Rocksolid Light

News from da outaworlds

mail  files  register  groups  login

Message-ID:  

BOFH excuse #101: Collapsed Backbone

alt / alt.atheism / Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?

SubjectAuthor
* Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?Robert
`- Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?Mitchell Holman

1
Subject: Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?
From: Mitchell Holman
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc, alt.atheism, alt.politics, alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.bible
Organization: TDSOTF
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 01:28 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!border-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 May 2024 01:28:14 +0000
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.atheism,alt.politics,alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.bible
Subject: Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?
From: dalmationstation@aol.com (Mitchell Holman)
References: <mNecnfpvNJdJHo77nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <l7pb3tF6i5lU1@mid.individual.net> <20240411104922.3722e3f2@234567aaa> <l7u3uiFsl69U1@mid.individual.net> <uvcncv$2l40g$2@dont-email.me> <uvd6ka$2rqp8$2@dont-email.me> <uvdgoi$2suo2$2@dont-email.me> <l8hd7gFrgdaU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsB15A571B5F946noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.20> <v00rh0$3p04n$1@dont-email.me> <XnsB15A87CE5C25Cnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.18> <20240420124057.0241154a@234567aaa> <v03dda$cjvt$2@dont-email.me> <3xcVN.1108216$Ms2.323258@fx01.ams4> <v03ov5$f3s8$1@dont-email.me> <TIiVN.622860$yZ2.260022@fx13.ams4> <XnsB15BD2ACF35FBnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.19> <4UxVN.696515$NX2.636381@fx14.ams4> <yTKdnW6l6MNqtrr7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com> <v0sdsa$2uusq$2@dont-email.me> <0001HW.2BE1FA390028710730DFBC38F@news.eternal-september.org> <XnsB165CFA8D9EE0noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.13> <0001HW.2BE33311002A6D8E30ECC238F@news.eternal-september.org>
Organization: TDSOTF
Message-ID: <XnsB166D02746E55noemailcomcastnet@69.80.101.16>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Date: Fri, 03 May 2024 01:28:14 +0000
Lines: 93
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-7xFYHCx6Om5/ObkBWVQnrseSAD1U4kX5JLKC9SkQxzlMAaFrX13eA7eco7G2nY1ecqkKZZhXKgOar45!UGYSjhHR9dCVEraZEp/xeLQKe+c0lz9cSwT5J9GrVwGBBHUZJ2O0L4DioYns5YSWveCcvl7ieNPT
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
View all headers

Robert <robert@no.way> wrote in
news:0001HW.2BE33311002A6D8E30ECC238F@news.eternal-september.org:

> On May 1, 2024, Mitchell Holman wrote
> (in article<XnsB165CFA8D9EE0noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.13>):
>
>> Robert <robert@no.way> wrote in
>> news:0001HW.2BE1FA390028710730DFBC38F@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>> > On Apr 30, 2024, Dawn Flood wrote
>> > (in article <v0sdsa$2uusq$2@dont-email.me>):
>> >
>> > > On 4/22/2024 10:33 PM, 68hx.1806 wrote:
>> > > > On 4/22/24 2:20 PM, Andrew wrote:
>> > > > > "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
>> > > > > news:XnsB15BD2ACF35FBnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.19...
>> > > > > > "Andrew" wrote:
>> > > > > > > "Dawn Flood" wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Andrew wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > "Dawn Flood" wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > This is false. I have faith that the laws of nature
>> > > > > > > > > > will continue this afternoon and into tomorrow &
>> > > > > > > > > > beyond, but unlike religious faith, my faith is
>> > > > > > > > > > falsifiable. It is possible that beginning
>> > > > > > > > > > tomorrow that apples may start rising up from the
>> > > > > > > > > > ground, but until then, the description of the
>> > > > > > > > > > physical world given by modern science at least
>> > > > > > > > > > implies "almost surely" that such will *not*
>> > > > > > > > > > happen.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Dawn
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > The laws of nature all point to the fact that we have
>> > > > > > > > > a Creator. Such as the Law of Biogenesis, which says
>> > > > > > > > > that all life comes from previous existing life.
>> > > > > > > > > Never an exception ever. It is a Law of science.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Then we can get into the Laws of thermo, and the
>> > > > > > > > > existence of matter..
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > We've going through this ad nauseam, Andrew; point to a
>> > > > > > > > single scientific paper and/or textbook that supports
>> > > > > > > > your POV.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The Laws of science are usually not debated. They are ~
>> > > > > > > established laws.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Even scientists do not think all
>> > > > > > laws are "established".
>> > > > > > Remember when "established law" said the speed of light is
>> > > > > > constant?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > https://www.sciencenews.org/article/speed-light-not-so-const
>> > > > > > ant- after-all
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > You are free to not believe them.
>> > > > > > > But only a fool would do that.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > As a creationist since when do you care what scientists
>> > > > > > think?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I only reject unscientific fantasies.
>> > > > > Whereas you accept whatever they
>> > > > > say. Which explains why you are
>> > > > > so easily deceived.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > "What they say" can be backed-up with exacting
>> > > > numbers and well-reviewed evidence. No "faith"
>> > > > involved - indeed busting someone elses pet
>> > > > theory is a badge of honor. Go ahead, post a
>> > > > paper - but expect everyone from Bejing to Moscow
>> > > > to Santiago to London to Kansas to try and tear
>> > > > apart your "truths". Science is NOT like religion.
>> >
>> > Sorry for the interrupt here Dawn, but this person above errs.
>> > Or he should state his meaning clearly.
>> >
>> > There is no global warming danger, that "science” is all hocus
>> > pocus.
>>
>> So why would climatologists
>> from all over the world reach
>> a "hocus pocus" conclusion?
>
> Why are you under the impression that they are?

You are claiming they are wrong, you tell us.

Subject: Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?
From: Robert
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc, alt.atheism, alt.politics, alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.bible
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 02:33 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: robert@no.way (Robert)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc, alt.atheism, alt.politics, alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.bible
Subject: Re: Are "Athiests" only FOUR Percent intellect ?
Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 19:33:53 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <0001HW.2BE33311002A6D8E30ECC238F@news.eternal-september.org>
References: <mNecnfpvNJdJHo77nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <l7pb3tF6i5lU1@mid.individual.net> <20240411104922.3722e3f2@234567aaa> <l7u3uiFsl69U1@mid.individual.net> <uvcncv$2l40g$2@dont-email.me> <uvd6ka$2rqp8$2@dont-email.me> <uvdgoi$2suo2$2@dont-email.me> <l8hd7gFrgdaU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsB15A571B5F946noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.20> <v00rh0$3p04n$1@dont-email.me> <XnsB15A87CE5C25Cnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.18> <20240420124057.0241154a@234567aaa> <v03dda$cjvt$2@dont-email.me> <3xcVN.1108216$Ms2.323258@fx01.ams4> <v03ov5$f3s8$1@dont-email.me> <TIiVN.622860$yZ2.260022@fx13.ams4> <XnsB15BD2ACF35FBnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.19> <4UxVN.696515$NX2.636381@fx14.ams4> <yTKdnW6l6MNqtrr7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com> <v0sdsa$2uusq$2@dont-email.me> <0001HW.2BE1FA390028710730DFBC38F@news.eternal-september.org> <XnsB165CFA8D9EE0noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 02 May 2024 04:33:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="27d77f52d5ccd3c21f61044b9b05ad7b";
logging-data="3807752"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+8gr+Pn3zs4GBq9uJ+zZso"
User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.24
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5tbGAcgvX/rb5IREdziFqi+8/Mw=
View all headers

On May 1, 2024, Mitchell Holman wrote
(in article<XnsB165CFA8D9EE0noemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.13>):

> Robert <robert@no.way> wrote in
> news:0001HW.2BE1FA390028710730DFBC38F@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> > On Apr 30, 2024, Dawn Flood wrote
> > (in article <v0sdsa$2uusq$2@dont-email.me>):
> >
> > > On 4/22/2024 10:33 PM, 68hx.1806 wrote:
> > > > On 4/22/24 2:20 PM, Andrew wrote:
> > > > > "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> > > > > news:XnsB15BD2ACF35FBnoemailcomcastnet@69.80.102.19...
> > > > > > "Andrew" wrote:
> > > > > > > "Dawn Flood" wrote:
> > > > > > > > Andrew wrote:
> > > > > > > > > "Dawn Flood" wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > This is false. I have faith that the laws of nature
> > > > > > > > > > will continue this afternoon and into tomorrow &
> > > > > > > > > > beyond, but unlike religious faith, my faith is
> > > > > > > > > > falsifiable. It is possible that beginning
> > > > > > > > > > tomorrow that apples may start rising up from the
> > > > > > > > > > ground, but until then, the description of the physical
> > > > > > > > > > world given by modern science at least implies "almost
> > > > > > > > > > surely" that such will *not* happen.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dawn
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The laws of nature all point to the fact that we have a
> > > > > > > > > Creator. Such as the Law of Biogenesis, which says that
> > > > > > > > > all life comes from previous existing life. Never an
> > > > > > > > > exception ever. It is a Law of science.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Then we can get into the Laws of thermo, and the
> > > > > > > > > existence of matter..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We've going through this ad nauseam, Andrew; point to a
> > > > > > > > single scientific paper and/or textbook that supports your
> > > > > > > > POV.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Laws of science are usually not debated. They are ~
> > > > > > > established laws.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even scientists do not think all
> > > > > > laws are "established".
> > > > > > Remember when "established law" said the speed of light is
> > > > > > constant?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://www.sciencenews.org/article/speed-light-not-so-constant-
> > > > > > after-all
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > You are free to not believe them.
> > > > > > > But only a fool would do that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a creationist since when do you care what scientists think?
> > > > >
> > > > > I only reject unscientific fantasies.
> > > > > Whereas you accept whatever they
> > > > > say. Which explains why you are
> > > > > so easily deceived.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "What they say" can be backed-up with exacting
> > > > numbers and well-reviewed evidence. No "faith"
> > > > involved - indeed busting someone elses pet
> > > > theory is a badge of honor. Go ahead, post a
> > > > paper - but expect everyone from Bejing to Moscow
> > > > to Santiago to London to Kansas to try and tear
> > > > apart your "truths". Science is NOT like religion.
> >
> > Sorry for the interrupt here Dawn, but this person above errs.
> > Or he should state his meaning clearly.
> >
> > There is no global warming danger, that "science” is all hocus
> > pocus.
>
> So why would climatologists
> from all over the world reach
> a "hocus pocus" conclusion?

Why are you under the impression that they are?

1

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor