> belief. Anti-theism is the active position of disbelief.
>
> For those people that don't give a toss... none of this has meaning
> anyway, so as far as the philosophical arguments go, we're just as
> batshit loony as theists for arguing at all.
>
> What they haven't considered yet are the consequences of "live and let
> live", and I fully accept that I'm in a truly lucky position of
> privilege to even begin to talk about this kind of thing.

The problem with accepting irrational thinking which doesn't
result in antisocial behavior is that it gives credence to those
that use irrational thinking to justify their antisocial behavior.




>
> Cheers,
> Dreamer
> AA 2306

[The Starmaker]

God is on the Right side, intelligence is on the left side.
http://889yoga.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/mercedez-benz-brain-large.jpg

[SkyEyes]

On Apr 26, 2:46 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Mason Barge wrote:
>

> > On 25 Apr 2013 20:40:16 -0400, wdst...@panix.com (William December

> > Starr) wrote:
>
> > >In article <dqmin81b7gkblovndmq8hcr18ir63su...@4ax.com>,
> > >Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> said:
>

> > >> wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
> > >>> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim.
>
> > >> SkyEyes demands proof, but offers none.
>
> > >Then you should call her on it in a thread wherein she makes a claim
> > >that requires proof.
>
> > >>> Trollmaker has said that God exists; has SkyEyes said that God
> > >>> doesn't exist?
>
> > >> That's disingenuous. "Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist"
>
> > >I think we both know that the word "atheist" is blurry as to
> > >whether it means, with regard to a given person, "I  believe
> > >that God does not exist" or "I do not believe that God exists."
>
> > Okay, this from dictionary.com:
>
> > "Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined
> > toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An
> > atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine
> > beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything
> > about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from
> > commitment to any religious doctrine. "
>
> > And really, I find the distinction razor-thin, anyway.
>
> > But I think I should apologize for being disingenuous myself, really.
> > There is no scientific proof that God exists, and there is no
> > scientific proof possible that God does not exist. To the best of my
> > knowledge, at least.
>
> You don't actually believe *everything* that exist is for...nothing, 'about' nothing?

Yup, pretty much. Anything else is argument from incredulity.

>
> I gave proof, what more proof do you require? You want me to send Him over to you house and walk through the door without knocking?

That would be a good start. Of course, you can't do this, but I'd
appreciate it if you'd try.

> You'll\
> claim He's David Copperfield!

I think I can tell the difference between David Copperfield and the
creator of the universe, time, matter, energy, and everything we know
of.

> You couldn't handle the proof. You cannot even dscribe what the proof should be!

Here's the thing: *if* a god actually exists, and *if* it wants me to
"believe in" it, and it's omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and
omnibenevolent as advertised, then it already knows what it would take
to convince me. The fact that such evidence is not forthcoming means
either (1) no god exists; or (2) one exists, but doesn't care whether
I believe in it or not.

--

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist

[skye...@yahoo.com]

Of course other things exist. Giant sequoia trees, and mayflies, and
continental drift, and algebra all exist, and have nothing to do
whatsoever with either hate or love.

>
> You either love a person or you hate them, ...there is no..right degree or any other degrees.

Not true. There's a whole raft of people whom I know but do not have
an opinion about either way.

>
> God is Love. God doesn't hate.

"God" is an idea between your ears, nothing more.

>
> The Devil is not Love...the devil is hate.

The Devil is God's exact equal.

>
> These are simple concepts...everything else is garbage.

So you say, but you have yet to come up with even an iota of evidence
for any of your assertions.

[William December Starr]

In article <67158126-f45a-4bea...@af5g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> said:

> The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't actually believe *everything* that exist is
>> for...nothing,
>> 'about' nothing?
>
> Yup, pretty much. Anything else is argument from incredulity.

Or its near-cousin, argument from "I find the alternative too
horrible to contemplate."

By the way, Starmaker is an inveterate troll. You might want to
consider not letting him eat any more of your time.

-- wds