Chez Watt

[Walter Bushell]

In the impossible to argue with the logic department

> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there a holy bible?
>
> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>

Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*! How could it not
be the Holy Bible?

--
This space unintentionally left blank.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:

>In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>
>> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Is there a holy bible?
>>
>> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>
>
>Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!

So was the Book of Mormon.

It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.

> How could it not
>be the Holy Bible?

Indeed, how not...?
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."

- McNameless

[Walter Bushell]

In article <tkdgf8pngcb3edq0m...@4ax.com>,

Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
> >
> >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Is there a holy bible?
> >>
> >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
> >>
> >
> >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
> So was the Book of Mormon.
>
> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
> > How could it not
> >be the Holy Bible?
>
> Indeed, how not...?

How about if the angel was a fallen angel? Surely they are fiendishly
clever and can masquerade as an angle of the Light? Certainly the
average Joe Smith could not tell the difference and neither could the
average camel humper.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:18:03 -0500, the following appeared

in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:

>In article <tkdgf8pngcb3edq0m...@4ax.com>,
> Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>
>> >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>> >
>> >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Is there a holy bible?
>> >>
>> >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>>
>> So was the Book of Mormon.
>>
>> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>>
>> > How could it not
>> >be the Holy Bible?
>>
>> Indeed, how not...?
>
>How about if the angel was a fallen angel? Surely they are fiendishly
>clever and can masquerade as an angle of the Light? Certainly the
>average Joe Smith could not tell the difference and neither could the
>average camel humper.

But we have the assurance of those who wrote all of them
that they couldn't be mistaken since they are confident they
were divinely inspired.

Ummm, wait a minute there...

[Ron O]

On Jan 17, 11:38�am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>
> >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>
> >> > Is there a holy bible?
>
> >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>
> >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
> So was the Book of Mormon.
>
> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.

The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
for the translation.

Ron Okimoto

[John S. Wilkins]

Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
> >
> > >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
> >
> > >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
> >
> > >> > Is there a holy bible?
> >
> > >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
> >
> > >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
> >
> > So was the Book of Mormon.
> >
> > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
> The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
> have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
> for the translation.

And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
*need* to be translated.

>
> Ron Okimoto
> >
> > > How could it not
> > >be the Holy Bible?
> >
> > Indeed, how not...?
> > --
> >
> > Bob C.
> >
> > "Evidence confirming an observation is
> > evidence that the observation is wrong."
> >
> > - McNameless

--
John S. Wilkins, Associate, Philosophy, University of Sydney
Honorary Fellow, University of Melbourne
- http://evolvingthoughts.net

[Walter Bushell]

In article <1kwy0vb.gtq49mv03yhN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,

jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

> Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> > > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
> > >
> > > >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
> > >
> > > >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
> > >
> > > >> > Is there a holy bible?
> > >
> > > >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
> > >
> > > >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
> > >
> > > So was the Book of Mormon.
> > >
> > > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
> >
> > The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
> > have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
> > for the translation.
>
> And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
> *need* to be translated.

Likewise the Torah, or at least that's what one of my former cow
orkers told me.

> >
> > Ron Okimoto
> > >
> > > > How could it not
> > > >be the Holy Bible?
> > >
> > > Indeed, how not...?
> > > --
> > >
> > > Bob C.
> > >
> > > "Evidence confirming an observation is
> > > evidence that the observation is wrong."
> > >
> > > - McNameless

--

[Ron O]

On Jan 18, 6:51�pm, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

> Ron O <rokim...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> > > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> > > >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>
> > > >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>
> > > >> > Is there a holy bible?
>
> > > >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>
> > > >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
> > > So was the Book of Mormon.
>
> > > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
> > The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. �An angel may
> > have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
> > for the translation.
>
> And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
> *need* to be translated.

You mean to say that the guys that finally wrote it down knew the
King's English and had Southern accents?

[jillery]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:19:35 -0500, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
wrote:

>In article <1kwy0vb.gtq49mv03yhN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
> jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>
>> Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>> > > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>> > >
>> > > >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>> > >
>> > > >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>> > >
>> > > >> > Is there a holy bible?
>> > >
>> > > >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>> > >
>> > > >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>> > >
>> > > So was the Book of Mormon.
>> > >
>> > > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>> >
>> > The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
>> > have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
>> > for the translation.
>>
>> And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
>> *need* to be translated.
>
>Likewise the Torah, or at least that's what one of my former cow
>orkers told me.

Wouldn't cow orkers be Hindu?

[Mitchell Coffey]

On 1/17/2013 12:38 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
>> In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>>
>>>>> Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is there a holy bible?
>>>
>>> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>>
>>
>> Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
> So was the Book of Mormon.
>
> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
>> How could it not
>> be the Holy Bible?
>
> Indeed, how not...?

The Hebrew Scriptures were dictated by God to Moses, which is a twofer.
And He did it BEFORE most of the stuff happened, which must count for
something.

Mitchell Coffey

[Mitchell Coffey]

On 1/18/2013 7:51 PM, John S. Wilkins wrote:
> Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>>
>>>> In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>>>
>>>>>>> Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>>>
>>>>>> Is there a holy bible?
>>>
>>>>> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>>
>>>> Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>>>
>>> So was the Book of Mormon.
>>>
>>> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>>
>> The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
>> have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
>> for the translation.
>
> And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
> *need* to be translated.

Um, I'm pretty sure God speaks Hebrew. At least it sounds like Hebrew.

Mitchell

[Mitchell Coffey]

On 1/18/2013 8:19 PM, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <1kwy0vb.gtq49mv03yhN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
> jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>
>> Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 17, 11:38 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>>>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a holy bible?
>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>>>
>>>>> Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>>>>
>>>> So was the Book of Mormon.
>>>>
>>>> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>>>
>>> The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
>>> have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
>>> for the translation.
>>
>> And the Q'uran was written in the True Language of God, and does not
>> *need* to be translated.
>
> Likewise the Torah, or at least that's what one of my former cow
> orkers told me.

He did WHAT to cows?!

Mitchell

[John S. Wilkins]

[*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi, not
God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him speaking for
God...]

[Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org]

It's a whimsical mis-spelling of "colleagues".

[Ron O]

On Jan 18, 11:50�pm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchelldotcof...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Deja vu all over again. But seriously, if you've participated in TO
long enough you have to know that the King James version of the Bible
is the written word of God and that it is translated best by the
pulpit pounders that can drawl out seven and days to rhyme with heaven
and Jesus.

Ron Okimoto

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 07:37:34 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ron O
<roki...@cox.net>:

>On Jan 18, 11:50�pm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchelldotcof...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On 1/17/2013 12:38 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>> > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>
>> >> In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>>
>> >>>>> Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>>
>> >>>> Is there a holy bible?
>>
>> >>> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>
>> >> Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>>
>> > So was the Book of Mormon.
>>
>> > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>>
>> >> How could it not
>> >> be the Holy Bible?
>>
>> > Indeed, how not...?
>>
>> The Hebrew Scriptures were dictated by God to Moses, which is a twofer.
>> And He did it BEFORE most of the stuff happened, which must count for
>> something.

>Deja vu all over again. But seriously, if you've participated in TO
>long enough you have to know that the King James version of the Bible
>is the written word of God and that it is translated best by the
>pulpit pounders that can drawl out seven and days to rhyme with heaven
>and Jesus.

But "seven" *does* rhyme with "heaven", and "days", ignoring
the odd syllable, sort of rhymes with "Haysoos".

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:43:13 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ron O
<roki...@cox.net>:

>On Jan 17, 11:38�am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>
>> >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>>
>> >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>>
>> >> > Is there a holy bible?
>>
>> >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>>
>> >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>>
>> So was the Book of Mormon.
>>
>> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
>The book of Morman was decoded from some golden plates. An angel may
>have led Smith to the plates, but he apparently didn't stick around
>for the translation.

Yeah, and the angel had an interesting name; the only real
question is why he chose to Italianize it.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <1kwyp38.11tradbggna18N%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,

jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

And how you know that?

[Mitchell Coffey]

What? But he sure looks like God!

Mitchell

[Nashton]

To the whole lot of you:

Your intransigence, your bigotry and your loathing concerning
Christianity makes me and others, I'm sure, not only sad but angry that
you are nothing but a cohort of bullies lacking any social life outside
this ng.
I wonder if one of your children turned to Christianity what your
reaction would be and if you would want them to read your inanities.

I wonder what Wilkins' University (his employer) would think of the fact
that he has participated in a thread that ridicules and implicitly makes
fun of many who have chosen to follow in the path of Christ. Wouldn't it
be considered discrimination against a group of people?

Your hatred is so profound and your disdain so apparent that I question
how any of you can have any meaningful relationships in your lives.

May God forgive you for your ignorance.

[John S. Wilkins]

Satan told me, and he has an honest face.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <kdf0bv$uqa$1...@dont-email.me>,

How do you know what God looks like? First of all She's Black!

[Walter Bushell]

In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,

jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

> > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi, not
> > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him speaking for
> > > God...]
> >
> > And how you know that?
>
> Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> --

Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
even type that one in a straight line.

[John S. Wilkins]

I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.

[rnorman]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

Wilkins) wrote:
> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:


> > In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
> > jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
> >
> > > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your
rabbi, not
> > > > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him
speaking for
> > > > > God...]
> > > >
> > > > And how you know that?
> > >
> > > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> > > --
> >
> > Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could
not
> > even type that one in a straight line.


> I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
> with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.
> --

I have trouble envisioning you teaching innocent schoolchildren about
the trinity or transubstantistion.

[John S. Wilkins]

Anglican: consubstantiation (unless you are high church, but I specified
evangelical. Also I don't think it's in Hooker's Polity.).

As to the Trinity, well at the time it seemed okay. I learned integer
arithmetic later.

[Walter Bushell]

In article
<almarsoft.3580...@news.eternal-september.org>,

It's a mystery to me too. I'd rather transport gulls across staid
lions for immortal porpoises.

[jillery]

I'm betting God will before you do.

[jillery]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

Wilkins) wrote:

>Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
>> jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>>
>> > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi, not
>> > > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him speaking for
>> > > > God...]
>> > >
>> > > And how you know that?
>> >
>> > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
>> > --
>>
>> Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
>> even type that one in a straight line.
>
>I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
>with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.

I'm betting both planets are grateful you followed a different path.

[jillery]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 20:37:10 -0500, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>

Pervert.

[UC]

On Jan 19, 8:15�pm, rnorman <r_s_nor...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wilkins) wrote:
> > Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:

> > > In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%j...@wilkins.id.au>,

> > > �j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>
> > > > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your
> rabbi, not
> > > > > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him
> speaking for
> > > > > > God...]
>
> > > > > And how you know that?
>
> > > > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> > > > --
>
> > > Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could
> not
> > > even type that one in a straight line.
> > I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
> > with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.
> > --
>
> I have trouble envisioning you teaching innocent schoolchildren about
> the trinity or transubstantistion.

2, 4, 6, 8
Time to transubstantiate!

[UC]

You need help. Religion in general, and Christianity in particular, is
a pestilence!

[Walter Bushell]

In article <s1pmf8ljs3ieone5a...@4ax.com>,

On what grounds are the Dr. (philosophy) Wilkins of today the same
entity as the theology student of yesteryear? Good ole Ship of Theseus
problem.

[John S. Wilkins]

Well in Australia, nonreligious organisations have no say in what people
do or say out of hours, and government organisations are prohibited by
our constitution from discriminating on the basis of religious belief.
It's a good idea - secularism. Protects religious as well as
nonreligious. Nashy should try it. [Actually, I thought Canada did.]

Secondly, my participation in something in no way implies I agree with
the actions of everyone involved, or else just walking along a road
would align me with every sin done by every other walker.

Thirdly, discrimination is not wrong in and of itself: discrimination
that undercuts or injures the rights of others is. Christians might not
like being mocked, but it in no way injures them, especially when those
same Christians are so keen to mock others and insult them. Moat and
beam, Nashy. Moat and beam.

Fourthly I do not mock Christianity in all its forms or practice.
Several of my good friends are Christians, and we have civil
disagreements over good wine or coffee. But I do mock the kind of small
minded ignorance that is made into a virtue by tribal loyalties that
Nashy evinces. I don't hate religion; I hate the wilfully ignorant who
try to control others.

[John S. Wilkins]

Is that misgenusation?

[Earle Jones]

In article <kdf44b$5rt$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.ca>
wrote:

*
Go away, Nashton. You're full of shit and everyone here knows it.

earle
*

[Michael Siemon]

In article <almarsoft.3580...@news.eternal-september.org>,
rnorman <r_s_n...@comcast.net> wrote:

So did he; hence the change of career...

[J. J. Lodder J. J. Lodder]

John S. Wilkins <jo...@wilkins.id.au> wrote:

> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
> > jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
> >
> > > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi,
> > > > > not God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him
> > > > > speaking for God...]
> > > >
> > > > And how you know that?
> > >
> > > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> > > --
> >
> > Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
> > even type that one in a straight line.
>
> I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
> with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.

The best way known to mankind to become an atheist or agnostic.

It worked for Darwin, so it should work for you,

Jan

[eridanus]

El jueves, 17 de enero de 2013 21:18:03 UTC, Walter Bushell escribi�:
> In article <tkdgf8pngcb3edq0m...@4ax.com>,

>
> Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>
> > in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> >
>
> > >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>
> > >
>
> > >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>
> > >> >
>
> > >> >
>
> > >> >
>
> > >> > Is there a holy bible?
>
> > >>
>
> > >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>
> > >>
>
> > >
>
> > >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
> >
>
> > So was the Book of Mormon.
>
> >
>
> > It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
> >
>

> > > How could it not
>
> > >be the Holy Bible?
>
> >
>
> > Indeed, how not...?
>
>
>

> How about if the angel was a fallen angel? Surely they are fiendishly
>
> clever and can masquerade as an angle of the Light? Certainly the
>
> average Joe Smith could not tell the difference and neither could the
>
> average camel humper.

>
>
>
> --
>
> This space unintentionally left blank.

this is an important point for all mystics in the catholic church were
viewed suspiciously, but the "mystic visions" can be either be of "divine"
or "diabolic" origins. The same can said of most holy bibles. What if
the OT was inspired by diabolic angels? Jesus warned about fake messiahs.
Perhaps he was one of the false messiahs as well. If I were a false
messiah, I would be so canny as warning people about fake messiahs. This is
like the well known dilemma in services of intelligence. You never can be
totally sure about the information you are receiving.

Eridanus

[jillery]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 22:58:41 -0500, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>

wrote:

>In article <s1pmf8ljs3ieone5a...@4ax.com>,
> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S.
>> Wilkins) wrote:
>>
>> >Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,
>> >> jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi,
>> >> > > > not
>> >> > > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him speaking
>> >> > > > for
>> >> > > > God...]
>> >> > >
>> >> > > And how you know that?
>> >> >
>> >> > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
>> >> > --
>> >>
>> >> Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
>> >> even type that one in a straight line.
>> >
>> >I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
>> >with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.
>>
>>
>> I'm betting both planets are grateful you followed a different path.
>
>On what grounds are the Dr. (philosophy) Wilkins of today the same
>entity as the theology student of yesteryear? Good ole Ship of Theseus
>problem.

I'm unfamiliar with the Ship of Theseus, but I am glad to know that
the Dr. (philosophy) Wilkins of today exists on this planet, however
and whenever he got here.

[jillery]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:34:45 +1100, jo...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

Could be. Also porpoiseful lion around and gullible travels.

[John S. Wilkins]

The Ship of Theseus is a thought experiment of Hobbes', in which
Theseus' Ship is slowly repaired with new parts, but somebody keeps all
the old bits and eventually rebuilds the Ship, so now there are two: one
that comprises all the original parts and the other that Theseus is
sailing in. Which is the Ship of Theseus?

Somebody has kept all my old bits and somewhere there is a healthy, thin
and undereducated young man who has no idea what is in store for him...

[James Beck]

On Jan 20, 12:42�pm, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

> jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 22:58:41 -0500, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
> > wrote:
>

> > >In article <s1pmf8ljs3ieone5avsq7qqvaa8deth...@4ax.com>,
> > > jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

> > >> Wilkins) wrote:
>
> > >> >Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>

> > >> >> In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%j...@wilkins.id.au>,

Since 90% of household dust is sloughed human skin cells, the odds are
that the somebody saving your old bits is you. A judicious cleaning of
your air ducts and a few incantations, and you could have a
replacement golem tomorrow.

[alextangent]

On Jan 20, 7:42�pm, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:

> jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 22:58:41 -0500, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
> > wrote:
>

> > >In article <s1pmf8ljs3ieone5avsq7qqvaa8deth...@4ax.com>,
> > > jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:03:15 +1100, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S.

> > >> Wilkins) wrote:
>
> > >> >Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>

> > >> >> In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%j...@wilkins.id.au>,

> > >> >> �j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>
> > >> >> > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your
> > >> >> > > > rabbi, not God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said
> > >> >> > > > about him speaking for God...]
>
> > >> >> > > And how you know that?
>
> > >> >> > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> > >> >> > --
>
> > >> >> Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
> > >> >> even type that one in a straight line.
>
> > >> >I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
> > >> >with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.
>
> > >> I'm betting both planets are grateful you followed a different path.
>
> > >On what grounds are the Dr. (philosophy) Wilkins �of today the same
> > >entity as the theology student of yesteryear? Good ole Ship of Theseus
> > >problem.
>
> > I'm unfamiliar with the Ship of Theseus, but I am glad to know that
> > the Dr. (philosophy) Wilkins of today exists on this planet, however
> > and whenever he got here.
>
> The Ship of Theseus is a thought experiment of Hobbes', in which
> Theseus' Ship is slowly repaired with new parts, but somebody keeps all
> the old bits and eventually rebuilds the Ship, so now there are two: one
> that comprises all the original parts and the other that Theseus is
> sailing in. Which is the Ship of Theseus?

In the car world, they are called "bitsa" cars. I know of two cars
that claim to be one and the same car.

The original was very badly crashed, but since they are rare they are
worth restoring. The chassis was replaced with a new chassis from the
original chassis manufacturer, and off the original jig, with many of
the original undamaged parts. The original chassis number, as is
allowed, was used on the replacement. This is standard practice for
badly damaged chassis where you have the original registration
documents.

The very badly damaged chassis was sold; unusually, with the original
chassis registration plate but without the registration documents.
This was an oversight; the plate is normally retained. Or perhaps it
was deliberate, since a scrap chassis is normally not worth much, as
it is the plate that "validates" the original build and hence has the
value.

This chassis was sent to the original chassis manufacturer, and
rebuilt off the original jig, with second hand and new parts to
complete the vehicle. The original plate is registered on this chassis
too; and the original plate is there to prove it. Since there are no
checks on unique chassis numbers in the UK (they simply have to match
the registration document VIN or "vehicle identity number", a quite
separate identifier), there are now two very rare cars of this type
and vintage where there was once only one.

In the eyes of the car fraternity, one of them owns a clone. I know
them both, and neither is willing to admit that his is not the real
thing and just a bitsa.

[Burkhard]

Sorry, no, the infallible source of al wisdom disagrees;
http://transremaxculver.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/items-of-useless-information-no-4/

[Ron O]

> Sorry, no, the infallible source of al wisdom disagrees;http://transremaxculver.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/items-of-useless-inf...

There is nothing to believe in anymore.

Ron Okimoto

[James Beck]

> Sorry, no, the infallible source of al wisdom disagrees;http://transremaxculver.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/items-of-useless-inf...

Fascinating...

[Nashton]

It appears that my presence here disturbs you.
Perhaps you ought to seek some help. I apologize if I caused you any
emotional harm.

[Nashton]

On 13-01-20 12:34 AM, John S. Wilkins wrote:
> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:43:51 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> To the whole lot of you:
>>>
>>> Your intransigence, your bigotry and your loathing concerning
>>> Christianity makes me and others, I'm sure, not only sad but angry that
>>> you are nothing but a cohort of bullies lacking any social life outside
>>> this ng.
>>> I wonder if one of your children turned to Christianity what your
>>> reaction would be and if you would want them to read your inanities.
>>>
>>> I wonder what Wilkins' University (his employer) would think of the fact
>>> that he has participated in a thread that ridicules and implicitly makes
>>> fun of many who have chosen to follow in the path of Christ. Wouldn't it
>>> be considered discrimination against a group of people?
>>>
>>> Your hatred is so profound and your disdain so apparent that I question
>>> how any of you can have any meaningful relationships in your lives.
>>>
>>> May God forgive you for your ignorance.
>>
>>
>> I'm betting God will before you do.

Of course "jillery", the Usenet junkie offers us another non post.

>
> Well in Australia, nonreligious organisations have no say in what people
> do or say out of hours, and government organisations are prohibited by
> our constitution from discriminating on the basis of religious belief.
> It's a good idea - secularism. Protects religious as well as
> nonreligious. Nashy should try it. [Actually, I thought Canada did.]

Nice rant, Wilkins. Were you actually trying to say something?

> Secondly, my participation in something in no way implies I agree with
> the actions of everyone involved, or else just walking along a road
> would align me with every sin done by every other walker.

This is nonsense. Take a long look at the mirror, Wilkins.

>
> Thirdly, discrimination is not wrong in and of itself: discrimination
> that undercuts or injures the rights of others is. Christians might not
> like being mocked, but it in no way injures them, especially when those
> same Christians are so keen to mock others and insult them. Moat and
> beam, Nashy. Moat and beam.

Seems that my post stirred up something in your psyche.
If you think mocking a specific cohort of people because of their
beliefs is not prejudicial and causes no harm, you're delusional.
And there is a great difference between mocking individuals and mocking
groups of people because of characteristics (in this case faith) they share.

>
> Fourthly I do not mock Christianity in all its forms or practice.
> Several of my good friends are Christians, and we have civil
> disagreements over good wine or coffee. But I do mock the kind of small
> minded ignorance that is made into a virtue by tribal loyalties that
> Nashy evinces. I don't hate religion; I hate the wilfully ignorant who
> try to control others.

Your participation in discussions such as these belies your statements.

>

[Nashton]

LOL

What have you done for your fellow man, lately? Have you supported any
campaigns in Africa? Have you been part of Christian organizations whose
sole goal is to help others?
How is Christianity a pestilence when Christians are responsible for so
many charitable organizations and give their time without recompense?

[eridanus]

you can see here an argument to explain my skepticism. Many statements are
like pieces of folklore, even if clothed in modern technical jargon.

Eridanus

[eridanus]

You must forgive your heathen brother, not only 7 times, but seven times
seventy. Forgive and you will be forgiven.

Eridanus

[chris thompson]

On Jan 19, 8:03 pm, j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
> > In article <1kwzqo6.13sfq1xv96albN%j...@wilkins.id.au>,
> >  j...@wilkins.id.au (John S. Wilkins) wrote:
>
> > > > > [*psst* Mitchell, that old guy with the white beard is your rabbi, not
> > > > > God. No, it doesn't matter what your mother said about him speaking for
> > > > > God...]
>
> > > > And how you know that?
>
> > > Satan told me, and he has an honest face.
> > > --
>
> > Johnny, have you ever considered a career in the Church? I could not
> > even type that one in a straight line.
>
> I did first year of theology towards an Anglican evangelical degree,
> with a view to becoming a minister. Long time ago. Another planet.

> --
> John S. Wilkins, Associate, Philosophy, University of Sydney
> Honorary Fellow, University of Melbourne
> -http://evolvingthoughts.net

Even then, trying to emulate Darwin, eh?

Chris

[chris thompson]

Except clipped nails. They're lost forever. If you don't clip your
nails, it just hastens the arrival of Ragnarok.

Chris

[chris thompson]

I believe you.

Chris

[chris thompson]

On Jan 19, 4:43 pm, Nashton <n...@na.ca> wrote:
> To the whole lot of you:
>
> Your intransigence, your bigotry and your loathing concerning
> Christianity makes me and others, I'm sure, not only sad but angry that
> you are nothing but a cohort of bullies lacking any social life outside
> this ng.

If Christianity cannot stand a little fun being poked at it on an
obscure corner of Usenet, what's next? Car bombs, like the Islamic
radicals?

> I wonder if one of your children turned to Christianity what your
> reaction would be and if you would want them to read your inanities.
>

When my daughter went to college one of her first friends took her to
a Baptist singing session. I encouraged her to go, and to keep going.
But she's an adult now, and capable of making reasoned decisions.

> I wonder what Wilkins' University (his employer) would think of the fact
> that he has participated in a thread that ridicules and implicitly makes
> fun of many who have chosen to follow in the path of Christ. Wouldn't it
> be considered discrimination against a group of people?

No. Personal opinions are not "discrimination" in a legal sense. He's
not stopping anyone from getting a job, or buying a house in a
particular neighborhood. I don't know what it's like in Canada, but in
the US you can refuse to sell your house to a person based on their
race, as long as no one else (lawyers, realtors, etc.) are involved.
Also you cannot make an agreement with other neighbors to refuse to
sell based on the race of the buyer. See the difference? (And yeah, it
sucks, but nothing's perfect.)

>
> Your hatred is so profound and your disdain so apparent that I question
> how any of you can have any meaningful relationships in your lives.

"Hatred" seems a rather strong word. I don't think it goes that far.
Or are you projecting again?

>
> May God forgive you for your ignorance.

I forgave God a long time ago. When's God going to ante up?

Chris

[jillery]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:38:52 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:

>On 13-01-20 12:34 AM, John S. Wilkins wrote:
>> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:43:51 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To the whole lot of you:
>>>>
>>>> Your intransigence, your bigotry and your loathing concerning
>>>> Christianity makes me and others, I'm sure, not only sad but angry that
>>>> you are nothing but a cohort of bullies lacking any social life outside
>>>> this ng.
>>>> I wonder if one of your children turned to Christianity what your
>>>> reaction would be and if you would want them to read your inanities.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what Wilkins' University (his employer) would think of the fact
>>>> that he has participated in a thread that ridicules and implicitly makes
>>>> fun of many who have chosen to follow in the path of Christ. Wouldn't it
>>>> be considered discrimination against a group of people?
>>>>
>>>> Your hatred is so profound and your disdain so apparent that I question
>>>> how any of you can have any meaningful relationships in your lives.
>>>>
>>>> May God forgive you for your ignorance.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm betting God will before you do.
>
>Of course "jillery", the Usenet junkie offers us another non post.

Of course "Nashton" continues to offer his content-free spew. As for
my choice of fixation, it's cheaper and safer that most, and keeps me
off the streets, all highly desirable attributes

I suspect Nashton considers Christianity to be an oppressed minority,
and so deserves special protection.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <5pqqf8hhddfgqadf7...@4ax.com>,

jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I suspect Nashton considers Christianity to be an oppressed minority,
> and so deserves special protection.

Perhaps he like some others here considers himself the only Christian
and hence a minority? Or a small group that "think" like him?" If you
restrict membership enough Christian can be a small minority indeed.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <e3049424-04a5-4ddf...@googlegroups.com>,

eridanus <leopoldo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> this is an important point for all mystics in the catholic church were
> viewed suspiciously, but the "mystic visions" can be either be of "divine"
> or "diabolic" origins. The same can said of most holy bibles. What if
> the OT was inspired by diabolic angels? Jesus warned about fake messiahs.
> Perhaps he was one of the false messiahs as well. If I were a false
> messiah, I would be so canny as warning people about fake messiahs. This is
> like the well known dilemma in services of intelligence. You never can be
> totally sure about the information you are receiving.
>
> Eridanus

What if St. Paul's vision was diabolical? Remember the adversary is
said to be fiendishly smart well beyond human intelligence.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <1kx1bp0.1h1aewy1rgk9bwN%jo...@wilkins.id.au>,

OK, John, as the philosopher is residence here, can you give grounds
for considering the youthful beginning Wilkins with the current
Wilkins? There aren't even made of the the same matter and while they
may have some memories in common the current memories have been
overwritten many times in the years and undoubtedly altered.

This question of identity through time, I think, proceeds the question
of wether to commit suicide.

[Walter Bushell]

In article
<d4291a11-2fee-4c2b...@w18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>,

Wurst, there is nobody to believe it.

[John S. Wilkins]

Identity is formed, in my view, out of contiguity of the right kind, not
out of essential properties or shared matter or functions. If I got hit
on the head and lost all my memories, I would still meet the criteria
for being John, only amnesiac.

>
> This question of identity through time, I think, proceeds the question
> of wether to commit suicide.

Well, if the youthful John is gone, *he* can't commit suicide, and since
the aged John isn't, he doesn't want to.

[Nashton]

On 13-01-21 3:19 PM, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <5pqqf8hhddfgqadf7...@4ax.com>,
> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I suspect Nashton considers Christianity to be an oppressed minority,
>> and so deserves special protection.

Reading comprehension problems, apparently.

>
> Perhaps he like some others here considers himself the only Christian
> and hence a minority? Or a small group that "think" like him?"

I suppose that your hatred for Christians is so great that you don't
believe they are capable of thinking? I wonder what the other Christians
in this ng have to say about this.

> If you
> restrict membership enough Christian can be a small minority indeed.
>

Sorry, you are wrong. Apparently you couldn't help yourself either and
had to take a cheap shot at Christianity and Christians yourself.
But you live in this ng, literally. You post thousands of messages /year
and I can understand your desire to be part of the crowd.

Only problem is that adults usually outgrow these teenage proclivities.

[Nashton]

On 13-01-21 8:41 AM, chris thompson wrote:
> On Jan 19, 4:43 pm, Nashton <n...@na.ca> wrote:
>> To the whole lot of you:
>>
>> Your intransigence, your bigotry and your loathing concerning
>> Christianity makes me and others, I'm sure, not only sad but angry that
>> you are nothing but a cohort of bullies lacking any social life outside
>> this ng.
>
> If Christianity cannot stand a little fun being poked at it on an
> obscure corner of Usenet, what's next? Car bombs, like the Islamic
> radicals?
>
>> I wonder if one of your children turned to Christianity what your
>> reaction would be and if you would want them to read your inanities.
>>
>
> When my daughter went to college one of her first friends took her to
> a Baptist singing session. I encouraged her to go, and to keep going.
> But she's an adult now, and capable of making reasoned decisions.

<snip>

So if she decides to become a Christian and is derided by some no-lifes
with an internet connection, how would that make you feel, buddy?

[jillery]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 08:44:40 -0400, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote:

>On 13-01-21 3:19 PM, Walter Bushell wrote:
>> In article <5pqqf8hhddfgqadf7...@4ax.com>,
>> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect Nashton considers Christianity to be an oppressed minority,
>>> and so deserves special protection.
>
>Reading comprehension problems, apparently.

Nashton could take remedial classes for that, but he's too busy trying
to make Usenet safe for Christians. So he also has a priority problem
as well.

>> Perhaps he like some others here considers himself the only Christian
>> and hence a minority? Or a small group that "think" like him?"
>
>I suppose that your hatred for Christians is so great that you don't
>believe they are capable of thinking? I wonder what the other Christians
>in this ng have to say about this.

Me too. The silence so far is deafening.

>> If you
>> restrict membership enough Christian can be a small minority indeed.
>>
>
>Sorry, you are wrong. Apparently you couldn't help yourself either and
>had to take a cheap shot at Christianity and Christians yourself.
>But you live in this ng, literally. You post thousands of messages /year
>and I can understand your desire to be part of the crowd.
>
>Only problem is that adults usually outgrow these teenage proclivities.

And then there's Nashton still wearing knappies.

[hersheyh]

On Thursday, January 17, 2013 12:38:41 PM UTC-5, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:59:36 -0500, the following appeared
>
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
>
>
> >In the impossible to argue with the logic department
>
> >
>
> >> > > Do Science And The Holy Bible Conflict?
>
> >> >
>
> >> >
>
> >> >
>
> >> > Is there a holy bible?
>
> >>
>
> >> Of course, the Vedas. This is the true holy bible.
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >Seriously? The Holy Q'uran was dictated *by an angel*!
>
>
>
> So was the Book of Mormon.
>
>
>
> It's "Duelling Scriptures" all the way down.
>
>
>
> > How could it not
>
> >be the Holy Bible?
>
>
>
> Indeed, how not...?
>
> --
And here I thought the Holy Bible was the one chewed up by bookworms. But spelling was never my strength.
>
>
> Bob C.
>
>
>
> "Evidence confirming an observation is
>
> evidence that the observation is wrong."
>
>
>
> - McNameless

[eridanus]

El martes, 22 de enero de 2013 12:44:40 UTC, Nashton escribi�:

try to explain, dear Nashton, in which way you are an oppressed minority.

I was probably an oppressed boy in a religious boarding school, for I
had to go to Mass everyday in the morning, and had to pray the rosary
every afternoon at 5 o'clock; the tea time of English aristocrats.

Almost none of the boys were interested in going to mass. Other matter
would had been if the nuns were giving us some piece of bread after
the mass was finished.

Eridanus

[James Beck]

I was mildly curious, so I did a little looking. In the Settled Dust
and Airborne Particulate Pilot Study (2008), the average 6-room house
in the study area (around Boston, Massachusetts) accumlated 40 lbs of
dust per year. About 40% of the total was outside dirt, so the upper
bound on human-related dust is around 60% of the total. That includes
bits of paper, plastics, and dropped food.

I didn't find anyone who did a separate assay, so I cleaned my
bedroom. I last did that Christmas eve, so there was about one month's
accumulation.

I found 114 grams of 'dust.' I assumed that 40% of it was from the
outside. A little over half of the dust consisted of bits of paper,
plastic, rubber, metal, and glass. If half of the remainder is skin
and half dust mites and their feces, that would leave about 0.45 kg of
dead skin per person per year. With all those assumptions, there's no
room for the Guarantee Fairy, but Wilkins could replace himself
roughly once every 200 years, or get a little head once a decade.

[jillery]

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:10:39 -0700, James Beck <jdbec...@yahoo.com>

No wonder Wilkins is so irritable.

[John S. Wilkins]

> >> Since 90% of household dust is sloughed human skin cells, the odds are
> >> that the somebody saving your old bits is you.
> >
> >Sorry, no, the infallible source of al wisdom disagrees;
> >http://transremaxculver.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/items-of-useless-informa
> >tion-no-4/
>
> I was mildly curious, so I did a little looking. In the Settled Dust
> and Airborne Particulate Pilot Study (2008), the average 6-room house
> in the study area (around Boston, Massachusetts) accumlated 40 lbs of
> dust per year. About 40% of the total was outside dirt, so the upper
> bound on human-related dust is around 60% of the total. That includes
> bits of paper, plastics, and dropped food.
>
> I didn't find anyone who did a separate assay, so I cleaned my
> bedroom. I last did that Christmas eve, so there was about one month's
> accumulation.
>
> I found 114 grams of 'dust.' I assumed that 40% of it was from the
> outside. A little over half of the dust consisted of bits of paper,
> plastic, rubber, metal, and glass. If half of the remainder is skin
> and half dust mites and their feces, that would leave about 0.45 kg of
> dead skin per person per year. With all those assumptions, there's no
> room for the Guarantee Fairy, but Wilkins could replace himself
> roughly once every 200 years, or get a little head once a decade.

I'm not touching that...