Evidence for a soul- NONE--- zero
mani deli
religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
Belief is not evidence.
Patrick
thomas p.
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
news:h_Gdnc3WXZEOCufW...@posted.localnet...
No answer?
Patrick
"thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4b7ab870$0$56778$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
> No answer?
I'm waiting for the question......
duke
Evidence drives belief.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
WangoTango
@cox.net says...
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>
> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> Evidence drives belief.
Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
You have a belief and you TRY to mold everything around that belief to
bolster it.
Since there is no testable way to verify your belief, it is just that, a
belief. That's where the term blind faith comes from.
Smiler
So you agree with everything mani deli said.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
Smiler
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
>> so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>> to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>> Belief is not evidence.
>
> Evidence drives belief.
>
You have no evidence, only belief.
AZ Nomad
>duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
>>> so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>>> to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>>> Belief is not evidence.
>>
>> Evidence drives belief.
>>
>You have no evidence, only belief.
to duke, delusion is evidence.
Mike Painter
I think he ie agreeing with you.
Alex W
>
> Evidence drives belief.
>
.... in the same way that fairy dust drives my car....
Budikka666
You know, anyone who took his LAWD's command to witness for him
seriously would have provided objective evidence that there's a soul,
or at the very least a rationale for it. But what does a loser like
you do?
Do you go the extra mile as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
Do you offer your coat, as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
Do you turn the other cheek as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
Instead, you insult and run away.
Just how pathetic is that?
The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not one of you
theists can justfy the soul, offer an explanaion for it, explain where
it comes from or where it goes to or when and how it enters and
interacts with the physical body.
In short, you're just confirming what we already knew.
Budikka
Budikka666
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> Evidence drives belief.
Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
not even an intelligent rationale.
How pathetic. But thanks for admitting your belief is a blind as they
come.
Budikka
Yap
Come up with something more intelligent than those ancient invention
such as soul, god, hell, heaven....
Have some terms more for modern time, and more convincing.
Of course, you cant/.
Yap
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> Evidence drives belief.
duke
>In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bck...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
>@cox.net says...
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>>
>> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
>> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>> >Belief is not evidence.
>>
>> Evidence drives belief.
>
>Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
believe.
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 16, 1:09�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of �suckers
>> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>> >Belief is not evidence.
>>
>> Evidence drives belief.
>
>Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
>nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
>not even an intelligent rationale.
Yep, got all 3.
Jimbo
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bckuiffv0akdodjkr...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
>
> It's an absolute fact -
You're a liar duke, and that is a fact.
duke
javs is a nice guy. Heeheeheeheeh.
Patrick
> Patrick wrote:
>> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:4b7ab870$0$56778$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>>>
>>> "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>>> news:h_Gdnc3WXZEOCufW...@posted.localnet...
>>>> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>>>>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers so
>>>>> they can shake them down for money. They want money and
>>>>> privilege to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>>>>> Belief is not evidence.
>>>>
>>>> same shit, different day....
>>
>>> No answer?
>>
>> I'm waiting for the question......
>
> So you agree with everything mani deli said.
I said it was shit, didn't I?
Do you agree with shit?
Patrick
On Feb 16, 7:03 am, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>
> > The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> > religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> > so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> > to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> > Belief is not evidence.
>
> same shit, different day....
You know, anyone who took his LAWD's command to witness for him
+PB - First of all, you need to find someone who claims to do this...+
seriously would have provided objective evidence that there's a soul,
or at the very least a rationale for it. But what does a loser like
you do?
+PB - Oh puleeze,,,... tell me, massah!+
Do you go the extra mile as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
+PB -- My Lawd doesn't command me nuthin."
Do you offer your coat, as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
+PB - Would you like a coat?
I've already emptied half of my closet of coats, but I do
have several left. Please provide an address and I'll
send you a coat.
Do you turn the other cheek as your LAWD commanded?
Nope.
+PB - Perhaps you just haven't been watching.
I've turned my butt cheek to you on numberous occasions.
Don't look now, butt...................
Instead, you insult and run away.
+PB - Yup, I'm a running. That is why you keep
coming back for more.
The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not one of you
theists can justfy the soul, offer an explanaion for it, explain where
it comes from or where it goes to or when and how it enters and
interacts with the physical body.
In short, you're just confirming what we already knew.
+PB - Then why do ya keep coming back for more?
Do you like being mopped all over the floor?
C'mon honey.... grow up.... move on.......
WangoTango
@cox.net says...
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bck...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
> >>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
> >
> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
>
> It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
> believe.
You'll go to your hell for lying like that.
mani deli
>It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
>believe.
Belief is not evidence!
Jimbo
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Feb 16, 1:09 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> Yep, got all 3.
>
You've got zero, liar pedophile earl.
Jimbo
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 05:12:11 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 17, 7:39 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bckuiffv0akdodjkr...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >> >@cox.net says...
> >> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
>
> >> It's an absolute fact -
>
> >You're a liar duke, and that is a fact.
>
> javs is a nice guy. Heeheeheeheeh.
>
Jesus Is Very Stupid is a guy? Probably your father then. You are
still a proven liar though.
Budikka666
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Feb 16, 1:09 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> Yep, got all 3.
LIAR. If oyu had all three and you *actually* wanted to help as you
repeatedly LIE, you'd actually post your evidence so we could all
share it. And I'm talking about *objective evidence*, liar, not blind-
ass statements of belief like the five you plagiarized from Tom
Aquinas.
Budikka
Smiler
I see, you have no answer.
Smiler
Either that, or he has no answer.
Smiler
To puke... 'belief' > 'evidence'> 'belief'.
Not only circular, but a short circuit.
That explains the state of his 'mind' (if you can call two neurons a
'mind').
"The lights may be on but there's no-one at home."
AZ Nomad
>AZ Nomad wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:35:45 -0000, Smiler <Smi...@joe.king.com>
>> wrote:
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>>>>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of
>>>>> suckers so they can shake them down for money. They want money and
>>>>> privilege to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>>>>> Belief is not evidence.
>>>>
>>>> Evidence drives belief.
>>>>
>>
>>> You have no evidence, only belief.
>>
>> to duke, delusion is evidence.
>To puke... 'belief' > 'evidence'> 'belief'.
>Not only circular, but a short circuit.
>That explains the state of his 'mind' (if you can call two neurons a
>'mind').
>"The lights may be on but there's no-one at home."
His brain withered away and died before he hit puberty.
Smiler
Is it cheaper than petrol?
Can you have your carb. adjusted to accept it?
Or do you need a special engine?
:-)
AZ Nomad
>Alex W wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:09:11 -0600, duke wrote:
>>>
>>> Evidence drives belief.
>>>
>>
>> .... in the same way that fairy dust drives my car....
>Is it cheaper than petrol?
>Can you have your carb. adjusted to accept it?
>Or do you need a special engine?
>:-)
It's an imaginary car.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asga...@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bck...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
> >>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
> >
> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
>
> It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
> believe.
Evidence is not the only thing that "drives" beliefs, as shown by the
high frequency of confidence games and swindles.
That duckgumbo believes something does not imply the existence of any
evidence whatsoever supporting duckgumbo's beliefs.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Feb 16, 1:09�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of �suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
> >>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
> >
> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> Yep, got all 3.
Duckgumbo must be so ashamed of them then that he keeps them well
hidden, as we have yet to see anything more than unsupported claims of
the existence of any such items.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >You're a liar duke, and that is a fact.
>
> javs is a nice guy. Heeheeheeheeh.
javs = "Jesusfreaks (like duckgumbo) Are Very Stupid"
thomas p.
> Mike Painter wrote:
>> thomas p. wrote:
>>> "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>>> news:h_Gdnc3WXZEOCufW...@posted.localnet...
>>>> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a
>>>>> bunch of religion business con men in order to scare
>>>>> the shit out of suckers so they can shake them down
>>>>> for money. They want money and privilege to save your nonexistent
>>>>> soul. It's a
>>>>> racket! Belief is not evidence.
>>>>
>>>> same shit, different day....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No answer?
>>
>> I think he ie agreeing with you.
>
> Either that, or he has no answer.
Beyond inanity that is.
Alex W
Maybe, but whenever I imagine this car, it's beautifully
filmed and Clarkson gives it the review of his life...
:-)
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 17, 6:40�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Feb 16, 1:09�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of �suckers
>> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>>
>> >> Evidence drives belief.
>>
>> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
>> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
>> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>>
>> Yep, got all 3.
>LIAR. If oyu had all three and you *actually* wanted to help as you
>repeatedly LIE, you'd actually post your evidence so we could all
>share it.
Been posting it for you for years now, dud. You're the one that arbitrarily
elects to reject the evidence - your problem, not mine.
>And I'm talking about *objective evidence*, liar, not blind-
>ass statements of belief like the five you plagiarized from Tom
>Aquinas.
Never ever saw his 5, but it sounds like he's also got true knowledge and
intelligence that you clearly lack.
duke
Then I'm safe.
Patrick
"Smiler" <Smi...@joe.king.com> wrote .
> Patrick wrote:
>>>>>> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>>>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>>>>>>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of
>>>>>>> suckers so they can shake them down for money. They want money
>>>>>>> and privilege to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>>>>>>> Belief is not evidence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> same shit, different day....
>>>>
>>>>> No answer?
>>>>
>>>> I'm waiting for the question......
>>>
>>> So you agree with everything mani deli said.
>>
>> I said it was shit, didn't I?
>> Do you agree with shit?
>
> I see, you have no answer.
I see you have no answer.
Patrick
>>> "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>>> news:h_Gdnc3WXZEOCufW...@posted.localnet...
>>>> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>>>>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers so
>>>>> they can shake them down for money. They want money and
>>>>> privilege to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>>>>> Belief is not evidence.
It is a mistake to talk about human beings as being potential persons.
Personhood is part of the substance of being human, not a property a human
develops later. Personhood isn't like hair color that you can change, it's
not a property. It is part of the substance of what it is to be human. The
argument that an acorn isn't an oak but a potential oak isn't true. An acorn
is an oak just as a mature oak tree is an oak, both are oaks but they are at
different stages of development. A square always has four sides. What if it
had only three sides? It wouldn't be a square, it would be something else--a
triangle. If a human didn't have a soul it wouldn't be a human being because
that's what human beings are. You can't say that one being gains a property
that changes it from one being to another. All beings have the same profile
of what they are and they gain and lose and develop properties over time.
But that doesn't change who or what they are.
WangoTango
@cox.net says...
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:15:13 -0500, WangoTango <Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <pqonn5hfnjtne9m2h...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bck...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >> >@cox.net says...
> >> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >> >Belief is not evidence.
> >> >>
> >> >> Evidence drives belief.
> >> >
> >> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
> >>
> >> It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
> >> believe.
> >
> >You'll go to your hell for lying like that.
>
> Then I'm safe.
Well of course you are, luckily there is no hell, or you would be on the
fast track for a lava side seat.
Dukey, just another liar for the lord and salad bar christian.
duke
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >And I'm talking about *objective evidence*, liar, not blind-
> >ass statements of belief like the five you plagiarized from Tom
> >Aquinas.
>
> Never ever saw his 5, but it sounds like he's also got true knowledge and
> intelligence that you clearly lack.
Since the majority of theists in the world reject your dogma, why should
anyone else accept it.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
Safely out of any chance of heaven.
Budikka666
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:44:22 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Feb 17, 6:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Feb 16, 1:09 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
> >> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> >> Yep, got all 3.
> >LIAR. If oyu had all three and you *actually* wanted to help as you
> >repeatedly LIE, you'd actually post your evidence so we could all
> >share it.
>
> Been posting it for you for years now, dud. You're the one that arbitrarily
> elects to reject
There's nothing arbitrary about it, Pig Shit. Lies I reject, Pig
Shit. Objective evidence I accept, Pig Shit. Still waiting on you
proving you're *not* pig shit, Pig Shit. I'll add this to the list of
"Threads You Fled" Pig Shit.
Budikka
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 18, 6:03�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
Yet after I kicked your ass on the biblical flood issue, you went into hiding
for a good year, reappeared and got your butt kicked again, went into hiding
again, and finally came out of hiding for the last year or so at which time I
continue to plant a hefty one on your backside.
All you can typically do is to use false data, like the Gen 1-11 issue, to try
to prove scientific data. You got booted on that one also. You don't
understand the bible well enough to put up a discussion so, personally, I fully
expect you to now go into hiding for another year or so.
I'm really going to miss you. Come back soon.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >There's nothing arbitrary about it, Pig Shit. Lies I reject, Pig
> >Shit. Objective evidence I accept, Pig Shit. Still waiting on you
> >proving you're *not* pig shit, Pig Shit. I'll add this to the list of
> >"Threads You Fled" Pig Shit.
>
> Yet after I kicked your ass
duckgumbo has not been able to kick anyone's ass.
The problem is that duckgumbo suffers from delusions of adequacy.
Smiler
That's a 'given'.
I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you've left out an "s" in that
sentence.
Smiler
I've seen no evidence that he's even reached puberty.
He appears to be a pre-pubescent Forest Gump living in a perpetual Groundhog
Day.
Smiler
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:36:24 -0600, AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 03:21:44 -0000, Smiler <Smi...@joe.king.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Alex W wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:09:11 -0600, duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidence drives belief.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .... in the same way that fairy dust drives my car....
>>
>>> Is it cheaper than petrol?
>>> Can you have your carb. adjusted to accept it?
>>> Or do you need a special engine?
>>> :-)
>>
>> It's an imaginary car.
>
Ah! A Toyota.....imaginary working accelerator, imaginary working brakes,
etc., etc.
> Maybe, but whenever I imagine this car, it's beautifully
> filmed and Clarkson gives it the review of his life...
> :-)
If Clarkson thinks it's good, I don't want one!
AZ Nomad
you just gotta buleeeve! If you believe you have a ferarri, it's just
as good as the real thing, right?
Alex W
... especially once I have the Ferrari decal on the side of
the door and the soundtrack CD playing! Vroom vroom.....
duke
duke
If you knew what the Lord said, you wouldn't be quite so comfortable.
thomas p.
> thomas p. wrote:
>> Smiler wrote:
>>> Mike Painter wrote:
>>>> thomas p. wrote:
>>>>> "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>>>>> news:h_Gdnc3WXZEOCufW...@posted.localnet...
>>>>>> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>>>>>>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by
>>>>>>> a bunch of religion business con men in order to scare
>>>>>>> the shit out of suckers so they can shake them down
>>>>>>> for money. They want money and privilege to save
>>>>>>> your nonexistent soul. It's a
>>>>>>> racket! Belief is not evidence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> same shit, different day....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No answer?
>>>>
>>>> I think he ie agreeing with you.
>>>
>>> Either that, or he has no answer.
>>
>> Beyond inanity that is.
>
> That's a 'given'.
> I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you've left out
> an "s" in that sentence.
He has the double handicap of being inane and insane. Many insane
people have been brilliant and could put up quite a good argument
to defend their particular delusions. Patrick can only lie or respond with
pathetic silliness he apparently sees as being very witty.
thomas p.
Unfair! Forest was nice.
WangoTango
Keep up the lies.
At least you can be entertaining.
Dukey, liar for the lord and salad bar christian extrordinare.....
duke
What lies? I just preparing you for the end.
hypa...@comcast.net
> "thomas p." <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4b7ab870$0$56778$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>
>
>
> > "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> skrev i meddelelsen
> >>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >>> so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >>> to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >>> Belief is not evidence.
>
> > No answer?
>
Why are you in alt.atheism. You don't like what
we have to say and we know that you only spout
nonsense. Are you that desperate for or attention?
hypa...@comcast.net
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >Belief is not evidence.
>
>
But, you have no evidence, Duke.
Therefore, you must have no belief.
hypa...@comcast.net
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:04:16 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bckuiffv0akdodjkr...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
>
> It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
> believe.
You have no evidence, Duke. You just believe blindly and
lie about having evidence. You know that you can't justify
your blind faith.
hypa...@comcast.net
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> Yep, got all 3.
>
know you won't and you'll lie yet again about
having shown it in the past.
You're such a failure here, Duke, yet you won't
leave. But, we know why you won't leave. You
need us. Without us, you have no reason to
believe that you exist.
hypa...@comcast.net
> "Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote ..
> On Feb 16, 7:03 am, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
>
> > "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>
> > > religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> > > so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> > > to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> > > Belief is not evidence.
>
>
> You know, anyone who took his LAWD's command to witness for him
>
> +PB - First of all, you need to find someone who claims to do this...+
>
> seriously would have provided objective evidence that there's a soul,
> or at the very least a rationale for it. But what does a loser like
> you do?
>
> +PB - Oh puleeze,,,... tell me, massah!+
>
> Do you go the extra mile as your LAWD commanded?
> Nope.
>
> +PB -- My Lawd doesn't command me nuthin."
>
> Do you offer your coat, as your LAWD commanded?
> Nope.
>
> +PB - Would you like a coat?
> I've already emptied half of my closet of coats, but I do
> have several left. Please provide an address and I'll
> send you a coat.
>
> Do you turn the other cheek as your LAWD commanded?
> Nope.
>
> +PB - Perhaps you just haven't been watching.
> I've turned my butt cheek to you on numberous occasions.
> Don't look now, butt...................
>
> Instead, you insult and run away.
>
> +PB - Yup, I'm a running. That is why you keep
> coming back for more.
>
> The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not one of you
> theists can justfy the soul, offer an explanaion for it, explain where
> it comes from or where it goes to or when and how it enters and
> interacts with the physical body.
> In short, you're just confirming what we already knew.
>
> +PB - Then why do ya keep coming back for more?
> Do you like being mopped all over the floor?
> C'mon honey.... grow up.... move on.......
You just got reamed and you're crying victory?
Your brain (what there is of one) must be in
bass ackwards. All you did was not answer
what for you should be an easy set of questions
about souls. That meqans that you don't even
know enough about your own religion to answer
simple questions. That means that you are a
pathetic representative of your own beliefs. I'll
abbreviate that. You are pathetic.
Patrick
On Feb 16, 1:51 pm, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
> >> "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
> >>> The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >>> religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >>> so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >>> to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >>> Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> same shit, different day....
> > No answer?
>
> I'm waiting for the question......
Why are you in alt.atheism.
+PB - Good Question.
I didn't come here voluntarily.
Why are you here in arc-rc?
-------
You don't like what
we have to say and we know that you only spout
nonsense. Are you that desperate for or attention?
+PB - Stop asking me questions.
I'll eventually go away.
WangoTango
Patrick
> The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not one of you
> theists can justfy the soul, offer an explanaion for it, explain where
> it comes from or where it goes to or when and how it enters and
> interacts with the physical body.
> In short, you're just confirming what we already knew.
<yawn>
same shit, different day.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >Well of course you are, luckily there is no hell, or you would be on the
> >fast track for a lava side seat.
> >Dukey, just another liar for the lord and salad bar christian.
>
> If you knew what the Lord said, you wouldn't be quite so comfortable.
If your god were real, and all those others were not, yours would long
since have eliminated them.
That yours has not eliminated all others is sufficient evidence to me
that yours is no more real than they are.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >Keep up the lies.
> >At least you can be entertaining.
>
> What lies? I just preparing you for the end.
For instance, if your god is real and those others are all false, why
hasn't yours been able to eliminate those others?
Budikka666
Funny but when I deleted everything that was long ago demonstrated a
LIE, you had nothing left to offer! It must be terribly hard to run
as fast as you do with your dumb, pig-ignorant ass hurting as badly as
it is from the endless kicking it gets. How *do* you do it?
Budikka
Budikka666
Still Nothing even remotely intelligent to say I see. Yawn.
But do share: how *do* you keep that pair of heels so clean?
Budikka
Budikka666
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:17:41 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >In article <6v4tn59g457dsd4ebasklkphsg08jui...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >@cox.net says...
> >> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:34:37 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> >In article <babqn5luifoao5hg26gtdbgib91f5mn...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >> >@cox.net says...
> >> >> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:15:13 -0500, WangoTango <Asgar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >In article <pqonn5hfnjtne9m2h3p9aee3aa04eoo...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >> >> >@cox.net says...> >> >> >> >In article <s9rln591d2ldf3bckuiffv0akdodjkr...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> >> >> >> >@cox.net says...
> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> >> >> >> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >> >> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >> >> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >> >> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
> >> >> >> >> Evidence drives belief.
>
> >> >> >> >Oh, now you know that is a blatant lie.
>
> >> >> >> It's an absolute fact - evidence drives belief. The evidence is there - I
> >> >> >> believe.
>
> >> >> >You'll go to your hell for lying like that.
>
> >> >> Then I'm safe.
>
> >> >Well of course you are, luckily there is no hell, or you would be on the
> >> >fast track for a lava side seat.
> >> >Dukey, just another liar for the lord and salad bar christian.
>
> >> If you knew what the Lord said, you wouldn't be quite so comfortable.
> >Keep up the lies.
> >At least you can be entertaining.
>
> What lies? I just preparing you for the end.
You're leaving? Please do. It must be awfully tiring doing all that
running and getting absolutely nowhere.
Budikka
Budikka666
> <hypati...@comcast.net> wrote
That's you to a 'T'. Keep Running Chicken Shit.
Budikka
Mike Painter
<snip>
>
> You just got reamed and you're crying victory?
> Your brain (what there is of one) must be in
> bass ackwards. All you did was not answer
> what for you should be an easy set of questions
> about souls. That meqans that you don't even
> know enough about your own religion to answer
> simple questions. That means that you are a
> pathetic representative of your own beliefs. I'll
> abbreviate that. You are pathetic.
http://tinyurl.com/2uvyp explains it.
Smiler
I know exactly what your supposed god said...absolutely nothing, exactly as
every other fictional character is silent.
Smiler
And nowhere near as stupid as puke.
thomas p.
Still no answer? Why not just admit your failure? That, at
least, would gain you a little respect.
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 18, 5:18�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
I sadly sit here wondering how you can continue to embarrass yourself this way.
My story hasn't changed - it can't. God's truth existed 10 years ago and it is
the same truth today - God's truth can't change.
duke
wrote:
>> What lies? �I just preparing you for the end.
>
>You're leaving? Please do. It must be awfully tiring doing all that
>running and getting absolutely nowhere.
>
>Budikka
Just sitting here like I have for the last many years while you go thru your
mid-live crises in posting and disappearing and posting and disappearing.
Budikka666
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:36:46 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Feb 18, 5:18 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >Funny but when I deleted everything that was long ago demonstrated a
> >LIE, you had nothing left to offer! It must be terribly hard to run
> >as fast as you do with your dumb, pig-ignorant ass hurting as badly as
> >it is from the endless kicking it gets. How *do* you do it?
>
> I sadly sit here wondering how you can continue to embarrass yourself this way.
> My story hasn't changed - it can't. God's truth existed 10 years ago and it is
> the same truth today - God's truth can't change.
So was Terah Abram's Father or not?
It's a perfectly simple question. It's not a trick question. It has
a simple, straight-forward answer. The Bible itself clearly states
the answer to this question. Why are you so abjectly terrified of it?
Budikka
Budikka666
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:39:12 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> What lies? I just preparing you for the end.
>
> >You're leaving? Please do. It must be awfully tiring doing all that
> >running and getting absolutely nowhere.
>
> >Budikka
>
> Just sitting here like I have for the last many years while you go thru your
> mid-live crises
"Mid-Live crises"? You really are the most stupid person I've
fortunately ever not met.
> in posting and disappearing and posting and disappearing.
If you could actually support *ANYTHING* you assert, it would be a
miracle, and I might well end up believing in this fake god of yours.
But you must be hurting like hell to be reduced to this squalid
manufacturing of outright LIES. Doesn't your Catholicism forbid
bearing false witness, Pig Shit?
The fact that I *ignore* you because you're a vacuous, cowardly, lying
piece of hypocritical pig shit and you're far too stupid to take
seriously in no way supports your LIE that I "disappeared". Anyone
can prove it's a LIE by Googling, whereupon they'll see an unbroken
record of posting over many years. They will also see where I
specifically told you that you were too stupid to talk to, and I would
deliberately ignore you, as I shall again before too long.
Ignoring has nothing to do with hiding. But why would you think you
can speak to a topic upon which you can claim no expertise? Please
allow me to suggest some topics which are eminently suited to your
skill set:
How to keep your pairs of heels so pristine.
Running as a vocation
Coping with a permanently kicked ass
Dancing around issues without ever addressing them
How to go year after year making claims without supporting a single
one of them
How to avoid any and all requests for supportive evidence.
I'm sure that you can wax eloquently upon all of those topics.
Budikka
thomas p.
There are defective hockey pucks that are smarter than puke and more
interesting conversationalists. Why do people keep responding to that dark
hole?
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 20, 5:45�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
The pre-historical Gen 11 says that the historical Abraham's father was named
Terah. It's not historical, so we don't know if it's the same Terah or not, or
even is Abraham's true male parent was named Terah because it's in the
pre-historical part of Genesis.
Heeheeheehee.
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 20, 5:46�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:39:12 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> What lies? �I just preparing you for the end.
>>
>> >You're leaving? �Please do. �It must be awfully tiring doing all that
>> >running and getting absolutely nowhere.
>>
>> >Budikka
>>
>> Just sitting here like I have for the last many years while you go thru your
>> mid-live crises
>
>"Mid-Live crises"? You really are the most stupid person I've
>fortunately ever not met.
It's the only reason I can think of as to why you went into hiding no less than
3 times when I challenged you to support your words. You failure to do so is
the indication that you just plagiarized them.
>> in posting and disappearing and posting and disappearing.
>If you could actually support *ANYTHING* you assert, it would be a
>miracle, and I might well end up believing in this fake god of yours.
>But you must be hurting like hell to be reduced to this squalid
>manufacturing of outright LIES. Doesn't your Catholicism forbid
>bearing false witness, Pig Shit?
I'm not bearing false witness. You're just hiding.
>The fact that I *ignore* you because you're a vacuous, cowardly, lying
>piece of hypocritical pig shit and you're far too stupid to take
>seriously in no way supports your LIE that I "disappeared".
It's always been your modus operandi. You speak, you get challenged, you kill
file the challenger so you can't see his responses and counter challenges, then
post that he is hiding from you.
> Anyone
>can prove it's a LIE by Googling, whereupon they'll see an unbroken
>record of posting over many years.
And googling will reveal the never-ending requests on my part to come back and
answer the challenges to you. To the day, you've never answer my challenges to
your "reasons" why there could never have been a global flood.
> They will also see where I
>specifically told you that you were too stupid to talk to, and I would
>deliberately ignore you, as I shall again before too long.
Well, you still have the chance to answer the challenges, even today. It's a
long time that I have been waiting on you.
>Ignoring has nothing to do with hiding.
It does for you.
> But why would you think you
>can speak to a topic upon which you can claim no expertise? Please
>allow me to suggest some topics which are eminently suited to your
>skill set:
>How to keep your pairs of heels so pristine.
>Running as a vocation
>Coping with a permanently kicked ass
>Dancing around issues without ever addressing them
>How to go year after year making claims without supporting a single
>one of them
>How to avoid any and all requests for supportive evidence.
>
>I'm sure that you can wax eloquently upon all of those topics.
>
>Budikka
The Dukester, American-American
JTEM
"thomas p." <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There are defective hockey pucks that are smarter
> than puke and more interesting conversationalists.
And nobody who wasn't certain of his own intellectual
inferiority would dwell on such matters. Because, yeah,
regardless of hos how dumb he is, it doesn't make you
any smarter. Nope. Not one iota.
...so why don't you save a shitload of bandwidth
by simply coming to terms with your "special" status?
Thanks in advance.
Patrick
news:4b7f7589$0$56774$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Errr,...
How bout:
The human body consists of both a body and a soul
Are ya payin tension now.....
There is an immaterial side of life that cannot be
tested scientifically--observed, measured, quantified, and
so on. The physical body houses a soul that animates the
body--it gives the body ultimate life and unity.
This soul never changes. It embodies the "you" of you.
Let's assume for now that you only have a physical body,
a complex collection of matter. I am hoping that you
agree with me here. If the matter configured into your body
ceases to be, (that is.... dies) then we would have to say
that you cease to be. Sounds reasonable, but check this out.
Science tells us that approximately every seven to nine years,
all the matter in your body changes at the atomic level,
including your brain. Think about it. You probably look
significantly different now than you did eight years ago,
and will probably look even more different eight years
from today. This would mean that every seven to nine
years "you" cease to be and another person begins.
Is this what you believe?
OK now, tommy.... please write all this down. Tell your
friends. Pass this around your circle of catholic-bashin buddies.
I really don't want to have to repeat this over and over.
thomas p.
> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4b7f7589$0$56774$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>> Patrick wrote:
>>> <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote
>>>
>>>> The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not
>>>> one of you theists can justfy the soul, offer an
>>>> explanaion for it, explain where it comes from or where
>>>> it goes to or when and how it enters and interacts with
>>>> the physical body. In short, you're just confirming
>>>> what we already knew.
>>>
>>> <yawn>
>>> same shit, different day.
>>
>> Still no answer? Why not just admit your failure? That, at least, would
>> gain you a little respect.
>
> Errr,...
> How bout:
> The human body consists of both a body and a soul
>
> Are ya payin tension now.....
You repeated your claim again. Do you think that that is evidence?
>
> There is an immaterial side of life that cannot be
> tested scientifically--observed, measured, quantified, and
> so on. The physical body houses a soul that animates the
> body--it gives the body ultimate life and unity.
>
> This soul never changes. It embodies the "you" of you.
>
> Let's assume for now that you only have a physical body,
> a complex collection of matter. I am hoping that you
> agree with me here. If the matter configured into your
> body ceases to be, (that is.... dies) then we would have
> to say that you cease to be. Sounds reasonable, but check this
> out.
> Science tells us that approximately every seven to nine
> years, all the matter in your body changes at the atomic
> level, including your brain. Think about it. You probably
> look significantly different now than you did eight years
> ago, and will probably look even more different eight years
> from today. This would mean that every seven to nine
> years "you" cease to be and another person begins.
>
> Is this what you believe?
>
> OK now, tommy.... please write all this down. Tell your
> friends. Pass this around your circle of catholic-bashin
> buddies. I really don't want to have to repeat this over
> and over.
Feel free to not repeat it until you have evidence to offer.
thomas p.
Thank you for your opinion.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> It's the only reason I can think of as to why you went into hiding no
> less than 3 times when I challenged you to support your words. You
> failure to do so is the indication that you just plagiarized them.
Duckgumbois, as usual, accusing others of his own sins.
>
> >> in posting and disappearing and posting and disappearing.
>
> >If you could actually support *ANYTHING* you assert, it would be a
> >miracle, and I might well end up believing in this fake god of
> >yours. But you must be hurting like hell to be reduced to this
> >squalid manufacturing of outright LIES. Doesn't your Catholicism
> >forbid bearing false witness, Pig Shit?
>
> I'm not bearing false witness. You're just hiding.
IF you are responding to someone, duckgumbo, that person is not hiding.
So you must be talking to yourself, or lying, or both
>
> >The fact that I *ignore* you because you're a vacuous, cowardly,
> >lying piece of hypocritical pig shit and you're far too stupid to
> >take seriously in no way supports your LIE that I "disappeared".
>
> It's always been your modus operandi. You speak, you get challenged,
> you kill file the challenger so you can't see his responses and
> counter challenges, then post that he is hiding from you.
How does duckgumbo claim to know whether he has been killfiled versus
just being normally ignored
>
> > Anyone
> >can prove it's a LIE by Googling, whereupon they'll see an unbroken
> >record of posting over many years.
>
> And googling will reveal the never-ending requests on my part to come
> back and answer the challenges to you. To the day, you've never
> answer my challenges to your "reasons" why there could never have
> been a global flood.
Unless duckgumbo has incontestable evidenced that such a flood occurred,
there is no need to justify doubt of its happening.
>
> > They will also see where I
> >specifically told you that you were too stupid to talk to, and I
> >would deliberately ignore you, as I shall again before too long.
>
> Well, you still have the chance to answer the challenges, even today.
> It's a long time that I have been waiting on you.
And, as a servant of a foolish faith, as duckgumbo is, duckgumbo is
good for nothing except being such waiter.
Virgil
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> The pre-historical Gen 11 says that the historical Abraham's father was named
> Terah. It's not historical
No parts of the RC bible are historical, though several parts are
hysterical.
Smiler
> Patrick wrote:
>> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:4b7f7589$0$56774$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>>> Patrick wrote:
>>>> <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> The *fact* is, as I proved many months ago in a.a., not
>>>>> one of you theists can justfy the soul, offer an
>>>>> explanaion for it, explain where it comes from or where
>>>>> it goes to or when and how it enters and interacts with
>>>>> the physical body. In short, you're just confirming
>>>>> what we already knew.
>>>>
>>>> <yawn>
>>>> same shit, different day.
>>>
>>> Still no answer? Why not just admit your failure? That, at least,
>>> would gain you a little respect.
>>
>> Errr,...
>> How bout:
>> The human body consists of both a body and a soul
>>
>> Are ya payin tension now.....
>
> You repeated your claim again. Do you think that that is evidence?
>
Patprick think?!?!? Nah! Not possible, from the evidence we have in his
posts.
Smiler
Rocks also match those criteria.
> Why do people keep responding to
> that dark hole?
It's fun to give his arse a good kicking.... for a while.
When it gets too boring, he'll go into my loony bin.
thomas p.
Far be it from me to deny others their fun. After all I like
anchovies on my pizzas.
duke
<hypa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On Feb 17, 7:40�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Feb 16, 1:09�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
>> >> >The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
>> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of �suckers
>> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
>> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
>> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>>
>> >> Evidence drives belief.
>>
>> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
>> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
>> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>>
>> Yep, got all 3.
>Prove it. Tell us what your evidence is. Oh, we
>know you won't and you'll lie yet again about
>having shown it in the past.
I have shown it in the past.
1. The scientific evidence is creation of the universe itself 13.7 billion
years ago - something from nothing into nothingness.
2. The objective evidence is creation of the universe itself 13.7 billion years
ago - something from nothing into nothingness.
3. The intelligent rational is definitely that the supreme creator did it. His
name is God.
>You're such a failure here, Duke, yet you won't
>leave. But, we know why you won't leave. You
>need us. Without us, you have no reason to
>believe that you exist.
You see, h7, you refuse to accept the only reality that makes sense. If you can
offer any reasonable alternative evidence for another scenario, go for it. And
that's your loss, not mine.
You can't do it.
Budikka666
> "Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote ..
> On Feb 16, 7:03 am, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
>
> > "mani deli" <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote ...
>
> > > The soul is just another religio-fantasy made up by a bunch of
> > > religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> > > so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> > > to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> > > Belief is not evidence.
>
>
> You know, anyone who took his LAWD's command to witness for him
>
> +PB - First of all, you need to find someone who claims to do this...+
You never heard of the Jehovah's witness you ignorant asshole? That's
their whole bag. Are you really so out of your depth that you didn't
know that? Or are you so stupid that you don't even understand the
very Bible with which you're supposed to be familiar? Are you
seriously trying to claim that Jesus (Note for theist pedants:
according to biblical mythology) never told his disciples to go
witness him?
> seriously would have provided objective evidence that there's a soul,
> or at the very least a rationale for it. But what does a loser like
> you do?
>
> +PB - Oh puleeze,,,... tell me, massah!+
Thanks for admitting that you're a racist fuck hole. I admit that's
something I didn't know.
> Do you go the extra mile as your LAWD commanded?
> Nope.
>
> +PB -- My Lawd doesn't command me nuthin."
Then do nothing asshole and quit posting your idiotic brain dead
messages. It will be a blessed relief to all of us not to have to see
Uenet larded up with your stupidity.
Budikka
Budikka666
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:29:58 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Feb 18, 6:03 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:44:22 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Feb 17, 6:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:19:56 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On Feb 16, 1:09 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:00:17 -0500, mani deli <nob...@rinterlog.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >religion business con men in order to scare the shit out of suckers
> >> >> >> >so they can shake them down for money. They want money and privilege
> >> >> >> >to save your nonexistent soul. It's a racket!
> >> >> >> >Belief is not evidence.
>
>
> >> >> >Then you have no explanation for your belief since you can offer
> >> >> >nothing to support it: no scientific evidence, no objective evidence,
> >> >> >not even an intelligent rationale.
>
> >> >> Yep, got all 3.
> >> >repeatedly LIE, you'd actually post your evidence so we could all
> >> >share it.
>
> >> Been posting it for you for years now, dud. You're the one that arbitrarily
> >> elects to reject
>
> >There's nothing arbitrary about it, Pig Shit. Lies I reject, Pig
> >Shit. Objective evidence I accept, Pig Shit. Still waiting on you
> >proving you're *not* pig shit, Pig Shit. I'll add this to the list of
> >"Threads You Fled" Pig Shit.
>
> Yet after I kicked your ass on the biblical flood issue,
Prove it Pig Shit.
> you went into hiding
You're hurting bad, I know that. Your ass is raw from being kicked so
thoroughly, but is that sufficient reason to ignore your god's
directive not to bear false witness? Just because you've deluded
yourself into thinking your lies aren't lies, doesn't actually *mean*
that your lies aren't lies, Pig Shit. Why don't you take counsel from
some of your fellow Catholics on Usenet and see if they agree with
your LIE that I went into hiding as opposed to simply ignoring you,
which is actually what I was doing as I specifically stated several
times during that period, in some cases directly to you, LIAR. But
you must have been hurt really badly - so bad that you're still
griping about it several years later.
> for a good year,
Prove it, Pig Shit.
> reappeared and got your butt kicked again, went into hiding
Prove it Pig Shit.
> again, and finally came out of hiding for the last year or so at which time I
> continue to plant a hefty one on your backside.
Is that why I have a list of "Threads you Fled" which lists at least
one for every month since last July - threads that *anyone* on Usenet
can go see for themselves and be the judge of what happened? Is that
why I have a list over over 100 questions, challenges, and requests I
made of you - you specifically - from which you're still running half
a decade later? Unlike you, I don't demand that they take my word for
it; instead, I ask that they look at my *objective evidence* for it.
Do you see what objective evidence means now, Pig Shit?
Why is it that you don't post even **ONE** URL to where you supposedly
did this mythical ass-kicking you're always puffing up yourself with?
Why is it that *I* can support what I say with objective evidence, but
you always RUN from your claims, Pig Shit?
> All you can typically do is to use false data
So thanks for finally admitting that the Bible contains false data. I
know that's a big step for you, and it's all the more admirable given
that you're hurting so very badly. Congratulations.
> like the Gen 1-11 issue
From which you're still running. So was Terah Abram's father or not?
Why are you living in mortal TERROR of s simple question like that,
Pig Shit? Why did you run like a squealing pig every time I ask that
question of you Pig Shit? The answer is right here in your Bible, Pig
Shit. The answer is either yes or no, Pig Shit.
Why can't you type a "Yes" indicating that Terah was Abram's father,
or a "No" indicating that he wasn't, and then we can move on to the
next step, Pig Shit? Why are you so scared of that next step, Pig
Shit? Why are you so terrified of me, Pig Shit - so scared that
you're forced to make up the most abysmally transparent of lies - lies
that everyone can see through, in order to cope with your fear? Why
are you so fearful of letting your yeay be yeay and your nay be nay as
your own god specifically instructed you to do?
Budikka
duke
wrote:
>On Feb 18, 5:18�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
No thanks, dud. It's your life, not mine. And this very ng has watched you for
years do the same to every poster that stood in your way to fame. It's always
the same - you make stupid and unfounded comments, you're challenged, you kill
file your challenger, then claim he ran away from you.
>> again, and finally came out of hiding for the last year or so at which time I
>> continue to plant a hefty one on your backside.
>Is that why I have a list of "Threads you Fled" which lists at least
>one for every month since last July - threads that *anyone* on Usenet
>can go see for themselves and be the judge of what happened?
Yes, they can, but you AT BEST are hiding behind a single post rather than a
summary of the whole thread. That's where you get so embarrassed.
> Is that
>why I have a list over over 100 questions, challenges, and requests I
>made of you - you specifically - from which you're still running half
>a decade later? Unlike you, I don't demand that they take my word for
>it; instead, I ask that they look at my *objective evidence* for it.
>Do you see what objective evidence means now, Pig Shit?
Yes I do. And using prehistoric data to try to prove a scientific point is your
way.
>Why is it that you don't post even **ONE** URL to where you supposedly
>did this mythical ass-kicking you're always puffing up yourself with?
>Why is it that *I* can support what I say with objective evidence, but
>you always RUN from your claims, Pig Shit?
>> All you can typically do is to use false data
>So thanks for finally admitting that the Bible contains false data.
Finally? I love it when you make these faux mistakes. I have proclaimed since
day one that God's word revealed in the bible is without error. But the bible
is written in the culture style and handwriting of man, which is not necessarily
literally true as far as the war stories are concerned.
Better luck next time, you big dud.
>> like the Gen 1-11 issue
>From which you're still running. So was Terah Abram's father or not?
Answered. The prehistoric Gen 11 says that a Terah was the father of Abram, who
is historic.
>Why are you living in mortal TERROR of s simple question like that,
>Pig Shit?
Heeheeheehee.
>Why can't you type a "Yes" indicating that Terah was Abram's father,
>or a "No" indicating that he wasn't, and then we can move on to the
>next step, Pig Shit? Why are you so scared of that next step, Pig
>Shit? Why are you so terrified of me, Pig Shit - so scared that
>you're forced to make up the most abysmally transparent of lies - lies
>that everyone can see through, in order to cope with your fear? Why
>are you so fearful of letting your yeay be yeay and your nay be nay as
>your own god specifically instructed you to do?
Heeheeheehee.
Budikka666
> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 05:48:33 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Feb 20, 5:45 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:36:46 -0800 (PST), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Feb 18, 5:18 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> >Funny but when I deleted everything that was long ago demonstrated a
> >> >LIE, you had nothing left to offer! It must be terribly hard to run
> >> >as fast as you do with your dumb, pig-ignorant ass hurting as badly as
> >> >it is from the endless kicking it gets. How *do* you do it?
>
> >> I sadly sit here wondering how you can continue to embarrass yourself this way.
> >> My story hasn't changed - it can't. God's truth existed 10 years ago and it is
> >> the same truth today - God's truth can't change.
>
> >So was Terah Abram's Father or not?
>
> >It's a perfectly simple question. It's not a trick question. It has
> >a simple, straight-forward answer. The Bible itself clearly states
> >the answer to this question. Why are you so abjectly terrified of it?
>
> The pre-historical Gen 11
Prove it. Where is your *Objective evidence* that anything prior to
"Genesis 12" is prehistoic? How can it be "prehistoric" when it's
actually recorded history, according to your Bible? Are you finally
admitting that the Bible LIES? I've requested that you provide
objective support for this claim for literally weeks, if not months.
Why do you flee in terror every time I ask it?
> says that the historical Abraham's father was named
> Terah.
So you admit that the Bible says Abram's father was Terah. Why has it
taken several weeks if not months to get that much out of you? Of
what are you so afraid? Did you not read that part of your Holy Bible
where it instructs you to let your yeay be yeay and your nay be nay?
> It's not historical,
By what criteria? Please support this statement with objective
evidence that we can go look at ourselves, not with "it's so because I
say it's so" which is all you seem able to offer.
This web site calls you a LIAR:
http://bible.org/seriespage/abrahams-call-and-gods-covenant
So does this site:
http://gnzbaptistchurch.tripod.com/greaternewzionbaptistchurch/bibletrivia/gen.htm
so does this site:
http://sigler.org/notibutchrist/abraham.htm
so does this one:
http://hastenministries.blogspot.com/2007/10/eeyer-terah.html
so does this one:
http://www.faith-space.com/profiles/blogs/weekly-devotional-by-rev-7
so does this one:
http://www.eternalthroneofdavid.com/liaf/terah.htm
and this one:
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:HzkvqUUcc2QJ:theabidinglife.com/writings/THE%2520TRAGEDY%2520OF%2520TERAH.doc+%22terah+was+Abraham%27s+father%22&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
and this:
http://www.faithtacoma.org/sermons/Genesis/genesis52.htm
Need I post more? All of these sites call you, at best, a Chicken
Shit, and at worst, an outright LIAR.
Is *Abram* historical? If he is, then how can his father not be
historical? If Terah isn't historical, then how can his son Abram be
historical? Why do you RUN in terror every time I ask this question
of you Pig Shit? Are you saying that the Bible is LYING about Abram's
genealogy? If that's the case, then why does Luke repeat it? Why
does Matthew repeat it? If your Holy Bible LIES about this, then how
can we trust anything in it? Why should we?
> so we don't know if it's the same Terah or not, or
Which other Terah could it be? Why are you LYING that we don't know,
when in at least three separate places in your own Holy Bible it
specifically states that Terah *was* Abram's father? Are you
admitting that Bible LIES?
> even is Abraham's true male parent was named Terah because it's in the
> pre-historical part of Genesis.
Prove it. Where's your *objective8 *evidence* for this "prehistoric"
claim?
You're quite evidently as ignorant of your Bible as you are of every
other aspect of this religion you LIE that you follow.
You're quite evidently unaware that the Bible contained no chapters or
verses in the earliest manuscripts that we have. There is no Genesis
11. There is no Genesis 12. In the earliest manuscripts, the Bible
reads thus: "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years:
and Terah died in Haran. Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee
out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house,
unto a land that I will shew thee"
See? There's no break, no gap, nothing to indicate that the first
sentence is prehistoric and the second is historical. The two are
one. So what *objective* authority can you offer that shows that one
is prehistorical and therefore FALSE DATA, and the very next sentence
is true data?
How can a real person (as you would have it), namely Abram - be real,
and his father be mythical?
Why are you so terrified of dealing with this, Pig Shit?
Budikka
Budikka666
> I'm not bearing false witness. You're just hiding.
I'm hiding when here I am right in your face proving what a pathetic
LIAR you are? You really must be hurting bad to be telling lies that
even a six year old could see though! LoL!
I see you at least aren't so delusional that you're pretending you can
support your bullshit! I guess there's still *some* hope for you no
matter how faint it is! Keep running from the Mortal Terah I've
inflicted on you, Pig Shit.
Budikka
Budikka666
> 1. The scientific evidence is creation of the universe itself 13.7 billion
> years ago - something from nothing into nothingness.
You assume a creation without a shred of evidence. The only *fact*
you have is that the universe is here. It's here whether it was
created by a god or came about hrough some other means with no gods
involved. The bald fact of its existence isn't evidence for any god.
The fact that you're too boning fido stupid to grasp this is proof
positive that you're already way out of your depth on your first
item! LoL!
If you want to demonstrate that a god made it, you need to offer
positive evidence for your case. You'd have to be as stupid as Pig
Shit to simply state that the universe exists and expect anyone of
even moderate intelligence to believe that was a cogent argument.
I feel bad for Catholics everywhere that they're forced to number you
amongst them.
> 2. The objective evidence is creation of the universe itself 13.7 billion years
> ago - something from nothing into nothingness.
You offer nothing to support your assertion that the universe came
from nothing. You offer nothing to support your assertion that there
was any creator involved. In short, you're a LYING piece of pig shit.
You assume a creation without a shred of evidence. The only *fact*
you have is that the universe is here. It's here whether it was
created by a god or came about through some other means with no gods
involved. The bald fact of its existence isn't evidence for any god.
The fact that you're too boning fido stupid to grasp that is proof
positive that you're pig shit.
> 3. The intelligent rational is definitely that the supreme creator did it. His
> name is God.
Intelligent rationale? There's nothing intelligent in anything you've
said, let alone any rationale. You really are the dumbest fuck in
Dumbfuckdom.
Damn! I can't *believe* how stupid you are and I already *know* how
stupid you are yet *still* you still utterly amaze me by proving that
no matter how stupid I think you are, no mater how stupid I *know* you
are, no matter how stupid you've repeatedly proven yourself to be,
there are still endless depths of stupidity that you have yet to
plumb. You're at the intellectual level of a retarded six year old
right now. Can you amaze us by sinking ever deeper? I'm now fully
confident that your can.
Budikka