"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fa9638$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 20/03/2024 6:29 am, Kualinar wrote:
>> Le 2024-03-19 à 05:43, Whisper a écrit :
>>> On 19/03/2024 7:30 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:65f44162$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>
>>>> Reality. Something you apparently know very little about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Who's reality?
>> What a nonsensical question. That's like asking «How much blue weight ?»
>>>
>
>
> Compare the reality of a blind and deaf person (from birth) to your
> reality.

They don't have a different reality than anyone else.. at most they have a
different perception of reality.

Which just brings us back to your denial of reality.

>>> Natural selection obviously exists, but how did it get a foothold? 'it's
>>> natural' type answers are not very helpful.
>> It got it's «foothold» when life started and the local condition changed.
>
> Explain this 'foothold'. How did it come to be.

Natural selection. Those that survived the changing conditions passed on
that which helped allow them to survive.

>>That change can be local or due to those organism being transported
>>somewhere else.
>> This have been explained to you before. More than once in this thread.
>
> I understand what you're saying, but it's fucking useless as far as
> actually answering my questions.

Only because you refuse to consider the answers given.

"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fa9838$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 20/03/2024 6:37 am, Phil Omdahl wrote:
>> On 3/19/2024 2:43 AM, Whisper wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 7:30 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:65f44162$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>
>>>> Reality. Something you apparently know very little about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Who's reality?
>>
>> Everyone's. There is only one reality.
>>
>
>
> Nope. A color blind person can't even see the colors you see - which
> reality is real?

There is only one reality. That you might lack perception another has
doesn't change the reality.. only your perception of it.

> A blind and/or deaf person's reality is very real to them, but very
> different to yours and mine.

No, their perception of reality is different.

See this is your fundamental problem.. you don't even know enough to know
what you are talking about.

> There are forces and
> concepts we are blind to, but our reality is still real to us even though
> we are missing a lot of reality out there.

See.. so just like the blind.. reality is what is it. The difference is how
much of it we can perceive or understand. If you regain your eyesight...
does your reality change, or merely your perception of it?

> Many of us accept complete BS concepts like big bangs, dark matter/energy
> etc even though they don't exist.

Great, now all you have to do is produce creditable evidence of that...

Again, it wouldn't be the reality changing.. only our perception and
understanding of it.

"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fa989a$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 20/03/2024 8:25 am, Siri Cruise wrote:
>> Phil Omdahl wrote:
>>> On 3/19/2024 2:43 AM, Whisper wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 7:30 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>> news:65f44162$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>
>>>>> Reality. Something you apparently know very little about.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who's reality?
>>>
>>> Everyone's. There is only one reality.
>>>
>>
>> So I assume.
>>
>
>
> Yes there is 1 reality, but humans will never perceive it in totality.

Prove it.

> We have a very blinkered and fragmented view of the universe. That's the
> best we'll ever do.

Maybe, even probably, but that's a long way from your assertion.

Hell, you can't even understand the difference between reality and the
perception of reality.. so I would say you have a long way to go because you
start asserting your Godlike pronouncements.

"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fa9981$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 20/03/2024 9:20 am, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:65f95e3a$1@news.ausics.net...
>>> On 19/03/2024 7:30 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:65f44162$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>
>>>> Reality. Something you apparently know very little about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Who's reality?
>>
>> You think there are different realities?
>>
>
>
> I think, know, there are many different perceptions of reality, all
> incomplete.

Really? You know every perception of reality by every creature that has ever
existed throughout the entire Universe?

Wow, what amazing Godlike powers you have.. you seem to be claiming your
perception of reality is complete.

See that's what is some interesting about you.. you claim to have a complete
perception of reality... then tell us that all perceptions are incomplete.

Maybe you should look in a mirror next time you say that. You could get into
the most amazing argument with yourself.

>
>> What is your basis for such a conclusion?
>>
>>
>
>
> Pretty fucking obvious.

Apparently not, since you can't share it.

>>> Natural selection obviously exists, but how did it get a foothold?
>>
>> Those that died early... didn't reproduce.
>
>
> That's not an answer. You're looking at effect without cause.

Sure it's an answer and it is an effect with cause(s). Those that die
without breeding.. will not pass on those traits which lead to them dying.

>> Those that did... did.
>>
>> Thus those best at surviving tend to produce more offspring than those
>> that didn't.
>>
>>> 'it's natural' type answers are not very helpful.
>>
>> True, as it does sort of assume some level of intelligence at both ends
>> of the conversation... something that seems to be weak at your end.
>>
>>
>>
>
> lol doesn't take much brain power to understand what you guys are
> posting - no offense : )

Yep, but apparently you don't have enough brain power to understand it.

On 21/03/2024 7:52 am, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:65fa989a$1@news.ausics.net...
>>
>>
>> Yes there is 1 reality, but humans will never perceive it in totality.
>
> Prove it.
>

There is no evolutionary advantage to us knowing the full reality.

>> We have a very blinkered and fragmented view of the universe.  That's
>> the best we'll ever do.
>
> Maybe, even probably, but that's a long way from your assertion.
>
> Hell, you can't even understand the difference between reality and the
> perception of reality.. so I would say you have a long way to go because
> you start asserting your Godlike pronouncements.
>
>

That's my point, our perception of reality is not necessarily 'the'
reality.

It is not evolutionary advantageous for us to understand the universe,
so we don't. Ants don't need to understand sql to survive. Furthermore
I firmly believe humans cannot and will never comprehend the true
reality of the universe. Your assertion seems to be we already pretty
much know it all already lol - we know fuck all in the scheme of things.
All we can do as humans is observe patterns and calculate some math,
that's nowhere near explaining why it is so. You can't even explain
gravity.

On 21/03/2024 8:01 am, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>
>>>> Natural selection obviously exists, but how did it get a foothold?
>>>
>>> Those that died early... didn't reproduce.
>>
>>

Not an answer, just explaining the patterns we see in nature.

>> That's not an answer.  You're looking at effect without cause.
>
> Sure it's an answer and it is an effect with  cause(s). Those that die
> without breeding.. will not pass on those traits which lead to them dying.
>

>>> Those that did... did.
>>>
>>> Thus those best at surviving tend to produce more offspring than
>>> those that didn't.
>>>

So what? Even if they pass on those traits they are dead and have no
concept of anything. The planet and all life on earth will one day be
gone, all that natural selection stuff was for nothing, given enough time.

>>>> 'it's natural' type answers are not very helpful.
>>>
>>> True, as it does sort of assume some level of intelligence at both
>>> ends of the conversation... something that seems to be weak at your end.
>>>

The older and more intelligent most people get the more they realize how
little they know. You'll note teens seem to think they know it all.

>>>
>>>
>>
>> lol doesn't take much brain power to understand what you guys are
>> posting - no offense : )
>
> Yep, but apparently you don't have enough brain power to understand it.
>
>

You're just regurgitating primary school science.

Le 2024-03-20 à 02:22, Daniel65 a écrit :
> Kualinar wrote on 20/03/2024 3:40 am:
>
> <Snip>
>
>> How an all loving god who forgive can sent peoples to eternal torture
>> JUST for not believing in it ? That quality make that «original sin»
>> an absurdity. An all loving, forgiving, god would have forgiven that
>> error by Adam & Eve who had NO WAY to know was «bad» until AFTER
>> committing that error. It was eating the fruit of the tree of
>> KNOWLEDGE. Including the knowledge of good and bad/evil. Before, they
>> DID NOT KNOW that eating that fruit was a bad thing.
>
> But didn't God tell them they could have the fruits of ALL the other
> trees, just not touch that ONE tree??
>
> AH! Yes .... https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-2/
>
> Genesis Chapt 2
>
> Verse 9 .... And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree
> that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also
> in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
>
> Verse 15 .... And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden
> of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
>
> Verse 16 .... And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree
> of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
>
> Verse 17 .... But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou
> shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt
> surely die.
>
> So Adam couldn't know the difference between Good and Evil, just that he
> was doing what God had said NOT to do!!
Support my point. Adam & Eve had NO way of knowing that eating from the
tree of knowledge was bad. They had NO way of knowing that disobeying
was bad.
And, god absolutely lied about them dying that very day.
In all of genesis, the ONLY one who never lies is the Serpent.

Kualinar wrote:
> Le 2024-03-20 à 11:18, HeartDoc Andrew a écrit :
>> (Bible) 03/20/24 Again behold ...
>>
>> HeartDoc Andrew, while http://WonderfullyHungry.org in the Holy
>> Spirit, Who causes (Deuteronomy 8:3) him to hunger right now (Luke
>> 6:21a) received the following thought (aka rhema or word) from GOD:
>>
>> "If I am not helping you through My Holy Spirit to overcome your
>> issues (Proverbs 4:23) with saying/writing that you're 'wonderfully
>> hungry' (Ephesians 6:11) when you are greeted, then you are not
>> well
>> but rather you are naked and blind, in danger of having satan enter
>> into your heart (Matthew 15:19)." -- Holy Spirit referring to
>> Revelation 3:17
>>
>> "You say, ‘I am rich (i.e. well); I have acquired wealth and do not
>> need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched,
>> pitiful,
>> poor, blind and naked." (Revelation 3:17 with parenthetical
>> clarification)
>>
>> Source:
>> https://groups.google.com/g/raptureriddle/c/E42T7ijIntg/m/YR2JjhMGAQAJ
>>
>>
>> Shorter more shareable link:
>> https://tinyurl.com/Ephesians611
> You realize that peoples are not watching this 24/7. No reply
> within 90 minutes to 5 hours is a common occurrence, expected.
> Not promptly replying to your post is NOT sin, just a normal
> occurrence.
> Remember that a sin is an imaginary fault. It exists ONLY in the
> head of whoever qualify something as a sin.
>
> Quoting the bible do you no good. The bible is just a collection
> of stories, fireside tall tales, fables, myths and legends from
> UNKNOWN authors. Stories that where propagated by a massive,
> generations spanning, telephone game.
> The earliest ANY of it content was put in writing no less than 30
> years after the alleged events, and up to about 1000 years.
> ALL of the author's names are later additions.

The No True Heartdoc fallacy.

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fc1908$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 21/03/2024 7:52 am, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:65fa989a$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes there is 1 reality, but humans will never perceive it in totality.
>>
>> Prove it.
>>
>
>
> There is no evolutionary advantage to us knowing the full reality.

So? That's a statement of opinion, and does nothing to prove your assertion.

>>> We have a very blinkered and fragmented view of the universe. That's
>>> the best we'll ever do.
>>
>> Maybe, even probably, but that's a long way from your assertion.
>>
>> Hell, you can't even understand the difference between reality and the
>> perception of reality.. so I would say you have a long way to go because
>> you start asserting your Godlike pronouncements.
>>
>>
>
> That's my point, our perception of reality is not necessarily 'the'
> reality.

True, but unless you can increase that perception, you're just flapping your
lips.

"Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:65fc1b11$1@news.ausics.net...
> On 21/03/2024 8:01 am, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>> Natural selection obviously exists, but how did it get a foothold?
>>>>
>>>> Those that died early... didn't reproduce.
>>>
>>>
>
> Not an answer, just explaining the patterns we see in nature.

Exactly. Those patterns ARE your answer

>
>
>
>>> That's not an answer. You're looking at effect without cause.
>>
>> Sure it's an answer and it is an effect with cause(s). Those that die
>> without breeding.. will not pass on those traits which lead to them
>> dying.
>>
>

<crickets>

>
>>>> Those that did... did.
>>>>
>>>> Thus those best at surviving tend to produce more offspring than those
>>>> that didn't.
>>>>
>
>
>
> So what?

So, cause and effect.

> Even if they pass on those traits they are dead and have no concept of
> anything.

But they passed them on, their conception is irrelevant.

> The planet and all life on earth will one day be gone, all that natural
> selection stuff was for nothing, given enough time.

If we remain bound to earth that would be the case, but even now we are
working to change that.

>>>>> 'it's natural' type answers are not very helpful.
>>>>
>>>> True, as it does sort of assume some level of intelligence at both ends
>>>> of the conversation... something that seems to be weak at your end.
>>>>
>
>
> The older and more intelligent most people get the more they realize how
> little they know. You'll note teens seem to think they know it all.

And you claim to know so much.... Hmmm..

>>> lol doesn't take much brain power to understand what you guys are
>>> posting - no offense : )
>>
>> Yep, but apparently you don't have enough brain power to understand it.
>>
>>
>
>
> You're just regurgitating primary school science.

Yep, apparently even primary school science is too much for your
understanding.

Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
> says...
>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:

<Snip>

>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
>>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
>>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
>>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
>>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>
>>>> Doesn't work.
>>
>> It works fine.
>
> Nope, bad link.
>
Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!
--
Daniel

Daniel65 wrote on 23/3/24 8:24 pm:
> Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
>> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
>> says...
>>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
>>>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
>>>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
>>>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
>>>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such as?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't work.
>>>
>>> It works fine.
>>
>> Nope, bad link.
>>
> Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!

Ah!! The above link must have been edited somewhere as the link works
*IF* there is a hyphen between the "biblical" and the "contrudictions",
e.g. https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

And also if the 'u' in "contrudictions" is changed to an 'a' as in
"contradictions"!!

Phew!! Just as well I checked before hitting 'Send'!! Or, rather, thank
goodness for Spell-checkers!
--
Daniel

In article <utm74g$3i9kq$1@dont-email.me>, daniel47@nomail.afraid.org
says...
>
> Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
> > In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
> > says...
> >> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
> >>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
> >>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
> >>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
> >>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
> >>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
> >>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
> >>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your source for this?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Such as?
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
> >>>
> >>>> Doesn't work.
> >>
> >> It works fine.
> >
> > Nope, bad link.
> >
> Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!

He does that all the time.

Le 2024-03-23 à 05:24, Daniel65 a écrit :
> Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
>> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
>> says...
>>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
>>>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
>>>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
>>>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
>>>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such as?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>>
> >>>> Doesn't work.
>>>
>>> It works fine.
>>
>> Nope, bad link.
>>
> Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!
Looks like Skeeter maliciously altered that URL to get that 404 error.
The originally posted link was :
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

The hyphen «-» was removed, and the «A» in «contradictions» replaced by
an «U», changing it into «contrudictions».

Le 2024-03-23 à 10:08, Skeeter a écrit :
> In article <utm74g$3i9kq$1@dont-email.me>, daniel47@nomail.afraid.org
> says...
>>
>> Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
>>> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
>>> says...
>>>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
>>>>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
>>>>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
>>>>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
>>>>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such as?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>>>
>> >>>> Doesn't work.
>>>>
>>>> It works fine.
>>>
>>> Nope, bad link.
>>>
>> Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!
>
> He does that all the time.

Found out that YOUR reply is the one where the original
«biblical-contradictions» got changed into «biblicalcontrudictions».
The original URL is correct, YOUR doctored URL give that 404 error.

That make YOU a dishonest guy. YOU are the one lying to protect the
non-existent infallibility of the very fallible bible.

On 3/23/2024 2:24 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
> Skeeter wrote on 19/3/24 5:53 am:
>> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn says...
>>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE
>>>>>>> been disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one : When the
>>>>>>> Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely
>>>>>>> more than a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep
>>>>>>> wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such as?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>>
> >>>> Doesn't work.
>>>
>>> It works fine.
>>
>> Nope, bad link.
>>
> Yeap, shows a 404 error to me, too!

That's because Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell fucked up the link.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

Above, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell removed the hyphen and replaced
the 'a' in "contradictions" with a 'u'.

On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
>>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>
>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
>>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded by
>>>> stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet, surrounded
>>>> by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>
>>> Your source for this?
>>>
>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>
>>> Such as?
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Doesn't work.

Yes, it works.

On 3/18/2024 11:53 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
> says...
>>
>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
>>>>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>>>> prokaryotes?primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
>>>>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded by
>>>>>> stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet, surrounded
>>>>>> by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>
>>> Doesn't work.
>>
>> It works fine.
>
> Nope, bad link.

It worked fine until you edited the link so it wouldn't.

The link I posted:

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

Your intentional munging of it.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/

You munged it by removing the hyphen and changing the spelling from
"contradictions" to "contrudictions" The original link works.

On 3/18/2024 11:53 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
> says...
>>
>> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
>>>>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>>>> prokaryotes?primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
>>>>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded by
>>>>>> stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet, surrounded
>>>>>> by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
>>>
>>> Doesn't work.
>>
>> It works fine.
>
> Nope, bad link.

It worked fine until you edited the link so it wouldn't.

The link I posted:

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

Your intentional munging of it.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/

You munged it by removing the hyphen and changing the spelling from
"contradictions" to "contrudictions" The original link works.

Rod Flanders wrote on 17/3/24 9:06 pm:
> Siri Cruise wrote:
>> Rod Flanders wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Let's hope he can explain what he really means by 'just happen' : )
>>>
>>> Processes don't just happen, only a mind is can invent one.
>>>
>>> Natural selection is seen so we know God invented it.
>>
>> You can't see natural selection. Just like you can't General
>> Relativity except as printed on a piece of paper. You can see
>> evolution without human breeding for which natural selection is
>> the current best theory. You're confusing facts and explanation of
>> facts.
>
> Only God can create natural selection.

God created US .... and then gave US the gift of FREE WILL .... so we
can ignore GOD if we so desired!! ;-P

> You should stick to baking bread and ironing shirts.

I don't do either of these! Will I be O.K.,??
--
Daniel

On 3/19/2024 12:24 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> Dawn Flood wrote:
>>>
>>> The positive claim imply the burden of proof.
>>> The lack of belief is NOT a claim, no, there is nothing to prove,
>>> hence, NO burden of proof.
>>
>> Well stated.
>
> Since DeMorgan allows a so-called positive statement to be converted to
> negative, it's nonsense.

As you talking about De Morgan's Theorem? I have Bachelor of Science in
Computer Science and have studied & read "Discrete Mathematics and Its
Applications" by Professor Kenneth H. Rosen off and on for the past
three decades, and so, I am not sure what you are talking about here!

>
>> As for the gnostic atheists, they (such as Dr. James A. Lindsay in
>
> Gnostic atheist? Is that like a Hindu Aztec? Gnosticism believes in a
> godhead. That it ascribes different attributes to Yahweh than the bible
> doesn't make it atheist.
>
>> his book, "Dot, Dot, Dot...") compare God to The Force and decide
>
> 'He is a proponent of the right-wing LGBT grooming conspiracy theory '

Ad hominem. Dr. Lindsay has some nutty ideas; this is true of many
scholars. Address the argument that he is making here, as opposed to
some of his nutty political ideas.

>
>> that both ideas are in the '6.9999'-repeating category on Professor
>> Richard Dawkins' "Spectrum of theistic probability":
>
> Bullshit. Probability is specifically defined and is not the same as
> 'waffling'.

As in the area of "subjective probability"? Ever hear the joke, "What's
the difference between an actuary and an accountant?" (Answer: "About
50K".) Read (or at least consider) the book written by Dr. Stephen
Unwin, who used Bayesian analysis to calculate the probability of God's
existence. Other authors, such as Dr. Michael Shermer, have used the
same formulas to get vastly different results. Unlike risk analysis, no
"lens model" exists for the supernatural that can provide any feedback
on which to refine the model. Unlike drivers who continually get into
accidents, no probabilistic statements can be made about the existence
of God beyond one's own subjective assessments.

>
>> Maybe the Omnipotence paradoxes are a positive reason for disbelief:
>
> The paradox is simply (1) No objective definition of 'omnipotence'
> that slips in presuppositions, and (2) No proof whatever definition used
> applies to some subject. The usually attempted definitions by atheists
> are easily shown not applicable to the god in the bible.
>
> So much for your 'positive'.
>

Theologians define "omnipotence", as does Merriam Webster:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/omnipotence

What is the problem here?

Dawn

Le 2024-03-24 à 06:01, Daniel65 a écrit :
> Rod Flanders wrote on 17/3/24 9:06 pm:
>> Siri Cruise wrote:
>>> Rod Flanders wrote:
> >>>>
>>>>> Let's hope he can explain what he really means by 'just happen' : )
>>>>
>>>> Processes don't just happen, only a mind is can invent one.
>>>>
>>>> Natural selection is seen so we know God invented it.
>>>
>>> You can't see natural selection. Just like you can't General
>>> Relativity except as printed on a piece of paper. You can see
>>> evolution without human breeding for which natural selection is
>>> the current best theory. You're confusing facts and explanation of
>>> facts.
>>
>> Only God can create natural selection.
>
> God created US .... and then gave US the gift of FREE WILL .... so we
> can ignore GOD if we so desired!! ;-P
>
>> You should stick to baking bread and ironing shirts.
>
> I don't do either of these! Will I be O.K.,??

You got that completely backward.
WE created gods, thousands to millions of gods.
Then, SOME stories about some gods had them create us.
You are drowning in one of those human created godly story so deep that
it's the only thing that your can believe. That belief blinds you to the
actual facts.
A human made story about an omnipotent god telling us that it created us
don't mean that it's how it happened.

Kualinar wrote:
> WE created gods, thousands to millions of gods.

What's your objective evidence?

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

Siri Cruise wrote:
> Kualinar wrote:
>> WE created gods, thousands to millions of gods.
>
> What's your objective evidence?
>

History

--
“Atheism is the birth right of all human, remember that!”- hhyapster 7.4.23

"Christian beliefs cannot withstand reason, fact, and knowledge"

"Religion is not about truth, it's about lifestyle"

"God is a convenient explanation for what man does not understand.
The less that's inexplicable, the less need for a 'God' explanation."

"Religion is an evil who's goal is mind control"

"The problem with theism is that it never remains within
the realm of belief but invariably proceeds to assertion"

Kualinar wrote:
> Le 2024-03-24 à 06:01, Daniel65 a écrit :
>> Rod Flanders wrote on 17/3/24 9:06 pm:
>>> Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>> Rod Flanders wrote:
>>  >>>>
>>>>>> Let's hope he can explain what he really means by 'just happen' : )
>>>>>
>>>>> Processes don't just happen, only a mind is can invent one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Natural selection is seen so we know God invented it.
>>>>
>>>> You can't see natural selection. Just like you can't General
>>>> Relativity except as printed on a piece of paper. You can see
>>>> evolution without human breeding for which natural selection is
>>>> the current best theory. You're confusing facts and explanation of
>>>> facts.
>>>
>>> Only God can create natural selection.
>>
>> God created US .... and then gave US the gift of FREE WILL .... so we
>> can ignore GOD if we so desired!! ;-P
>>
>>> You should stick to baking bread and ironing shirts.
>>
>> I don't do either of these! Will I be O.K.,??
>
> You got that completely backward.
> WE created gods, thousands to millions of gods.
> Then, SOME stories about some gods had them create us.
> You are drowning in one of those human created godly story so deep
> that it's the only thing that your can believe. That belief blinds you
> to the actual facts.
> A human made story about an omnipotent god telling us that it created
> us don't mean that it's how it happened.

that's very well said

--
“Atheism is the birth right of all human, remember that!”- hhyapster 7.4.23

"Christian beliefs cannot withstand reason, fact, and knowledge"

"Religion is not about truth, it's about lifestyle"

"God is a convenient explanation for what man does not understand.
The less that's inexplicable, the less need for a 'God' explanation."

"Religion is an evil who's goal is mind control"

"The problem with theism is it never remains within
the realm of belief, but invariably proceeds to assertion"