God Damned Fundies!
|From: Mark Kimes
|To: Steve Kemp
|Sub: Re: Dark Shadows
|Date: 12 Jan 01 21:00:34
EID:4cea 622ca800
MSGID: 1:102/125.99 86cc686b
REPLYTO 1:102/125.99 UUCP
REPLYADDR HOLYSMOKE-LIST@salata.com
GID GIGO+ sn 148 at salata vsn 0.99.970109
From: Mark Kimes
X-Ftn-To: Steve Kemp
(posted TO: Steve Kemp)
FTN-Posted-By: Mark Kimes
> FTN-Posted-By: Steve Kemp
>> Basically, "dark matter" or "non-baryonic matter"
>> (weird matter which is almost impossible to detect
>> except by its gravitational effects)
> I know what dark matter is postulated to be, and it's
> NOT exclusively non-baryonic matter.
Uh, Steve, you're being anal retentive. I specifically spelled out several
times exactly what I meant by "dark matter" in my answer -- you quoted one
specific instance of it right there. And "dark matter" is considered to
be
a term that refers primarily to non-baryonic matter, by such worthies as
Richard Morris, Stephen Hawking, Steven Weinberg, Paul Davies and Kip
Thorne, as well as a host of others. Furthermore, since Wayne stated that
he "didn't buy" dark matter, I had to assume that he was _not_ referring
to
mere non-radiating baryonic matter, since he's sitting on a big chunk of
it
we like to call Earth. :-) Finally, since "hot dark matter" in the form
of
neutrinos has been detected (and, if they have sufficient mass, could even
be sufficient to close the universe by themselves), I would assume that
Wayne is referring solely to more exotic forms of non-baryonic dark matter
such as WIMPS, axions, shadow matter, cosmic strings, etc.
Now, how about you settle down before I slap a light cone on your ass? :-)
>> The problem with recycling universes is that
>> the laws of thermodynamics prevent a universe
>> from cycling infinitely between bang-crunch-bang.
>> Such a process would "quickly" (in very, very few
>> rebounds) produce a dead, open universe.
> That's debatable.
To paraphrase Stephen Hawking, if you plan to debate the laws of
thermodynamics, you don't have much of a chance. The laws of thermodynamics
don't let anyone win, break even, or quit the game.
> Especially considering that each new "Bang" would be
> anew and surely equal in energy/mass as the previous
> ones
Entropy doesn't refer to how _much_ energy is around, it refers to how much
_usable_ energy is around -- it's not how much energy you've got, but the
disequilibrium. You are confused, but I forgive you willingly. I also
suggest that we take further discussions on this topic to private mail as
we've probably bored everyone else to tears with all this stuff. :-) I
would be quite happy to continue the discussion there if you like, and
assure you that I harbor no ill feelings.
---
* Origin: Fidonet<->Internet Gateway (1:102/125.99)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 102/125 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Mark Kimes
|To: Steve Kemp
|Sub: Re: Zwicky
|Date: 12 Jan 01 21:18:30
EID:6a13 622caa40
MSGID: 1:102/125.99 d9aa2eee
REPLYTO 1:102/125.99 UUCP
REPLYADDR HOLYSMOKE-LIST@salata.com
GID GIGO+ sn 148 at salata vsn 0.99.970109
From: Mark Kimes
X-Ftn-To: Steve Kemp
(posted TO: Steve Kemp)
FTN-Posted-By: Mark Kimes
> FTN-Posted-By: Steve Kemp
To make sure my usage of the term "dark matter" was correct, I took a look
at the definition proposed by the originator, Fritz Zwicky. (I promise,
folks, last post here on the topic):
Zwicky's definition of dark matter was: "Matter that neither emits _nor
absorbs_ light, our primary means of observation." [Emphasis mine]
I also found this, which I thought was entertaining:
"Zwicky had a difficult personality, and intentionally intimidated his quiet
colleague Baade. Zwicky was also fond of calling people 'spherical
bastards,' because they were bastards every way he looked at them. He used
to prowl the halls of the astronomy building at Caltech (Robinson Hall),
accosting unfamiliar students with the interrogation 'Who the hell are
you!?'"
Hec
http://www.hectorplasmic.com
---
* Origin: Fidonet<->Internet Gateway (1:102/125.99)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 102/125 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: GOD DAN
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 08:40:00
EID:aae2 622d4500
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 fa517f63
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting God Dan to Sally Springett <=-
BN> I save the chicken fat for pie crusts. No, really. None of
SS> Is it really as good as lard?
GD> Best guess is that you'd have to confirm that with Ed Wierd...
I thought that was Cornish game hens.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: JOHN WILSON
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 08:41:00
EID:beef 622d4520
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 2e49de9e
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting John Wilson to Marty Leipzig <=-
JW> Jeremiah. P. Ostriker (In 2000 he won the U.S. National medal of
JW> Science) And Paul j. Steinhardt, both of Princeton.
In what discipline? I'm really tired of the so-called 'credentials' of
creationists. Their list of 'scientists' looks impressive, too. Until
you start to notice that there's not one BIOLOGIST in the bunch. (Several
economists and engineers, though)
So these people could be scientists and still not know what they're
talking about. I'm not likely to have any confidence in an inorganic
chemist talking about cosmology. And if you do, then maybe you need to
see a proctologist the next time your teeth need cleaned.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: God Dan
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 07 Jan 01 15:10:00
EID:9089 62277940
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 8cb36ff6
TZUTC: -0800
MG> Why do some christians hate homosexuals?
RS> You'd have to ask THEM.
GD> So, you love homosexuals. Which one are you married to?
You seem to have a very limited list of
possibilities. Why are there only these
extremes?
I love my sisters and brothers, but I
wouldn't want to live with any of them. :^)
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Fuzzy logic: a Vulcan contemplating a tribble.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Curtis Johnson
|Sub: Biblical contradicti
|Date: 07 Jan 01 18:48:00
EID:0e9a 62279600
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 65e601c1
TZUTC: -0800
DH> It is, after all, the context out of which you have been taking
DH> everything you *have* read.
CJ> Robert, the below does not help at all Dave understand why
CJ> you haven't even bother to read through this book that you think to
CJ> be so wonderful above any other book. The more you talk it up, the
CJ> harder it is for Dave (and me, and even probably your pastor/priest)
CJ> to understand why you haven't bothered to read it all the way
CJ> through.
RS> I received a new Bible for Christmas,
RS> and I'm reading it currently.
CJ> Be sure to compare parallel passages closely, asking yourself
CJ> such questions as "Who killed Goliath?" "Was it Satan or God that's
CJ> responsible for suckering David into taking the census?" "Who went
CJ> to the tomb of Jesus, when, and what did they see" etc.
RS> I believe the accounts I've read in the
RS> Bible, of people witnessing miracles.
CJ> Why those miracles instead of the miracles in the sacred
CJ> books of other religions?
RS> These are what I've been exposed to,
RS> so far. That's like asking me why I
RS> haven't read many different science
RS> texts.
CJ> Science hangs together. Different religions don't.
CJ> Do you or don't you believe in the claims of miracles of
CJ> religions that don't believe in your God?
I must claim ignorance. Perhaps
situations could occur, where we
are talking of the same God,
without realizing it.
RS> I have had experiences that I believe
RS> reinforce much of what I've heard and read.
CJ> Most religionists of other religions also make that claim.
CJ> No response?
What would you have me say? I would
expect them to do so.
RS> I have thought about the complexities of
RS> the universe and cannot fathom a more
RS> logical explanation for its intricacy.
CJ> Have you examined other explanations? I rather have a
CJ> fondness for the ancient Greek one of chaos for an indefinite
CJ> period, which eventually threw up the Titans, who then got going
CJ> on the universe.
RS> But, chaos of WHAT? Where did that
RS> "something" come from to be in chaos?
CJ> Chaos, by definition, is the *absence* of something--an
CJ> ordering power. But randomicity can throw up order (the
CJ> proverbial example being monkeys at a typewriter that will
CJ> eventually produced something readable.)
This does not address the issue of WHAT
was in chaos. (I don't truely expect that
monkeys with typewriters WILL produce a
novel, regardless the amount of time
available.)
RS> To me, the power that is capable of
RS> creating something from absolutely
RS> nothing is God. This "beginning" is
RS> necessary for my mind, and establishes,
RS> to me, that God is, because we are.
CJ> The vacuum is capable of creating something. Read up on
CJ> physics and "quantum fluctuations," "virtual particle pairs,"
CJ> "Lamb shift," etc.
Where did the energy come from?
CJ> What may be necessary for your mind does not mean necessary
CJ> for the universe.
True; but, it's a limit within myself
that I recognize.
CJ> "Beginning" and "creation" requires time to exist; yet it
CJ> is as nonsensical to speak of time outside space-time as to
CJ> speak of driving a car over the ocean.
CJ> It is man that created the notion of "God," etc.
I admit that this is true, for me. See
above about my need for an origin.
CJ> Incidentally, many early Christians did not think well of
CJ> the supernatural figure they held created the universe.
OK.
RS> I trust many people smarter than I who also
RS> believe and have studied in great detail,
RS> the Bible and Christianity.
CJ> Not everyone who's studied those two in detail are Christians.
RS> True. But, those whom I know, are.
CJ> You're corresponding with one who isn't.
And, in time, I may get to know you, too.
RS> I have not seen evidence that is contrary
RS> to a devine creator.
CJ> Sad to say, there is considerable evidence against a
CJ> Creator who is both benevolent and omnipotent, omniscient, etc.
RS> I cannot agree, as I don't have
RS> enough knowledge of His "plans" and
RS> "thought processes" to say what His
RS> "actions" and "inactions" really mean,
RS> just as a child may not understand the
RS> actions of their parent.
CJ> One of my favorite examples is the Guinea worm, widespread ...
CJ> ... The only method was to split the tip of a stick, splash water
CJ> on the sore so that the egg-laying end of the GW would protrude,
CJ> and clamp the split end of the stick onto the end of the GW.
CJ> However, attempting to yank the GW out or even to roll it out all
CJ> at once would break the GW, which would then die and putrefy within
CJ> the patient. One had to slowly give the stick one twist a day.
CJ> What kind of a sick fuck would deliberately create something
CJ> like that?
I must admit that I do not
understand why.
TTYL and thanks for an informative post.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * When your head's in the sand, your ass is a target.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Don Martin
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 12 Jan 01 18:16:00
EID:1903 622c9200
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 8be69e9e
TZUTC: -0800
RS> It is they that keep crying to provide
RS> evidence, and they that demand that I
RS> denounce God.
DM> Bullshit.
Look over the messages that are addressed
to me and see for yourself. They ask, and
THEN I try to provide that which I can.
DM> Provide some real evidence for any god here and
DM> you'll see all sorts of WOAs converting on the spot.
DM> Who _demands_ that you denounce god? Name that person
DM> and give the quote.
I don't archive the posts. I can't even
tell you who it was, as I didn't try to
memorize his name. As I said above, just
look over the posts that are addressed to
me and you should find more than one
instance. Paraphrasing: Admit that there
never is, was, or could be a God. NOW!
DM> Personally, I don't give much of a shit one way or another
DM> _what_ you do with your imaginary superfriend, so long as you
DM> do not expect my support in your doing it.
The only support that I expect is
support of my right to believe.
RS> I have experienced things that I
RS> consider to be evidence. If you do not
RS> consider them to be evidence, so be it.
DM> And people who have wet dreams may suppose themselves to
DM> have had intimate relations with Julia Roberts, too. If
DM> nobody else (including Julia Roberts) shares their fond
DM> suppositions, so be it.
No argument.
RS> I see no need to "be so mean", in any
RS> case; and I now expect "meanness" from
RS> the majority here, so it has no effect.
DM> It certainly does not seem to have spurred you to
DM> thinking more clearly.
Do you really expect "meanness" to spur
clear thinking? Seems to me, that's the
opposite of what is expected or intended.
TTYL and thanks for the post.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Do Not Disturb. I'm already disturbed!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 07 Jan 01 16:22:00
EID:16bf 622782c0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 2485b57a
TZUTC: -0800
JB> Nope. Because along with their data, they have to describe how
JB> they arrived at it. If their data is correct I can replicate it
JB> for myself, I don't even have to directly believe them.
RS> But, I'll bet you don't. You just
RS> take it on faith that you could.
JB> NO I DON'T TAKE IT "ON FAITH"...
JB> ... I have confidence ...
JB> But something spurious I will check out on my own or wait for
JB> the word from people I do have confidence in.
You are correct. "Confidence" is a
better choice of words.
JB> The fact is that scientists don't publish unless they are sure
JB> that their results are replicable by others. When they aren't
JB> they lose their grants, they lose respect, they lose confidence.
JB> They end up cleaning mouse shit in the lab ... if they're lucky.
You mean, like cold fusion?
JB> Your religion will NEVER do any of these things. All they want
JB> is for you to believe with nothing to show you WHY you should
JB> believe.
You talk about "your religion" as if it were
a person or people, rather than a belief. *IT*
is what I believe (much of it, anyway). THEY
are people and fallible. Hopefully, THEY (as
I) are trying to figure it all out, and to do
"the right things".
TTYL and thanks for the post.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * A fool and his data are soon parted.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 07 Jan 01 16:52:00
EID:22a9 62278680
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 93e1d4e4
TZUTC: -0800
RS> Are you telling me that you do not
RS> have to have faith in the persons
RS> and methods that were used to develop
RS> the data which you take as evidence?
JB> Nope. Because along with their data, they have to describe how
JB> they arrived at it. If their data is correct I can replicate it
JB> for myself, I don't even have to directly believe them.
RS> But, I'll bet you don't. You just
RS> take it on faith that you could.
KS> And do you apply the same standard to your skepticism of
KS> evolution?
I'm not sure what you're asking here.
What I've been taught about evolution is
that it is incomplete. I'm not overly
concerned with whether it is true or not,
so I don't pursue it. I was just trying
to say (though poorly) that none of these
are absolutes.
Thanks for the post, Karl.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Love is grand. Divorce is fifty grand.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Sue Alexander
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 07 Jan 01 18:03:00
EID:7291 62279060
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 8e82891a
TZUTC: -0800
SA> So, if God created all from nothing, does that mean that God is
SA> nothing? Thought so...
RS> Anything that can create that which _is_,
RS> from absolutely nothing, cannot reasonably
RS> be called nothing.
SA> Why is it easier for you to believe that God has always existed
SA> than to say you just don't know what was there? The logical
SA> arguments in your statement are profound... the most straight
SA> forward being who/what created the creator?
As I cannot find an end to the question
"But, where did THAT come from", I have
decided that there must be an ultimate
origin. I call that ultimate origin God,
because that's what I've been taught is
what others have called it. I have seen
nothing that makes me think that there
was not an origin.
Since I believe that an origin must
exist, I must also believe that that
ultimate origin must have created itself.
It also must have created everything
else, whether directly or indirectly.
Anything with THAT power cannot
reasonably be called nothing, IMO.
TTYL, Sue, and thanks for a great post.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Save the whales! Collect the whole set!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Don Martin
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 07 Jan 01 19:24:00
EID:1903 62279b00
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 f320c6ce
TZUTC: -0800
JB> And yet, there is MORE evidence for the Easter Bunny than
JB> there is for your god ...
RS> Justify this position.
DM> EGGS, Dimbulb.
RS> I guess I'm pretty dense.
DM> The inability to connect any dots whatsoever _does_ seem
DM> to be your presenting symptom, yes, but I am sure that this
DM> condition can be ameliorated, if not cured, by reading. Have
DM> you found any book on language and informal logic yet?
I know it's a cop-out, but I am having
trouble finding time to read the Bible
as well as technical magazines, etc. and
still respond here. HOLYSMOKE takes up
most all of my free time. Looking for
more information to read, at least for
now, is a very low priority.
RS> I don't understand your answer.
DM> And you expect people to be surprised by this admission?
No. Why should I?
RS> Are you saying that you have evidence of eggs that came
RS> from "the Easter Bunny"?
DM> I do not, but so far as the devotees of that imaginary
DM> superfriend are concerned, those eggs are evidence
DM> sufficient that their furry little buddy exists. This is an
DM> example of what you would call "faith dependent" evidence:
DM> it satisfies the believers and amuses everyone else.
Yet, she inferred that there IS
evidence. That's the position that
I wanted her to justify.
If colored eggs are the evidence,
religious artifacts are evidence,
too.
Thanks, Don. TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Not hungry. Not homeless. Will work for sex.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Don Martin
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 07 Jan 01 19:28:00
EID:1903 62279b80
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 b9f67976
TZUTC: -0800
SM>> Either come up with evidence we will accept, Robert,
SM>> or admit that your God does not exist, never has
SM>> existed, never will exist, and CAN not exist.
Here's the quote that tells me to
denounce God. It was in one of your
replies to me (though, I realize
that you did not make the demand).
Thanks. I couldn't have sent it
without you (or someone else)
posting it again. I still couldn't
tell you the name of the poster.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Why can't women remember to put the seat back up?
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Obviously nuthin' much..
|Date: 07 Jan 01 22:20:00
EID:0b52 6227b280
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 39efb552
TZUTC: -0800
MG> The Bible says "in his image". I've asked you before..
MG> how are we different we are created in his image?
RS> "In His image" does not equal "exact replica".
KS> And that of course is the crux of the problem: What
KS> attributes ARE replicated, and which are NOT? By allowing
KS> any range of differences, you are effectively (very)
KS> promulgating a gap huge enough to 'explain away' any
KS> inconvenient contradictions.
I don't know. The ability to know
right from wrong and to choose
between them would probably be two
similarities. As I don't know, I
must leave "a gap huge enough to
'explain away' any inconvenient
contradictions".
KS> What human most closely approximates the original?...Jesse
KS> Jackson?... Adolph Hitler?...Alexander the Great?...you might
KS> as well claim to have an 'image' of an animal and it is that
KS> of a leopard, or a snail. Can't you see how ridiculous the
KS> idea is?
Have you ever looked at a drawing
made by a small child? :^)
Seriously. We aren't an image, we
are made in His image. I don't
know that any one person more
"closely approximates the original"
than does another.
RS> As for the differences and the similarities, I
RS> don't know. God can do anything. I cannot do as
KS> That might be so. But as yet, there's no evidence that she
KS> HAS done anything. Sorry.
RS> You keep trying to equate us with God.
RS> You cannot. God is the creator; the
RS> designer. He can do no wrong, whether
RS> we understand it or not.
KS> Believe it or not, I almost understand your mindset on this. God
KS> sends tornadoes to kill 100 people just to show everyone how much
KS> power he has. And the 2 who survive give thanks that they weren't.
KS> So everything is fine and dandy. That is the kind of shit that
KS> really gyrates my hormones.
I don't know that this is not so.
I sure hope it's not.
RS> In both cases, as the creator, they can do
RS> no wrong in relation to what they create. It
KS> Just out of curiosity, if you had the ability to create a
KS> universe, or even a colony of 'intelligent' life, would you
KS> fuck with them like your perceived deity has allegedly done?
KS> Yes or no will be fine.
First, I don't claim to know why God
does or does not do anything. I don't
know that I can agree with "fuck with
them". That being said:
Being human, I might. I would hope to
be stronger than that, but `til it
happens, I really don't know.
This question made me think of a kid
watching ants. Ever mess with `em? ;^)
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Those who write the manuals, don't use the hardware.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: OBVIOUSLY NUTHIN' MUCH..
|Date: 07 Jan 01 23:46:00
EID:0b52 6227bdc0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 35b3149a
TZUTC: -0800
RS> The claim that He doesn't stop bad stuff
RS> is not true. He does stop some bad stuff.
RS> My question was: If He stopped bad stuff
RS> before it ever began, how could you know?
KS> Robert, you have hoist yourself on your own petard here: You
KS> said "He does stop some bad stuff" which indicates you have some
KS> psychic knowledge of 'bad stuff' that MIGHT have happened, but in
KS> the same short paragraph you ask the very question that you would
KS> need to answer!
KS> Maybe it needs to be put a little simpler: What 'bad stuff' has
KS> 'he' stopped (per your claim) and even more interestingly, how do
KS> you know? Please think about how absurd your position here is!
I think you are assuming that I
know of "bad stuff" that was stopped
before it started. I made no such
claim. I only asked how someone
would know, had that happened.
I said that He has stopped some
"bad stuff".
Many stories in the Bible tell of God
stopping some "bad stuff" directly.
(Parting of the Red Sea, etc.)
I have donated food and used
clothes, purchased new clothes, school
supplies, etc. for less fortunates
because of my belief in Him. This is
God stopping some "bad stuff"
indirectly.
RS> You can't have good without bad. You
RS> can't choose good over evil, if there
RS> is no evil.
KS> Nobody ever has chosen evil over good. The
KS> concepts are 100% subjective.
Because they are subjective they
cannot be chosen?
I have chosen evil over good at
times. I'm not proud of it, but
I have done it.
KS> If a Capitalist makes a profit (something, by the
KS> way, objected to by the icon of your faith), it results in a
KS> loss by someone else. There is a 'good', from the seller's view
KS> and an 'evil' (loss) to the purchaser. It isn't a completely
KS> equitable transaction. You really ought to read about what Jesus
KS> had to say about it.
I disagree that a profit requires a
loss. And I'm not talking about a
spiritual profit, either.
If I work and plant a garden, I will
profit by that garden. No
corresponding loss will occur to
anyone else. If I sell some of the
vegetables from that garden to my
neighbors, I will profit by that and
so will they. It's win - win.
If I have something in my closet that
is just taking up room, and I sell it,
I make a profit. The person buying can
also cosider the transaction
profitable.
Loss can occur, due to evil, but it
is not, in and of itself, evil.
I really don't understand where the
idea that profit = bad comes from.
Without profit, we would die.
I know the idea of the rich man,
camel, and needle eye. And the story
of selling doves, etc. at the temple.
Are you talking about something else?
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * 3 stages of sex: Tri-weekly, Try weekly, Try weakly.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Marty Leipzig
|Sub: Obviously nuthin' much..
|Date: 12 Jan 01 18:27:00
EID:88bc 622c9360
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 c08dd2e8
TZUTC: -0800
KS> when it comes from religio-nuts. All you wackoes like to spread
KS> that kind of shit around, but when someone is -about- to die, you
KS> fall all over yourselves praying for it NOT to happen.
RS> Some do. Many don't see that they are
RS> usually being selfish when they do this.
RS> I pray for the soul of the person to be
RS> accepted into heaven. I pray for the
RS> family to get through the tough situation
RS> with the least pain.
ML> So, you "pray", which is a supplication to your "God" to
ML> change the concert of "His" "perfect creation" (After all, "He"
ML> is supposed to be omnisicent, omnipotoent, omnietc., correct?)
ML> and yet you still entreat "Him" to change it to what you
ML> "believe" is better?
RS> I pray because I've been taught
ML> You pray because you've been brainwashed and incapable of
ML> critical thinking.
RS> that
RS> God can and will help those that ask
RS> for His help, and that I can ask for
RS> help on the behalf of others.
ML> Still you commit the sin of hubris asking your God to
ML> change His plans to suit YOU.
ML> And you find nothing, ever so tiny bit, disquieting about that?
It's what He's told us to do.
RS> All
RS> that He requires is that we choose
RS> Him.
ML> Why is it that an omnipotent, omniscient God NEEDS anything?
ML> Particularly from mere mortals?
I don't know that He does. Perhaps
"wants" would be more correct.
ML> So, evidently, by your own words and actions (inactions,
ML> really, prayer tends to be nothing more than a raising of
ML> hands upward (or a pious folding) coupled with that usual
ML> "who-cut-one" eye's-wide closed goofy expression), you are
ML> better than your "God" (the author of the entire cosmos),
ML> but yet you still are powerless to do anything but pray to
ML> ask "Him" to change "His" plan, just for you?
RS> You misunderstand. See above.
ML> I did, and you STILL have not explained why you're so damned
ML> special that God'll change His cosmic plans for your determined
ML> pleading.
I don't know why you and I are so
special.
ML> Or why you're so egomanical.
We are all special. Not an ego
issue.
ML> Hmph. Must go with the territory.
ML> A tautology, wrapped up in hubris, with a ribbon of
ML> selfishness.
ML> Luckily, many other folks prefer action to the sort of
ML> weird supplication (and ululation) you seem to prefer.
RS> What action do they take when someone
RS> is about to die, that believers do not?
ML> They provide real aid and comfort, not some illusory
ML> supplication to some supposed superfriend that it'll be
ML> all right, in the next life.
I work in a Catholic hospital. We do
much more than just pray. Besides,
what's wrong with saying "it'll be
all right, in the next life" if it
gives comfort?
ML> Prove me wrong. Give me a list of Christian Scientist EMS'.
What do Christian Scientists have to
do with this?
RS> Why do you insinuate prayer disallows
RS> any other actions? Prayer is in addition
RS> to those actions.
KS> The ultimate manifestation of such a mindset is when
KS> 'pious' folks won't take a sick kid to a doctor. GOD
KS> DAMN, that shit makes me really mad.
ML> Hey, it's God's will. There you go again, knowing better
ML> than the deity you worship.
RS> Now, you're talking something completely
RS> different, IMO. I could never do this. I
RS> can't see how this belief comes from
RS> Christianity. This seems (to me) to be
RS> following the wrong path, so to speak.
ML> All faith is a blind path in a dark forest leading nowhere.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Windows not found: heer arty ance?
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Religion?
|Date: 08 Jan 01 21:34:00
EID:95ce 6228ac40
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 3732b34c
TZUTC: -0800
RS> I understand this idea; but, wouldn't you expect more
RS> creatures that are between man and chimp, ape, monkey, or
RS> whatever? I mean, there are so many different types of man,
RS> yet not much of anything man-like yet also "monkey"-like.
RS> Wouldn't you expect a "bigfoot" or something?
SS> How many "types of man" are there? I am unaware of any but
SS> the one commonly known as the human race.
RS> I tried to say it in a way that
RS> someone would not make a smart
RS> remark about different races of
RS> man, rather than to answer the
RS> question.
KS> Sally didn't say anything about 'races of man',...
Sally didn't say anything at all
before the above quoted lines. Would
you have been happier had I typed:
so many different colors of man?
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I'm a victim of PMS ....... My wife's!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Sue Alexander
|Sub: Religion?
|Date: 10 Jan 01 19:06:00
EID:86cd 622a98c0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 35a1b113
TZUTC: -0800
SA> That is true. However, those antibiotic-resistant bacteria
SA> that are now showing up all over the place show evolution exists.
RS> Only if you equate adaptation to evolution.
RS> We adapt to changing conditions without
RS> evolving into something different.
SA> The bacteria do not "adapt"...
SA> ... This is not adaptation, this is evolution.
All of the web sites that I went to say adapt.
A few also say mutate.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Have a nice day, somewhere else.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Marty Leipzig
|Sub: Religion?
|Date: 10 Jan 01 19:16:00
EID:7144 622a9a00
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 f5d6af13
TZUTC: -0800
SA> That is true. However, those antibiotic-resistant bacteria
SA> that are now showing up all over the place show evolution exists.
RS> Only if you equate adaptation to evolution.
ML> Evolution operates on populations, not individuals. It also
ML> operates over the span of geological time, not the pitiful time
ML> scales of humanity.
So, evolved MDR bacteria would take
more than "the pitiful time scales
of humanity" to occur. Thanks, Marty.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * My wife and I were happy for 20 years. Then we met.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Don Martin
|Sub: Still don't get "free
|Date: 10 Jan 01 19:31:00
EID:a023 622a9be0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 71738d3f
TZUTC: -0800
RS> Just a WAG, but, might God be bored if He just
RS> made everything do exactly as He wanted?
DM> Just an observation from logical consequences, but is it
DM> _possible_ for an omniscient and omnipotent being to make
DM> everything any _other_ way than exactly as it wanted?
No. But, why couldn't He make beings
that could make their own choices?
DM> This is a rhetorical question, one for which an answer
DM> is not required. If you don't "get it", please go read
DM> and learn rather than replying.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * As I said before, I NEVER repeat myself!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: SALLY SPRINGETT
|To: BLANCHE NONKEN
|Sub: Re: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 15:52:00
EID:c9a6 622d7e80
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 8edda188
TZUTC: -0500
BN> I save the chicken fat for pie crusts. No, really. None of
BN> that Crisco shit. Plain, unflavored rendered chicken fat
BN> makes the _best_ pie crusts.
SS> Is it really as good as lard?
BN> In my opinion, better. The crust is more tender, flakier, has
BN> a lovely golden color and a finer crumb. A little harder to
BN> handle, as chicken fat's fairly liquid at room temperature.
BN> So I chill the bowl, the flour, the fat and the other
BN> ingredients first.
I'll have to try it. I make at least one pie every single year.
___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: God Dan
|Sub: Re: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 23:07:02
EID:0d16 622cb8e0
MSGID: 1:153/7715.0 3a5ffe96
-=> God Dan wrote to John Wilson <=-
-> On 10 Jan 01 19:57:04, John Wilson got back to God Dan
GD> Scientists correct there mistakes. Theologians have their view
GD> cut in stone.
GD> Try making the connection.
JW> Oh, please. Try a few Issues of New Testament abstracts. Or even
GD> Has it ever occured to you that I have?
Yes, but not from your statement above.
----------------
GD> Just becuase she's your girlfriend doesn't mean she's a goddess
GD> to anyone but you.
Absolutly, positivly, exactly correct!
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: MARK KIMES
|Sub: Dark Shadows
|Date: 13 Jan 01 16:42:00
EID:8c83 622d8540
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 b51401fe
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Mark Kimes to Steve Kemp <=-
MK> I also suggest that we take further discussions on this topic to
MK> private mail as we've probably bored everyone else to tears with all
MK> this stuff. :-)
I'd rather be bored by this than the comedy team of Sayre and Wilson.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 13 Jan 01 16:43:00
EID:0495 622d8560
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 cfffae02
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Robert Sayre to Karl Schneider <=-
RS> I'm not sure what you're asking here.
RS> What I've been taught about evolution is
RS> that it is incomplete. I'm not overly
Of course it's incomplete, dimbulb. Evolution is an ONGOING
process. As long as there is ANY type of life at all, evolution
will continue.
Try thinking for once instead of just swallowing everything. Pick
up a book and look for yourself for a change.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Cindy Haglund
|To: ALL
|Sub: Foxholes
|Date: 11 Jan 01 16:59:00
EID:bb4f 622b8760
Favorite xtian adage?: "You'll find no atheists in foxholes."
Yup. While this adage is meant to be derogatory from the xtian pov I
believe it isn't.
Atheists don't believe in killing people.
Cindy
* SLMR 2.1a * Confucius say: Look for helping hand on end of own arm.
--- Synchronet+SBBSecho v1.30
* Origin: The Sanatorium //the-sanatorium.dyn.dhs.org (1:260/432)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 260/432 2613/404 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Cindy Haglund
|To: DAVE HAMILTON
|Sub: Obviously nuthin' much..
|Date: 11 Jan 01 17:01:00
EID:06c2 622b8820
DH> JW> I, like most people prefer to think that my view of reality is
sharp, DH> JW> precise, accurate; founded in experience and knowledge.
DH>Reality is a consensus of observations.
ROTFL
Gee.. I see smoke! Dale is on fire!
Cindy
* SLMR 2.1a * One person's theology is another's belly laugh.
--- Synchronet+SBBSecho v1.30
* Origin: The Sanatorium //the-sanatorium.dyn.dhs.org (1:260/432)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 260/432 2613/404 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Cindy Haglund
|To: JOHN WILSON
|Sub: Still don't get "fre
|Date: 11 Jan 01 17:14:00
EID:c133 622b89c0
JW>-=> John Wilson wrote to Mark Kimes What would be ironic if it were more imporant, is that this echo
JW>deals with profound subjects in such simplistic ways.
Yes John. Religion is simple. Non-religion is profound.
Many people here in HS try to show you hwy Relgion sucks, in a
simplistic way. WHY? Because religion is so simplistic and believers
need simplistic explantions. Yet I don't see much getting through.
JW>...so it is with both biblical tudies and theology.
LOL. And Grimm Fairy Tales as well?
JW>Some people believe for a time in the bible being inerrent, unchangable
JW>and God-written because of the bewilderingness of the alternative.
JW>(And for other reasons, of course.
JW>(To such: C'mon in: the waters fine!) :-)
The Bible is a book JOhn. Understand? It was written by men.
"Inspired by God" you say? Well hate to bust your ark honey but
um inspiration is a construct of the human mind; and so isn't "GOD".
JW>concerning every aspect of New Testament study you (or they) could think
of.
JW>High praise for some monographs/books/articles; some severly chastised.
One thing Religion does do, is keep the economy going, like cigarettes,
Barbie dolls and booze.
JW>My point is that saying that I'm keeping up is the same as hearing others
JW>say that *they* are keeping up with Science.
Keeping up with ignorance seems to be your forte' John.
JW>Most posts here seem to be childish squabbles about those who
Actually people just get frustrated saying the same thing over and over
and over again. That's just 'human nature' for you.
JW>take a holy book as containing somethings with which ordinary science
does
What is "HOLY" John? As in water? Some fat assed priest or whatever
waves his meaty little hand ovver some water and says it's holy!? OH
come on.... bullpoop.
State the physical properties of 'holy' John. Did you run a test on this
so called 'holy water' and find out something 'there' extra?
JW>not deal, and those who take the view that that book should be thrown
away;
JW>but no substitute for what to some is a way of life. And without the
JW>courtesy/modesty to be agnostic! :-)
Blahblahblahbah blather John.
JW>To think that one has plumbed the depths of a profound book and have
Profound? Yes most fantasies are quite profound, yet shallow in reality.
JW>just grounds for declaring it worthless, is a sign of an even bigger
ego
JW>that I have been declared (with a *leetle* bit of justification :-)
JW>to have.
JW>Amid whatever rubble that needs discarding are bits of that non-science
JW>called wisdom. Contained elsewhere certainly, but one of the
JW>first of a gazillion books on the market today: how to lead a truly happy
JW>life. (Modern books are, of course an improvmeent, they offer a 20lb.
JW>weight loss in less than a month! :-)
Sure thing John just like how it is the bibble promises some sort of
edenic afterlife to those who are 'saved'...
JW>In this era of info-glut where everyone is behind in *something*
JW>I fear even this echo is behind in something
I think John, you are behind in reality.
JW>of greater importantance to me as time goes by
JW>And the word is "manners"
Or money? I mean that's what religion is for ... mostly.
JW>The insulting smugness that counters ignorance benefits ---whom?---
The person who is tired of asking you the same thing over and over
again. It's a vent John.
Cindy
JW> JW> ... Alexander the Grape--he concord the world.
JW> JW> ___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
JW> JW> --- Maximus 3.01
JW> JW> * Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
JW>___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
JW>--- Maximus 3.01
JW> * Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
* SLMR 2.1a * When a problem goes away, the people working on it do not
--- Synchronet+SBBSecho v1.30
* Origin: The Sanatorium //the-sanatorium.dyn.dhs.org (1:260/432)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 260/432 2613/404 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Karl Schneider
|To: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|Sub: Thanks again
|Date: 12 Jan 01 19:38:50
EID:8872 622c9cc0
GMD: 1:396/1
MSGID: 1:170/501 43936aae
On (12 Jan 01) WAYNE CHIRNSIDE wrote to JUDITH BANDSMA...
WC> Update on the dogs teeth.
WC> Spankys teeth are now remarkably clean, I'm
WC> forever in your debt.
WC> Those turkey necks really did the trick and
WC> I'm somewhat astounded at how really clean his teeth are.
WC> Maybe science ought to look at putting this enzyme
WC> into people toothpaste.
I suspect the enzymes are secondary to the abrasive action, but,
hell... whatever works! '>
... You promised a drug-free America. I want my free drugs.
--- PPoint 3.01
* Origin: Snug Harbor (1:170/501)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 170/501 500 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 13 Jan 01 15:03:00
EID:0171 622d7860
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 e4b4ecc1
TZUTC: -0500
-=> ROBERT SAYRE wrote to JUDITH BANDSMA <=-
JB> But something spurious I will check out on my own or wait for
JB> the word from people I do have confidence in.
RS> You are correct. "Confidence" is a
RS> better choice of words.
JB> The fact is that scientists don't publish unless they are sure
JB> that their results are replicable by others. When they aren't
JB> they lose their grants, they lose respect, they lose confidence.
JB> They end up cleaning mouse shit in the lab ... if they're lucky.
RS> You mean, like cold fusion?
And those scientists are cleaning up mouse shit in the lab, at best.
Your fairy tale has had no supporting evidence for a couple
thousand years, cold fusion weas debunked in a couple of months.
Apply the same standards to the bible as to cold fusion and
the bible loses big time.
... Fundies are like mushrooms, they like to be fed shit in the dark.
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.35
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: ROSS SAUER
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 13 Jan 01 12:37:00
EID:3734 622d64a0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 7623b990
TZUTC: -0500
RS>.TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
RS>.MSGID: 1:205/40 93e1d4e4
RS>.TZUTC: -0800
RS>RS> Are you telling me that you do not
RS>RS> have to have faith in the persons
RS>RS> and methods that were used to develop
RS>RS> the data which you take as evidence?
RS>JB> Nope. Because along with their data, they have to describe how
RS>JB> they arrived at it. If their data is correct I can replicate it
RS>JB> for myself, I don't even have to directly believe them.
RS>RS> But, I'll bet you don't. You just
RS>RS> take it on faith that you could.
RS>KS> And do you apply the same standard to your skepticism of
RS>KS> evolution?
RS> I'm not sure what you're asking here.
RS>What I've been taught about evolution is
RS>that it is incomplete.
No Robert, it is NOT incomplete.
Our full knowledge of it is what's incomplete.
RS>I'm not overly
RS>concerned with whether it is true or not,
RS>so I don't pursue it.
Then why not actually study it, rather than getting propaganda from the
ICR and "answersingenesis?"
---
þ CMPQwk #1.42þ UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: ROSS SAUER
|To: HECTORP@SOFTDISK.COM
|Sub: Re: Silly fundy
|Date: 13 Jan 01 19:35:00
EID:29cf 622d9c60
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 541b14bc
TZUTC: -0500
TO: HECTORP@SOFTDISK.COM
MK>> Art Bell has left his radio show, and some other
MK>> idiot like him has taken his place. (Forgot the
MK>> shithead's name.)
MK>Yeah, I know, but if I'd said his name instead of Art's (and I don't
MK>remember it off the top of my head, either), you wouldn't have known
MK>what I was talking about, would you? :-)
True.
þ CMPQwk 1.42 16554 þ
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: God Dan
|To: John Wilson
|Sub: Scientific Method
|Date: 13 Jan 01 01:50:16
EID:9764 622d0e40
PID: OMX 1.00.DOS [NR]
MSGID: 1:393/9005.30 3a5fb458
-> On 11 Jan 01 14:14:12, John Wilson got back to God Dan
JW> And you have yet to realize that that is *exactly* what I object to.
GD> You have yet to realize that no one gives a shit.
JW> I *am* begining, to their loss, to realize just that.
So, John, pull the handle on the device that is named after
you and flush yourself before we need to call in the septic
service.
... The confusion is all yours, John Wilson.
--- OMX/Blue Wave v2.12
* Origin: Soundly on the Fault Line (1:393/9005.30)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 393/9005 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: God Dan
|To: Michael Gothreau
|Sub: Evidence?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 21:24:09
EID:7ce8 622dab00
PID: OMX 1.00.DOS [NR]
MSGID: 1:393/9005.30 3a60c779
-> On 10 Jan 01 18:00:47, Michael Gothreau got back to God Dan
-> Re: Evidence?
RS> * SLMR 2.1a * Philosophers are tourists. Scientists are
RS> explorers.
JW> ...and true theists are residents. :-)
GD> See tagline. You fit in far too well.
GD> ... Did you ever notice how fundies like to argue with taglines?
MG> He should have written "...and true theists are sheep."
MG> Nobody could have argued with that...
Yeah, but someome might steal that...
... "...and true theists are sheep." -- Michael Gothreau
--- OMX/Blue Wave v2.12
* Origin: Soundly on the Fault Line (1:393/9005.30)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 393/9005 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: God Dan
|To: MARTY LEIPZIG
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 21:51:24
EID:fc2b 622dae60
PID: OMX 1.00.DOS [NR]
MSGID: 1:393/9005.30 3a60cddc
-> On 11 Jan 01 23:26:00, MARTY LEIPZIG got back to GOD DAN
GD> Back in the 1960's, the resultant was Au + H2O
WC> Uh, little confused here, isn't Pb lead, S2 sulfer and Au
WC> gold. A little more alchamy going on here than allowed for in
WC> science. Ain't it lead sulphide or some such.
GD> "Gold" "Water", a former presidential candidate.
ML> FeS2.
GD> There's no '2' in ferrous sulfide.
ML> Nor is there a "fool", yet...
GD> Au, you shouldn't go that way..
ML> That's just none of your Bi.
Aren't you be rather un-(x)Hg2 to me?
GD> Don't you hate a smart-ass?
ML> Harumph.
GD> As I now know, I am pyrite at times.
ML> Well, don't be realgar (AsS).
Don't be so AsHg2.
... Been there, done that, did the microsedimentology. [Marty Leipzig]
--- OMX/Blue Wave v2.12
* Origin: Soundly on the Fault Line (1:393/9005.30)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 393/9005 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Mark Kimes
|To: Marty Leipzig
|Sub: Re: Teric.
|Date: 13 Jan 01 10:44:25
EID:f30e 622d5580
MSGID: 1:102/125.99 154a3f92
REPLYTO 1:102/125.99 UUCP
REPLYADDR HOLYSMOKE-LIST@salata.com
GID GIGO+ sn 148 at salata vsn 0.99.970109
From: Mark Kimes
X-Ftn-To: Marty Leipzig
(posted TO: Marty Leipzig)
FTN-Posted-By: Mark Kimes
> FTN-Posted-By: Marty Leipzig
JW>> ...what are the benefits, other than discarding
JW>> a lot of theological and cultural lingusitic
JW>> baggage? A clearer picture of your life's
JW>> meaning or purpose or worth?
> It's a helluva lot more than simply linguistics.
> It's an unfettering of one's mind from questions
> which, by their very construction, cannot be
> answered. Why chase illusory waterfowl when
> there's an entire cosmos out there to investigate?
At the very least it frees you from old, unsatisfactory answers to loaded
questions, and allows you to look at the questions that were intentionally
not asked prior to those loaded questions. What causes many of the
questions to be discarded is the ability to look at them honestly and
realize that they're invalid in the first place -- but you may find a valid
question underneath it.
JW>> If value is not of scientific interest
One might well view scientific method as a means of ferreting out value
from
fields of dross. What John-boy actually means is that scientific value
is
not of interest to him, perhaps.
JW>> and atheism introduces a bleakness
JW>> regarding death...
> If you require some supernatural being to personally
> make your life worthwhile, then there is nothing I
> can say to alter that situation.
Ah, but he's giving away his real problem there -- he's looking at
"bleakness regarding death" rather than "worthwhile value in life."
ML>>>>> Oh, yeah? With which revision of the Bible,
ML>>>>> Qu'ran, Torah, etc?
JW>>>> They are *all* being revised, every day....
ML>>> Sorry, but quite a few billion of very
ML>>> religious, very fundamentalist and very
ML>>> deluded people disagree with you.
JW>> Oh they may now, but few are up to the world.
JW>> Change comes faster and faster...
> Only religion is still stuck in the stasis of
> immutability.
John-boy's just telling you that his religion is better than theirs. "There
are new religions and religious ideas; I have embraced one, they haven't.
T
hey're wrong and I'm right. Nyah, nyah."
You're right -- same old song, same lack of reason and evidence to back
it
up.
Hec
http://www.hectorplasmic.com
---
* Origin: Fidonet<->Internet Gateway (1:102/125.99)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 102/125 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Blanche Nonken
|To: All
|Sub: Ed News
|Date: 13 Jan 01 13:40:34
EID:8a2a 622d6d00
MSGID: 1:102/125.99 2be61d2b
REPLYTO 1:102/125.99 UUCP
REPLYADDR holysmoke@salata.com
GID GIGO+ sn 148 at salata vsn 0.99.970109
From: Blanche Nonken
FTN-Posted-By: Blanche Nonken
Snipped from an email from Ed. Forwarded so you guys know he's still
alive.
>And I hope you're feeling better. Coughing up a lung >is supposed to be
a metaphor, man!
Evidently not the case with me. The shit's still
happening, after what... six weeks now! Jesus Fucking
Christ, this is getting old.
Went to the doc finally, yesterday - he gave me a
scrip for cephalexin, supposedly a good wide-
spectrum antibiotic, but thus far, it's had very little
effect. Today is another typical one for the last
month - go to work, fitful sleep. Nothing else. The catbox is starting
to look really terrible.
---
* Origin: Fidonet<->Internet Gateway (1:102/125.99)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 102/125 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: TIM RICHARDSON50
|To: CINDY HAGLUND
|Sub: Foxholes
|Date: 13 Jan 01 19:30:00
EID:2aa1 622d9bc0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 e27e6864
TZUTC: -0500
Cindy,
CH>Favorite xtian adage?: "You'll find no atheists in foxholes."
CH>
CH>Yup. While this adage is meant to be derogatory from the xtian pov I
CH>believe it isn't.
CH>
CH>Atheists don't believe in killing people.
Adolf Hitler Josef Stalin
Martin Bormann Lavrenti Beria
Hermann Goering Yuri Andropov
Josef Goebbels Mao tse Tung
Hans Frank Ho Chi Minh
Heinrich Himmler Benito Mussolini
Rudolf Hoess
Adolf Eichmann
Josef Mengele
Rheinhardt Heydrich
SS general Heigelein
Julius Streicher
Erich Koch
Ilsa Koch
Kaltenbrunner
Tim Richardson
___
* UniQWK v4.2 * The Windows Mail Reader
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Jake Campbell
|Sub: Re: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 15:29:00
EID:1413 622d7ba0
MSGID: 1:153/7715.0 3a60e4bc
-=> Jake Campbell wrote to Cindy Haglund <=-
JC> Jan 11 12:19 01, Cindy Haglund wrote to GOD DAN:
CH> I believe Religion is wrong. It's ...unnatural....
JC> Then why is there so much of it? How is it any more wrong than
JC> masturbation?
A great (if just *slightly* weird) question!
___---------
What `natural' is has been pondered by people a lot smarter'n me for
as long as rational man has been around, I suppose...
Cheers!
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: Re: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 15:38:02
EID:7b53 622d7cc0
MSGID: 1:153/7715.0 3a60e6da
-=> JUDITH BANDSMA wrote to JOHN WILSON <=-
-=> Quoting John Wilson to Marty Leipzig <=-
JW> Jeremiah. P. Ostriker (In 2000 he won the U.S. National medal of
JW> Science) And Paul j. Steinhardt, both of Princeton.
JB> In what discipline? I'm really tired of the so-called
JB> 'credentials' of creationists.
Don't think you'd find 'em in Scientific American...but...I'll look:
Jeremiah Ostriker and Paul J. Steinhardt are both professors at Prinction
...their prediction of accelerated expansion in 1995 anticipated the
groundbreaking supernova results by several years. Ostriker was one of
the first to appreciate the prevelence of dark matter and the importance
of hot intergalactic gas...Steinhardt was one of the originators of the
theory of inflation and the concept of quasicrystals...
That from the "The Authors" squib from the magazine.
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Mark Kimes Mark Kimes wrote to Steve Kemp <=-
MK<> ...I also suggest that we take further
MK<> discussions on this topic to private mail as we've probably bored
MK<> everyone else to tears with all this stuff. :-)
Not everyone. This is the first post you've made that I found *really*
interesting!
(This topic is being discussed in SCIENCE and is the prime
subject of the current Scientific American.)
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Mark Kimes I *knoe* you are more ingelligent than you
> have been acting
MK<> Unfortunately, John-boy, you aren't.
Both of us can change our minds.
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Dave Hamilton
|Sub: Obviously a great deal..
|Date: 13 Jan 01 17:15:08
EID:962b 622d89e0
MSGID: 1:153/7715.0 3a60fd9c
-=> Dave Hamilton wrote to John Wilson <=-
DH> ...Psychology doesn't define the
DH> self as an entity that could be considered together or apart
DH> from its environment.
Heavy-duty material.
It's that "or" that gives me pause. If I can get some synapses
to begin firing, I'll reply.
When you say "psychology" do you mean some, many, most or all,
psychologists define the self suchly?
Gurdjieff (*Eastern* psychology?) defines the self in a
*very* interesting way. (Actually, he's not much into `defining'.
He said "I have some good leather for those who wish to make
shoes." IOW, practical applications for his system. (He disliked
the word system, though everything he taught comes 'round to everything
else he taught...
And I'm just (still) a freshman student at this...
... God is real, unless declared "integer".
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Jake Campbell
|Sub: Re: Scientific Method
|Date: 13 Jan 01 17:23:10
EID:ffbc 622d8ae0
MSGID: 1:153/7715.0 3a60ff7e
-=> Jake Campbell wrote to John Wilson <=-
JC> ... I am just a shade more theist than agnostic, which
JC> could get me called a Fundy 'round here.
...and worse! :-)
JC> Well, in for a penny...
...in for a pounding. :-)
Cheers!
... If you explain so that nobody misunderstands, some will.
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: John Wilson
|To: Mark Kimes Mark Kimes wrote to All <=-
MK<> A fundy said:
First three words and a lie is born!
> And the Absolute is more complex than you can imagine.
MK<> But before that the fundy said:
> A belief in `The Absolute' about which nothing
> can be known...
MK<> So the fundy's claim to know that "The Absolute" is complex is
MK<> meaningless by his own "logic."
I guess you could say that I do not think the "Absolute" is simple.
Hence complex. An assumption, of course as is true of anything about which
nothing can be known to human intelligence.
Reprise:
> The point was that it was as impossible to provide
> evidence for the existance of God as It is to
> provide evidence for the existance of love.
MK<> That was the fundy's claim. However, it was pointed out to the
MK<> fundy, complete with references, that we know many of the
MK<> chemicals which cause the emotional responses we call "love."
MK<> The fundy did not argue with this fact. The fundy's reply?
> Which is not evidence.
MK<> You've just gotta love the entertainment of a blindered,
MK<> logically devoid fundy of whatever stripe.
You don't need more brain power than Forest Gump to "know
..what love is..."
And it ain't chemicals. If you really think that chemicals are what love
is, that knowing `many' of the chemicals involved explains
love, I really feel sorry for you.
Hope you learn better.
... It is only an attitude away.
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32
--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, B.C., Canada (1:153/7715)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 153/7715 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Martin Goldberg
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 18:37:00
EID:9884 622c94a0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 f14c359d
TZUTC: -0800
MG>> Why do some christians hate homosexuals?
RS> You'd have to ask THEM.
MG> But, I'm asking YOU.
But, I don't know. How could I?
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I tried to get a life, but they were out of stock.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 18:47:00
EID:b7cb 622c95e0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 66816dd5
TZUTC: -0800
SM>> You see, it's you (and your fellow believers) who are trying to
SM>> convince us that your God exists.
RS> 4) I haven't figured out WHY I was
RS> invited, yet. (I hope that it was
RS> more than just to be ridiculed.)
KS> I -think- it was I who invited you...although I've slept since then...
KS> but operating under that assumption, and if I recall correctly, it
KS> was because I thought you were a bright fellow who might actually
KS> come up with something 'new and improved', as it were, regarding
KS> evidence for one or more deities! Regardless of the often undiplomatic
KS> dialogue here, many of us would welcome it. Really. ;>
Thanks, Karl. I wasn't sure if it
was you, or Wayne.
Thanks for the compliment. Obviously,
I've nothing "new nor improved" to
add. Just ask most anyone here. ;^)
Anyway, I'm gonna have to cut back,
as I just don't have enough time to
spend at this.
TTYL and thanks again.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Bury a lawyer 12' under; because, deep down they're nice.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Ross Sauer
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 19:02:00
EID:602d 622c9840
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 36d847ae
TZUTC: -0800
RS> What is your view on gays and lesbians, Robert?
RLS> I believe that homosexuality is
RLS> wrong. I believe that it is a sin
RLS> against God, and unnatural. I do
RS> Are animals that have homosexual sex "unnatural and
RS> sinning against God?"
I don't know of any animals having
homosexual sex; but, to sin requires
the knowledge that it IS a sin, and
a CHOICE to commit that sin. Animals
are incapable of sin.
RS> And what evidence do you have that homosexuality is
RS> a "sin?" Specifically.
Here we go again, with the evidence
requests...
RLS> If it doesn't affect these, then,
RLS> as Benny Hill says: "I think that
RLS> Lebanese and homosapiens should be
RLS> left to their own devices, really
RLS> I do".
RS> Hill was a comedian, and he was making a joke.
And, I thought it funny enough to
repeat it. (Many times.)
TTYL, Ross.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * DejaMoo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Marty Leipzig
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 19:01:00
EID:2e06 622d9820
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 7f5f6b48
TZUTC: -0800
RS> What is your view on gays and lesbians, Robert?
RS> I believe that homosexuality is
RS> wrong.
ML> Why?
As I said, it is a sin against God.
That, in and of itself is enough.
I think that the primary reason for
sex is for procreation. I don't see
procreation in homosexual sex.
RS> I believe that it is a sin
RS> against God,
ML> Why? Could you, if you disposed of your Biblical prejudices,
ML> accept that homosexual is what some folks are?
I don't need to dispose of
anything to accept that some are
homosexual.
RS> and unnatural.
ML> It's as natural as fucking can be. It is displayed in many,
ML> many different orders of animals: cetaceans, aves, primates
ML> (the non-human variety), canines, rodents, felids,
ML> crocodilians, boids, etc., etc.
ML> And it's not just when these animals are put in stressful or
ML> "unnatural" situations. It's something that happens, quite
ML> naturally.
This is news to me. I've never
seen dogs, horses, nor any other
animals in a homosexual encounter,
though I have seen them in
heterosexual encounters.
RS> I do not like to see it, as it
RS> makes me very uncomfortable.
ML> What? Just because your heart does the Cha-Cha every time you
ML> see a couple of women or men holding hands, that's a reason to
ML> ridicule, loathe and despise that group?
My heart doesn't "do the Cha-Cha".
What makes you think that I
ridicule or despise "that group"?
I haven't said anything, until I
was asked. If anything, I feel
sorry for them.
ML> Or, are you just fearful that you see more of
ML> yourself in them than you care to admit?
Not that I equate these; but, I
don't feel comfortable around
drug users, theives, adulterers,
murderers, etc.
RS> I believe that, as with any sin,
ML> Ah, Pffft! 'Sin'. The only sin is ignorance.
ML> Sinner.
You can believe what you want.
RS> it is up to the individual(s) to
RS> correct the behavior,
ML> It may be genetically encoded. Go ahead, "correct" your
ML> eye color.
Eye color is not an act, and
does not involve choice. Sex is
a choice. Celibacy is a choice.
Stealing is a choice. Etc.
RS> or else accept the
RS> consequences in the afterlife.
ML> Piss on the afterlife. You may want to waste your real life on
ML> an illusory afterlife, but please don't burden thinking people
ML> with your fanciful, and inane, precepts.
Then, don't ask.
RS> It is not for me to interfere,
ML> But it's OK to be judgemental, condescending and arrogant?
ML> Nice set of values you got there, bucko.
If that's how you see it.
RS> until and unless it affects
RS> someone whom I'm responsible for.
ML> But still you sit there all smug and smarmy, glowering down
ML> from your supposed moral high-horse on all those dirty queers.
Everyone has faults. Mine are no
better or worse than anyone elses.
I think that a look over the posts
in here will show who is "glowering
down".
ML> People like you make me rejoice that I'm an atheist.
RS> If it doesn't affect these, then,
RS> as Benny Hill says: "I think that
RS> Lebanese and homosapiens should be
RS> left to their own devices, really
RS> I do".
ML> Your attempt (and failure) at humor does nothing to mask the
ML> repugnance of your post.
This was a retelling, not my own
creation.
ML> Let me ask you, what's your beliefs on atheism and atheists?
I think that they're mistaken.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Sexy women are nature's way of saying "keep it up"!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Sue Alexander
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 19:55:00
EID:6935 622c9ee0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 aee40c6f
TZUTC: -0800
>> What is your view on gays and lesbians, Robert?
RS> I believe that homosexuality is wrong. I believe that it is a sin
RS> against God, and unnatural. I do not like to see it, as it makes me
RS> very uncomfortable.
RS> I believe that, as with any sin, it is up to the individual(s)
RS> to correct the behavior, or else accept the consequences in the
RS> afterlife. It is not for me to interfere, until and unless it
RS> affects someone whom I'm responsible for.
SA> So, what would happen if your daughter or son would bring a
SA> same-sex partner home to meet you? It could happen if you have
SA> children.
My son brought home a girl of another
race. We were not comfortable with the
situation, and we told him why. We told
him that we would support him, regardless
of his choices.
I would hope that we would do the same
if he brought home a boy, though I really
don't know, and I hope that we never have
to face such a situation.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I can walk on water; but, I stagger on alcohol.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: God Dan
|Sub: Biblical contradictio
|Date: 12 Jan 01 19:59:00
EID:db74 622c9f60
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 4ab08ff9
TZUTC: -0800
CJ> Do you really want to teach junior high kids that the universe
CJ> came into being because Ptah jacked off?
RS> I don't think that it should be done
RS> in those words.
GD> Why not?
I think that the idea could be
conveyed in a more tactful way.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I'm not Superman; but, I am very dense.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Linda Pagels
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 12 Jan 01 20:02:00
EID:bf3a 622ca040
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 e2e40720
TZUTC: -0800
JB> And yet, there is MORE evidence for the Easter Bunny than
JB> there is for your god ...
RS> Justify this position.
DM> EGGS, Dimbulb.
RS> I guess I'm pretty dense. I don't understand
RS> your answer. Are you saying that you have
RS> evidence of eggs that came from "the Easter
RS> Bunny"?
LP> Just where do you think that all of the colored eggs come from,
LP> Robert? Or, is there a more rational explanation for the
LP> phenomenon?
It is known.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * learn from your parents mistakes....use birth control!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 12 Jan 01 20:08:00
EID:22a9 622ca100
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 eafb6896
TZUTC: -0800
JB> And yet, there is MORE evidence for the Easter Bunny than
JB> there is for your god ...
RS> Justify this position.
DM> EGGS, Dimbulb.
RS> I guess I'm pretty dense. I don't understand
RS> your answer. Are you saying that you have
RS> evidence of eggs that came from "the Easter
RS> Bunny"?
KS> Every spring, billions of colored eggs are discovered by children
KS> and others with that mindset. Popular culture says they are brought
KS> by the Easter Bunny.
KS> So, to place you on the receiving end of a similar challenge you
KS> have issued to us 'nonbelievers', can you 'prove' that they were
KS> NOT put in place by that famous and ubiquitous rodent?
Only the ones that I've had at
my house. :^)
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Nottyeterosexual: see virgin (q.v.)
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Karl Schneider
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 12 Jan 01 21:26:00
EID:22a9 622cab40
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 d6934771
TZUTC: -0800
RS> I believe that I have "seen", and that I
RS> am not wishing. In fact, if there were no
RS> God, I suspect that some decisions would
RS> be easier for me.
KS> A thought experiment: Replace 'God' with 'conscience', (or, if you
KS> prefer, "an understanding that doing something bad to another person
KS> is uncool and might compromise my own safety") and consider that as
KS> a basis for your decisions.
I don't know that I can separate
conscience out; but, God is more
than just conscience.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I started with nothing, and I still have most of it left!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Ross Sauer
|Sub: Evidence?
|Date: 12 Jan 01 22:15:00
EID:48a7 622cb1e0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 61142eab
TZUTC: -0800
RS> I like to collect drawings of anthropomorphic animals, those
RS> that have a sort of "cheesecake" appeal, like swimsuit models.
RS> If anyone would like an example, think of one of the characters
RS> from the movie, "Michael Jordan's Space Jam." The one I like is
RS> "Lola Bunny."
RS> Now, there are literally THOUSANDS of drawings of these, and
RS> people have been drawing them since even before the Bible was
RS> written.
RS> I even have photographs of them! Yes! I do!
RS> Now, are these simply a harmless fantasy, or are they real?
RLS> If you HAVE them, they must be real
RLS> photos and drawings.
RS> But is the subject of the photos and drawings real?
RS> Why or why not?
No, because we know that they were
humanly created (and usually by whom).
RS> Because I have never seen a photograph of "God," or "Jesus."
RS> Yet I have numerous drawings of these kinds of animals, AND
RS> photos!
RS> So which is more real, the deities I mention, or the animals I
RS> mentioned?
RLS> Real is not a matter of degree.
RS> Nope.
RS> Reality is not defined "by degrees."
RS> It is defined by what can be seen, heard and measured.
I'd say "sensed".
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Hole drilled in ladies room wall. Police looking into it.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Martin Goldberg
|Sub: Obviously nuthin' much..
|Date: 12 Jan 01 22:48:00
EID:1675 622cb600
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 08524455
TZUTC: -0800
RS> "In His image" does not equal "exact replica".
RS> As for the differences and the similarities, I
RS> don't know. God can do anything. I cannot do as
RS> much. I do not yet know everything that I can
RS> do, nor what I cannot.
MG> Then how do you know that it does not mean "exact relica".
Because, if that were the case, it
would have been stated; and, we'd have
the ability to perform miracles,
amongst other things.
MG> How much similar and difference is there? You already admt
MG> that you do not know. this leave open the window of"
MG> Simlarity=100%
MG> Difference=0%
RS> When I say that my brother was dead,
RS> and came back to life during Last Rites,
RS> it is met with the response that he must
RS> not have truely been dead.
MG> Occam's Razor. the simplest explanation is usually the right
MG> one. Dead people do not come back to life. If this happened,
MG> then he wasn't really dead.
IOW, a miracle can't happen because
miracles can't happen.
MG> You have believed what you wanted to believe with the added
MG> fact that you believe the more difficult story to swallow.
MG> Oh it's of great value. when you recieve it, please reply
MG> here in the echo your thoughts on the thing.
It is a very sad image.
My first thought was how people
can allow this. My second thought
was: What did the cameraman do for
this little one? Anything?
I ask how people can allow this,
because governments will not allow
food and supplies to be given to
people like these. The food gets to
the country, but the local
governments won't allow some or all
of it to get to the needy. This is
due to actions of people, not God.
TTYL and thanks for the image. It
is very touching.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Your girlfriend says to say hi.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Sue Alexander
|Sub: Still don't get "free
|Date: 13 Jan 01 09:29:00
EID:fa1a 622d4ba0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 05fedea2
TZUTC: -0800
RS> Just a WAG, but, might God be bored if He just made everything do
RS> exactly as He wanted?
SA> Then he wouldn't be omnibenevolent.
The benevolence is in respect to the afterlife.
RS> Wouldn't it be more likely that He would want some
RS> unpredictability, if for nothing else but amusement?
SA> That would mean he isn't omniscient.
He would simply be blocking that aspect of His
ability, to whatever extent He wanted, for
whatever time period He wanted, concerning
whatever He wanted.
RS> Or, perhaps He NEEDS worship and/or followers for some reason?
SA> That would land him in the asshole category, which many followers
SA> deny. Let's put that one as "wouldn't be omnibenevolent".
I don't see why a need "lands Him in the asshole
category", nor, in the "wouldn't be omnibenevolent"
category.
RS> Why could He not, as God, create us to have the ability of choice?
SA> If he is omnipotent, he could.
RS> Why couldn't He deliberately "blind" himself to the outcomes?
SA> That would mean he is no longer omniscient, and definitely not
SA> omnibenevolent.
See above for omniscient. I don't get the connection
to benevolent.
RS> Or, perhaps "in His image" means that He has given us a little part
RS> of Himself that could grow or die, dependent upon how we chose?
SA> Omnibenevolence again is at risk... what choice does a 3 year old
SA> girl have when she is raped? A 6 year old boy when he is tortured
SA> and killed? It is one thing to allow choice to grow or die, but
SA> there is no protection of the innocents out there.
That's because, this life is not the reason
for our being; it is only a test. I don't
understand why "innocents" must endure that
which they do. I don't know why we must be
tested.
SA> You really can't come up with a way for God to be omniscient,
SA> omnipotent and omnibenevolent and still have society be the way
SA> it currently is. Either your definition of God needs to change
SA> or there isn't a God out there.
The benevolence is for the soul. Society is the
result of many choices by many people. Not really
directly related, only indirectly.
TTYL, Sue.
Thanks for a great post.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Sorry for the crayon.They won't let me have sharp objects
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Richard Plinston
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 13 Jan 01 09:56:00
EID:0e2d 622d4f00
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 f894d35d
TZUTC: -0800
SS> It seems to me that the basic problem you are having in here is
SS> based on the fact that you use the words "know" and "believe" as
SS> though they were synonymous. They aren't. Knowledge and belief are
SS> very different animals and until you get that difference clearly
SS> in mind you are at a great disadvantage in discussing ideas.
RS> If you truely believe something,
RS> you know it to be true. If you
RP> In this case your 'know' and 'true' are purely the result
RP> of your 'believe' and are not related to the 'know' and
RP> 'true' of reality.
RP> ie you are incapable of putting your mind into a state in
RP> which you could possibly understand that there is a difference
RP> between your 'believe' and reality.
True.
RP> Thus you are at a serious disadvantage in _understanding_
RP> anything at all.
RP> But you can't possibly understand this.
I think that I'm quite capable of understanding
this.
RS> If you know something to be true, you
RS> believe it. Though they mean slightly
RS> different things, they go together.
RP> They only 'go together' in certain individuals who are
RP> incapable of separating them. As you cannot separate them
RP> you cannot understand that there is a clear difference or
RP> that others can see this difference and can hold their
RP> 'beliefs' as a separate entity from their 'knowledge'.
The difference seems to me, to be one of
degree.
RP> Those that also tie their 'know' and 'true' into their
RP> 'beliefs' also seem to lack the mental processes by
RP> which they can evaluate information outside of their
RP> belief system.
RP> You, of course, won't understand this. Just as a blind
RP> person won't understand how someone can paint with colours.
I do understand you, and I agree with
you that it is difficult, though not
impossible.
RP> You probably will think that it is _me_ that is blind to
RP> what you '_know_' to be '_true_', even though this is just
RP> your belief.
RP> ... Knowledge is a belief because of the evidence.
I agree.
RP> Faith is a belief in spite of he evidence.
I disagree that it is "in spite of the evidence".
Faith is belief without direct evidence.
RP> Your 'know' and 'true' are 'faith'.
True.
TTYL and thanks for a great post, Richard.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * 7 days without prayer makes one weak!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Linda Pagels
|Sub: Evidence?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 09:57:00
EID:e014 622d4f20
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 ee39d25a
TZUTC: -0800
RS> I even have photographs of them! Yes! I do!
RS> Now, are these simply a harmless fantasy, or are they real?
RS> If you HAVE them, they must be real
RS> photos and drawings.
LP> Now, are Stephen King's books real because they are not
LP> just in print but made into movies?
Of course. You can hold one in your hand.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * TSR: Trash System Randomly.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Richard Plinston
|Sub: Religion?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 10:06:00
EID:ddaa 622d50c0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 bdf1033e
TZUTC: -0800
RP> The whole point of evolving is that successive generations become
RP> different for a 'reason' - or for many thousands of reasons.
RP> If one line develops an adaptation that makes them better able
RP> to survive and grow than other adaptations then they will
RP> dominate at the expense of those less adapted to the new
RP> conditions.
This is the part that is confusing to me.
Why would it be "at the expense of those
less adapted"? Seems that man in different
climates would develop differently due to
the differing diets, climates, predators,
etc.
Man in the tropics should have developed
differently from man in the arctic circle
without being "at the expense of those
less adapted".
Thanks for an informative post.
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * Horn broke .... watch for finger.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: KARL SCHNEIDER
|Sub: Thanks again
|Date: 13 Jan 01 22:25:00
EID:b0ca 622db320
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 3362ee37
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Karl Schneider to Wayne Chirnside <=-
WC> Maybe science ought to look at putting this enzyme
WC> into people toothpaste.
KS> I suspect the enzymes are secondary to the abrasive action, but,
KS> hell... whatever works! '>
It's not an enzyme that is in the necks themselves, it's an enzyme
released when the dog eats any type of raw meat. The combination of
the enzyme and the abrasion are what works so well.
If it was abrasion alone, carrots, milk bones and chew toys would work
better than they do. Hell, if it was abrasion alone, brushing their teeth
would work better than it does.
Dog toothpaste comes in liver, beef and chicken flavor.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 13 Jan 01 22:26:00
EID:3760 622db340
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 9a6f32fd
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Wayne Chirnside to Robert Sayre <=-
WC> thousand years, cold fusion weas debunked in a couple of months.
And, as I told him (which is where he got it), cold fusion was
falsified very quickly because nobody could replicate the results.
When nobody else can come to the same findings, you ain't got diddly.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: CINDY HAGLUND
|Sub: Foxholes
|Date: 13 Jan 01 22:27:00
EID:200b 622db360
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 89d8932f
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Cindy Haglund to All <=-
CH> Atheists don't believe in killing people.
You are, as usual, wrong again. Atheists just don't use the 'god
told me to do it' defense. And they don't kill in the name of some
god.
Get a grip, Jimbo.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Don Martin
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 13 Jan 01 16:09:00
EID:75f6 622d8120
MSGID: 1:261/1000.0 3a60c3ec
Judith Bandsma said "Anybody notice this?" to John Wilson, adding:
JW> Jeremiah. P. Ostriker (In 2000 he won the U.S. National medal of
JW> Science) And Paul j. Steinhardt, both of Princeton.
JB> In what discipline? I'm really tired of the so-called
JB> 'credentials' of creationists. Their list of
JB> 'scientists' looks impressive, too. Until you start to
JB> notice that there's not one BIOLOGIST in the bunch.
JB> (Several economists and engineers, though)
JB> So these people could be scientists and still not know
JB> what they're talking about. I'm not likely to have any
JB> confidence in an inorganic chemist talking about
JB> cosmology. And if you do, then maybe you need to see a
JB> proctologist the next time your teeth need cleaned.
One with a really _long_ proctoscope.
... Through a Jaundiced Eye Darkly--Rheum With a View
(don.martin@mail.va.gov)
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Nerve Center - Where the spine is misaligned! (1:261/1000)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 261/1000 3090 109/500 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Re: Religion?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 11:27:00
EID:fa82 622e5b60
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 7bfd8626
TZUTC: -0500
-=> ROBERT SAYRE wrote to RICHARD PLINSTON <=-
RP> The whole point of evolving is that successive generations become
RP> different for a 'reason' - or for many thousands of reasons.
RP> If one line develops an adaptation that makes them better able
RP> to survive and grow than other adaptations then they will
RP> dominate at the expense of those less adapted to the new
RP> conditions.
RS> This is the part that is confusing to me.
RS> Why would it be "at the expense of those
RS> less adapted"? Seems that man in different
RS> climates would develop differently due to
RS> the differing diets, climates, predators,
RS> etc.
Almost completely wrong. Man's advantage is his lack of
specialization and a large brain that allows him to adapt his
environment to his need, never the less man IS evolving.
The first man was likely found in Africa and had more melanin
in his skin, black, as that trait confered some protection
from U.V. light waves.
RS> Man in the tropics should have developed
RS> differently from man in the arctic circle
RS> without being "at the expense of those
RS> less adapted".
Lots of black people from the arctic circle are there.
... God: A fairy tale told by humans who fear their own death.
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.35
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Re: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 11:30:00
EID:a892 622e5bc0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 2eeed5eb
TZUTC: -0500
-=> ROBERT SAYRE wrote to MARTY LEIPZIG <=-
RS> and unnatural.
ML> It's as natural as fucking can be. It is displayed in many,
ML> many different orders of animals: cetaceans, aves, primates
ML> (the non-human variety), canines, rodents, felids,
ML> crocodilians, boids, etc., etc.
ML> And it's not just when these animals are put in stressful or
ML> "unnatural" situations. It's something that happens, quite
ML> naturally.
RS> This is news to me. I've never
RS> seen dogs, horses, nor any other
RS> animals in a homosexual encounter,
Try watching PBS occasionally, you know, documentaries on
animal behavior and such.
Homosexuality is news to you because you haven't seen it
but god is real to you, I suppose this means you've actually seen god.
Next time you see god, ask him or her how it's hanging.
RS> Not that I equate these; but, I
RS> don't feel comfortable around
RS> drug users, theives, adulterers,
RS> murderers, etc.
RS> I believe that, as with any sin,
ML> Ah, Pffft! 'Sin'. The only sin is ignorance.
ML> Sinner.
RS> You can believe what you want.
Merty doesn't do belief, he does *evidence*
RS> it is up to the individual(s) to
RS> correct the behavior,
Christianity in my view is nothing but a dodge to avoid
responsibility for ones actions. Kill someone, accept Jesus into
your life and you're *saved*. I prefer those that take
personal responsibility for their actions in *this* the
only evidenced life.
ML> It may be genetically encoded. Go ahead, "correct" your
ML> eye color.
RS> Eye color is not an act, and
RS> does not involve choice.
Walking is an act and a choice, is it a sin.
Much evidence has been recently uncovered that huge amounts
of human behavior IS genetically encoded.
RS> Sex is
RS> a choice. Celibacy is a choice.
RS> Stealing is a choice. Etc.
Being born with genetic defects is a choice too I suppose.
RS> or else accept the
RS> consequences in the afterlife.
What consequences, what afterlife. Evidence please.
ML> Piss on the afterlife. You may want to waste your real life on
ML> an illusory afterlife, but please don't burden thinking people
ML> with your fanciful, and inane, precepts.
RS> Then, don't ask.
What than are you doing in an atheist oriented echo than, go away
if you don't want to be debunked.
RS> It is not for me to interfere,
So shut up.
ML> But it's OK to be judgemental, condescending and arrogant?
ML> Nice set of values you got there, bucko.
ML> Let me ask you, what's your beliefs on atheism and atheists?
RS> I think that they're mistaken.
We've evidence for our reasoned understanding of reality.
What have you got, fairy tales.
... God: A fairy tale told by humans who fear their own death.
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.35
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: WAYNE CHIRNSIDE
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Re: Evidence?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 11:35:00
EID:89c3 622e5c60
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 b51ad037
TZUTC: -0500
-=> ROBERT SAYRE wrote to ROSS SAUER <=-
RS> Nope.
RS> Reality is not defined "by degrees."
RS> It is defined by what can be seen, heard and measured.
RS> I'd say "sensed".
Oh great seer, next weeks Florida lotto numbers please.
Just turn on the old sense, third eye, consult a crystal, whatever.
... God: A fairy tale told by humans who fear their own death.
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.35
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: George Pope
|To: God Dan
|Sub: Scientific Method
|Date: 14 Jan 01 15:25:29
EID:be56 622e7b20
MSGID: 1:323/120.0 257aaaf5
PID: ViaMAIL! v1.60d [Beta]
GD> -> On 01 Jan 01 00:20:09, George Pope got back to God Dan
GD>
GD> GD> GD> So, Jesus was the prophet of Mohammed.
GD> GD>
GD> GD> GP> You're really a JW, aren't you?
GD> GD>
GD> GD> You really are a fucking idiot, aren't you.
GD> GD>
GD> GD> GP> I've never known any other group who
GD> GD> GP> could so easily invent non sequitur answers, even when the
facts
GD> GD> GP> glaringly obvious!
GD> GD>
GD> GD> Try checking the ethnicity of arabs, George.
GD>
GD> GP> So you're saying that ALL descendents of Noah's son, Shem, are
GD> GP> disciples of Mohammad?
GD>
GD> Try providing evidence that 'Shem' existed, George.
GD>
GD> GP> ("Semite" refers to descendents of "Shem", one of the sons of Noah;
it
GD> GP> also refers to both/either/or Jews & Arabs -- either way, you're
GD> GP> trying to suggest that all Jews are Semites are Arabs -- I affirmed
th
GD> GP> simple fact that Jesus was Jewish(Semitic, as opposed to Oriental)
GD>
GD> Try providing evidence that Jesus existed, George.
That wasn't the topic of discussion. fundy!
We were discussing whether the Jesus of the Bible, according to the information
we do have, is "oriental" or "semitic"!
Try to stick to one discussion instead of meandering around in that cesspool
you call a mind!
Your friend,
<+]::-{)} (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
(Yahoo & AOL Instant Messengers' ID=Cyberpope67
ICQ UIN: 32617950; Odigo ID=Cyberpope
homepage: http://citizens.nettaxi.com/Cyberpope
... nfx v3.1 2+2=5 (for exceptionally large values of 2)
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
* Origin: Chowdanet! (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 323/120 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: George Pope
|To: Linda Pagels
|Sub: sexuality genetic?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 15:25:29
EID:bc8f 622e7b20
MSGID: 1:323/120.0 257aaaf6
PID: ViaMAIL! v1.60d [Beta]
LP> He can make all of the theological statements that he wants, George.
LP> There are theological statements of many people about quite a
LP> few gods and goddesses. Why do you deny that their gods not
LP> exist while your unfounded god does?
Where did I do either of those? No other god but the one of the Bible has
ever
validated him/herself to me, so why would I have any concern/interest in
the
others?
Your friend,
<+]::-{)} (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
(Yahoo & AOL Instant Messengers' ID=Cyberpope67
ICQ UIN: 32617950; Odigo ID=Cyberpope
homepage: http://citizens.nettaxi.com/Cyberpope
... nfx v3.1
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
* Origin: Chowdanet! (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 323/120 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: George Pope
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: SC does something RIGHT
|Date: 14 Jan 01 15:25:30
EID:f88e 622e7b20
MSGID: 1:323/120.0 257aaaf7
PID: ViaMAIL! v1.60d [Beta]
JB> GP> Anything more on those election day shenanigans, in which, you
were
JB> GP> saying, the blacks were largely prevented from exercising their
JB> GP> franchise?
JB>
JB> Yes, a meeting was held in Charleston last night where more than 40
JB> people presented evidence of being turned away at just ONE precinct.
JB> They were ALL black. The election commission is on the block at the
JB> moment.
Good! I hope they can do a major shakedown of the no-good who
organized/perpetrated this blatant denial of franchise because of their
racial
hatred! :/
Your friend,
<+]::-{)} (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
(Yahoo & AOL Instant Messengers' ID=Cyberpope67
ICQ UIN: 32617950; Odigo ID=Cyberpope
homepage: http://citizens.nettaxi.com/Cyberpope
... nfx v3.1
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
* Origin: Chowdanet! (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 323/120 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: George Pope
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: Brides OF Christ?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 15:25:30
EID:ca7a 622e7b20
MSGID: 1:323/120.0 257aaaf8
PID: ViaMAIL! v1.60d [Beta]
JB> GP> The expectation was there, sure, but that's certainly not evidence
JB> GP> that EVERY male son of a tradesman DID marry!
JB>
JB> Yes there is...he wasn't stoned to death at the city gate. The only
JB> other reason that a male heterosexual wouldn't be married at the age
JB> of 30 would be because he was recognized as a bastard, and Jewish bastards
JB> are not allowed to be married.
Where do you GET this garbage?!?
Jewish bastards COULD and DO marry! There's limitations as to WHO they
can
marry, but that's about the extent of it!
Your friend,
<+]::-{)} (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
(Yahoo & AOL Instant Messengers' ID=Cyberpope67
ICQ UIN: 32617950; Odigo ID=Cyberpope
homepage: http://citizens.nettaxi.com/Cyberpope
... nfx v3.1
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
* Origin: Chowdanet! (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 323/120 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: George Pope
|To: Marty Leipzig
|Sub: sexuality genetic?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 15:25:30
EID:b983 622e7b20
MSGID: 1:323/120.0 257aaaf9
PID: ViaMAIL! v1.60d [Beta]
ML> GP> "Hell," in the Hebrew Bible, means "death"
ML>
ML> Whoopdee fuck. Everybody ("catch-all...culturally...") adheres
ML> to, believes in the nonsense contain within, or has even heard
ML> of the Hebrew Bible?
This THREAD is about how people(religiods, mostly) have falsely defined
the
"hell" of the Bible as being a place of eternal torture, when it never meant
that -- it always meant, simply, "death". . .
ML> Whoopdee fuck^2. Not all cultures hold to any version of "hell"
ML> and not all cultures buy into, if they cleave unto some form of
ML> divine retribution, believe you have to wait until dead to get
ML> it.
EXACTLY WHAT THE FUCK I WAS SAYING, YOU DOOFUS!!!!
ML> GP> to there being any
ML> GP> place of eternal torment where some people go when they die! That's
ML> GP> the only point I'm making -- what is YOUR stance on this subject,
in
ML> GP> this thread, exactly?
ML>
ML> That "hell" is for those who believe in such nonsense. It is
ML> not a "catch-all" nor is it a cultural given.
Well, I was saying that "death" is the 'cultural given' -- "hell" is merely
the
Biblical word for this concept of everybody ending up "dead"!
Your friend,
<+]::-{)} (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
(Yahoo & AOL Instant Messengers' ID=Cyberpope67
ICQ UIN: 32617950; Odigo ID=Cyberpope
homepage: http://citizens.nettaxi.com/Cyberpope
... nfx v3.1
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
* Origin: Chowdanet! (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 323/120 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Steve Kemp
|To: Robert Sayre
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 14 Jan 01 11:12:00
EID:d8ea 622e5980
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX98-1060M2
MSGID: 1:114/59 00e8e5f1
RS>SM>> Either come up with evidence we will accept, Robert,
RS>SM>> or admit that your God does not exist, never has
RS>SM>> existed, never will exist, and CAN not exist.
RS> Here's the quote that tells me to
RS>denounce God.
Nope.
Here's an analogy....
Let's say you believe that there is an invisible and untouchable apple
on a table you and I are sitting at. An apple you only believe is there,
one that even you can't see or touch.
Show that it exists or admit that it doesn't. OR admit that your belief
is baseless at best.
That isn't a case of demanding that you denounce apples.
It's a case of you being required to demonstrate that your mystical
apple exists....for if you can't do so, even to yourself, then it
doesn't.
Meaning there is no reason to believe it does.
In short, it's a challenge.
þ CMPQwk 1.42 18775 þ http://www.angelfire.com/ca/devilmusic
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Bob's Place BBS Mesa,AZ (www.bobsplc.com) (480)610-5160 (1:114/59)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 114/59 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Steve Kemp
|To: Mark Kimes
|Sub: Re: Dark Shadows
|Date: 14 Jan 01 12:32:00
EID:9639 622e6400
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX98-1060M2
MSGID: 1:114/59 11bad865
MK>>> Basically, "dark matter" or "non-baryonic matter"
MK>>> (weird matter which is almost impossible to detect
MK>>> except by its gravitational effects)
MK>> I know what dark matter is postulated to be, and it's
MK>> NOT exclusively non-baryonic matter.
MK>Uh, Steve, you're being anal retentive.
How so?
My calling you on a wrongful blanket statement of "no" to my rhetorical
question isn't an insult of you or a case of petulance on my side.
Hey, you wrote something to me, and I wrote something to you. And I
thought I was being quite gentle and good natured while doing so. I
don't see how that makes me anal retentive.
Actually, if you believe yourself right and I believe myself right then
that would make us equally guilty of something if anything such were
true.
MK>I specifically spelled out
MK>several times exactly what I meant by "dark matter" in my answer --
I know.
But what YOU consider it to be isn't authoritative at all. Sorry.
I'll take Vera Rubin's offerings per what dark matter is. A more modern
definition than Zwacky's, by the way, and her credentials are good
enough for me.
MK>you quoted one specific instance of it right there. And "dark
MK>matter" is considered to be a term that refers primarily to
MK>non-baryonic matter, by such worthies as Richard Morris, Stephen
MK>Hawking, Steven Weinberg, Paul Davies and Kip Thorne, as well as a
MK>host of others.
Primarily!!!
Primarily because such is what is postulated to be needed MORE. For
the amount of baryonic about isn't enough for the closed
universe case. I've remember reading somewhere that scientists have
postulated that there would have to be 4-5 times as much non-baryonic
matter than baryonic for a closed universe to be the case. (I don't
remember where I saw that though, so you can take it or leave it as you
like)
Back to square one then, dark matter (yep, primarily non-baryonic) IS
integral to the theory of a closed "recycling" universe.
And leave my anus and it's retention out of it!!! :-P
MK>Furthermore, since Wayne stated that he "didn't buy"
MK>dark matter, I had to assume that he was _not_ referring to mere
MK>non-radiating baryonic matter,
Well, that's a good point. For how couldn't he not believe in such.
BUT how could he likewise not believe in neutrinos, for instance,
they've been detected.
MK>since he's sitting on a big chunk of it we like to call Earth. :-)
Well, not a great analogy, for dark matter is matter that is not readily
or easily detected. The Earth surely IS rather easily observed.
MK>Finally, since "hot dark matter" in the f
MK>orm of neutrinos has been detected (and, if they have sufficient
MK>mass, could even be sufficient to close the universe by themselves),
MK>I would assume that Wayne is referring solely to more exotic forms of
MK>non-baryonic dark matter such as WIMPS, axions, shadow matter, cosmic
MK>strings, etc.
Dig. Via his context that would seem to be the case.
But MY rhetorical still wasn't exclusive. Thus, I still say that "yes"
is the correct answer to my rhetorical. Of course. :)
MK>Now, how about you settle down before I slap a light cone on your
MK>ass? :-)
I'm calm as a dew covered dead body, guy. :-P
You're a good guy, and this interchange has been nothing like some of
the "debates" I've had with Todd, for instance. Now THOSE were
maddening. This has been a short pleasant disagreement.
ALTHOUGH you did stoop to name calling and inaccurate assumptions of my
what my state of agitation is. But I'll willingly forgive you. ;)
MK>>> The problem with recycling universes is that
MK>>> the laws of thermodynamics prevent a universe
MK>>> from cycling infinitely between bang-crunch-bang.
MK>>> Such a process would "quickly" (in very, very few
MK>>> rebounds) produce a dead, open universe.
MK>> That's debatable.
MK>To paraphrase Stephen Hawking, if you plan to debate the laws of
MK>thermodynamics, you don't have much of a chance. The laws of
MK>thermodynamics don't let anyone win, break even, or quit the game.
Such laws would apply to individual universes is my point. Each
"successive universe" in any "string of Big Bangs" would be separate and
distinct. Again, in my opinion. I mean REALLY, how could one universe
created from one Big Bang effect another "previous" one? Especially
considering that there is no "before"?
Also, the physics of a(the) singularity is in question.
MK>> Especially considering that each new "Bang" would be
MK>> anew and surely equal in energy/mass as the previous
MK>> ones
MK>Entropy doesn't refer to how _much_ energy is around, it refers to
MK>how much _usable_ energy is around -- it's not how much energy you've
MK>got, but the disequilibrium.
And?
I guess I could take the word "energy" out of my above statement. But I
believe that that would be a mistake. For:
In 1905 Albert Einstein showed, in his special theory of relativity (see
Relativity), that mass and energy are equivalent.
"Conservation Laws," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 2000. © 1993-1999
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
-------------------------
MK>But if that would make my point clearly then fine. ;)
In short, the total amount of matter in a closed system remains
constant. Thus in a closed universe the amount of matter (and, yep, thus
energy) would be the same in the product of each new "Bang".
Damn, that's what I said the first time. :-P
MK>You are confused, but I forgive you willingly.
Sorry, but I don't see you as being in any position to
"correct me".
I dare say I'm correct on my main premise, that being that the existence
of dark matter IS integral to the theory of a closed and "recycling"
universe.
I also believe my postulation of "previous" universes as products of
such "recyclings" would not and could not effect "previous" ones.
In short, the "recyclings" would NOT be akin to a bouncing ball that
loses momentum.
MK>I also suggest that we take further discussions on this
MK>topic to private mail as we've probably bored everyone else to tears
MK>with all this stuff. :-)
Shit, guy, people here are doing multiple pun threads and recipes. :-P
MK>I would be quite happy to continue the
MK>discussion there if you like,
Ahhh, I've pretty much blown my wad per the subject. ;)
MK>and assure you that I harbor no ill feelings.
Me either.
Shit, this is a freakin' hobby. It's about entertainment. And I
certainly wasn't all wound up and steaming per this subject.
Not at all. I, like you, was simply offering my opinions and
counterpoints. And, after all, that is what this venue is all about.
And this has been an interesting exchange.
þ CMPQwk 1.42 18775 þ http://www.angelfire.com/ca/devilmusic
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Bob's Place BBS Mesa,AZ (www.bobsplc.com) (480)610-5160 (1:114/59)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 114/59 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Steve Kemp
|To: Cindy Haglund
|Sub: Foxholes
|Date: 14 Jan 01 12:36:00
EID:da2c 622e6480
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX98-1060M2
MSGID: 1:114/59 b0a596a1
CH>Atheists don't believe in killing people.
Yeah, we just do it. :-P
þ CMPQwk 1.42 18775 þ jesusonacid@yahoo.com
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Bob's Place BBS Mesa,AZ (www.bobsplc.com) (480)610-5160 (1:114/59)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 114/59 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Biblical contradictions
|Date: 14 Jan 01 08:41:00
EID:0495 622e4520
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 184d172e
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting Robert Sayre to Don Martin <=-
SM>> Either come up with evidence we will accept, Robert,
SM>> or admit that your God does not exist, never has
SM>> existed, never will exist, and CAN not exist.
RS> Here's the quote that tells me to
RS> denounce God. It was in one of your
I see your problem. Please note how that is worded. You see, that's
a message to you from Sean.
Sean is NOT an atheist, which I'm sure you think he is. He's an
anarchist pagan. Or a pagan anarchist. Whatever.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Steve Kemp
|To: Mark Kimes
|Sub: Re: Dark Shadows
|Date: 14 Jan 01 12:53:00
EID:9639 622e66a0
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX98-1060M2
MSGID: 1:114/59 26464aa0
MK>But if that would make my point clearly then fine. ;)
WHOOPS! I don't know how that happened. Those were my words, not yours.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Bob's Place BBS Mesa,AZ (www.bobsplc.com) (480)610-5160 (1:114/59)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 114/59 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Richard Plinston
|To: Robert Sayre
|Sub: Religion?
|Date: 15 Jan 01 10:06:08
EID:9cdd 622f50c0
MSGID: 3:772/1.0 3a637450
REPLY: 1:205/40 bdf1033e
RP> to survive and grow than other adaptations then they will
RP> dominate at the expense of those less adapted to the new
RP> conditions.
RS> This is the part that is confusing to me.
RS> Why would it be "at the expense of those
RS> less adapted"? Seems that man in different
RS> climates would develop differently due to
RS> the differing diets, climates, predators,
RS> etc.
RS> Man in the tropics should have developed
RS> differently from man in the arctic circle
And when we look at 'man in the tropics' and 'man in the 'arctic'
we do actually find that they have developed differently, different
enough that they do not compete against each other for the same
resources. ie they stay in their adapted places.
RS> without being "at the expense of those
RS> less adapted".
Because Human Beings (the current hominoid species) occupy all
possible niches then any other hominoid species, such as
earlier ones or sub-branches (eg Neanderthal), then these
other species would have to occupy the _same_ environments
as humans. This means that there would be direct competition
for the _same_ resources. Humans, being better adapted
has won those competitions.
Neanderthals did exist up until only a few ten thousand years
ago, just as you required. However as humans out bred and
out competed them they either died off or were directly
killed by humans.
This would have happened over the millions of years as the
new dominant tribes expanded they replaced the less suited
tribes.
Much the same happened in Tasmania in the 19th century. Europeans
went on Abo hunts and wiped them out. They 'believed', based on
what was written in some stupid book, that they were a 'chosen'
species and that that the Aboriginies were mere animals that
could be hunted and killed because their 'god' had 'given'
them dominion over all.
In fact Hitler tried much the same thing in taking over the
eastern part of Europe and eliminating the tribes that
lived there.
Chimpanzees also fight amongst tribes and this will eliminate
weaker competitors for what they see as 'their' resources.
Extrapolate that behaviour back a few million years and you
have the answer to your question.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: === NZCC Maxie BBS. Ak, NZ +64 9 444-0989 === (3:772/1)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 772/1 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: Robert Sayre
|To: Cindy Haglund
|Sub: Foxholes
|Date: 14 Jan 01 08:08:00
EID:e2d0 622e4100
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0516M
MSGID: 1:205/40 2fefa4ca
TZUTC: -0800
CH> Atheists don't believe in killing people.
How could you possibly know this to be
true or false?
TTYL.
Robert
* SLMR 2.1a * I must be a sex object. I say sex; she objects!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fresno Area Amiga eXchange-(559)226-7162-*HST/DS V.34+* (1:205/40)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 205/40 348/956 105 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: ROSS SAUER
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 17:18:00
EID:db8c 622e8a40
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 2f56502a
TZUTC: -0500
RS>RS> What is your view on gays and lesbians, Robert?
RS>RLS> I believe that homosexuality is
RS>RLS> wrong. I believe that it is a sin
RS>RLS> against God, and unnatural. I do
RS>RS> Are animals that have homosexual sex "unnatural and
RS>RS> sinning against God?"
RS> I don't know of any animals having
RS>homosexual sex; but, to sin requires
RS>the knowledge that it IS a sin, and
RS>a CHOICE to commit that sin. Animals
RS>are incapable of sin.
Are they incapable of thought? According to many animal behavior
specialists they can think, and reason.
RS>RS> And what evidence do you have that homosexuality is
RS>RS> a "sin?" Specifically.
RS> Here we go again, with the evidence
RS>requests...
So in other words, all you have is your own stupid prejudice.
It used to be "a sin" for people of other races to marry and/or have
kids.
And the racists who said this could find Biblical verses "justifying"
their asinine prejudice.
Now, what makes homosexuality a "sin?"
Obvious answer: Nothing. Just stupid prejudice.
þ CMPQwk 1.42 16554 þ
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: ROSS SAUER
|To: ROBERT SAYRE
|Sub: Evidence?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 17:20:00
EID:95a9 622e8a80
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 aa7f66e2
TZUTC: -0500
RS>RS> I like to collect drawings of anthropomorphic animals, those
RS>RS> that have a sort of "cheesecake" appeal, like swimsuit models.
RS>RS> If anyone would like an example, think of one of the characters
RS>RS> from the movie, "Michael Jordan's Space Jam." The one I like is
RS>RS> "Lola Bunny."
RS>RS> Now, there are literally THOUSANDS of drawings of these, and
RS>RS> people have been drawing them since even before the Bible was
RS>RS> written.
RS>RS> I even have photographs of them! Yes! I do!
RS>RS> Now, are these simply a harmless fantasy, or are they real?
RS>RLS> If you HAVE them, they must be real
RS>RLS> photos and drawings.
RS>RS> But is the subject of the photos and drawings real?
RS>RS> Why or why not?
RS> No, because we know that they were
RS>humanly created (and usually by whom).
Are the artists simply creating what is in their imagination?
Can you prove they don't exist for real?
So why then is your deity something other than just imagination,
combined with ignorance and desire for control?
þ CMPQwk 1.42 16554 þ
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: GEORGE POPE
|Sub: Brides OF Christ?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 20:18:00
EID:c225 622ea240
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 c38faa8c
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting George Pope to Judith Bandsma <=-
GP> Jewish bastards COULD and DO marry! There's limitations as to WHO
GP> they can marry, but that's about the extent of it!
You better check with a rabbi, Georgie. In orthodox Judaism...which is
what Jesus would have subscribed to...bastards are NOT permitted to
marry. Siblings of suicides are not permitted to marry. There's a lot
of proscriptions.
And I get it from the rabbi here in Charleston. We've had many talks
about such things.
Sure, Jewish bastards can and do marry today in reform and conservative
congregations. In biblical times a bastard, if it's mother wasn't stoned
to death, was an outcast even if a man came forward to marry the mother.
You didn't stop being a bastard by benefit of marriage.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/1 12 128/148 140/0 1 2 100 153/7715 218/890 1001
SEEN-BY: 221/0 2604/104 2613/404 3615/50 51
PATH: 18/140 396/1 18/500 10/3 140/1 3615/50 218/1001
|From: JUDITH BANDSMA
|To: JOHN WILSON
|Sub: Anybody notice this?
|Date: 14 Jan 01 20:19:00
EID:beef 622ea260
TID: PX/Win v3.0pr5 PX96-0466M2
MSGID: 1:18/140 b3f93a7f
TZUTC: -0500
-=> Quoting John Wilson to Judith Bandsma <=-
JW> Jeremiah Ostriker and Paul J. Steinhardt are both professors at
JW> Prinction
Professors of WHAT?????
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Get all your fido mail here: www.docsplace.org (1:18/140)
SEEN-BY: 10/3 17/