| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
23 Jan 2008 02:30:35 PM |
| Object: |
Atheism and morality |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
.
|
|
| User: "Greywolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
24 Jan 2008 04:13:17 AM |
|
|
<mccoy@sunset.net> wrote in message
news:405bba35-edeb-46a9-b396-a0163a85eec9@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Dang! Where was this genius during the Dover, PA evolution/creation trial.
Shoot, he would have made all the scientists eat their shoes for lunch if
*he* would have shown up. (Wonder why he didn't? Too busy making videos for
YouTube proving Noah's Flood was a matter of historical fact or something?)
We would be arguing over whether or not our 'ancestors' actually rode
T-Rex's bare-back or used 'saddles' if would have bothered enough to make
his presence at the trial, don't you think?
About those murdering Christian Crusaders and the torture-happy Christian
breaking limbs and tearing flesh apart during the Inquisitions not being
'Christians': Well they weren't Hindus or Buddhists now, were they?
Oh, that's right: The Jesus guy would say they're not really 'Christians'
behaving so despicably, that they're . . . uh . . . hmmm . . . How about
this: Jesus loving, 'God believing' atheists? No?
Well they weren't Hindus or Buddhists, now were they?
Greywolf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 03:45:33 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
mccoy@sunset.net wrote:
|
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
|
Says the immoral xtian that refuses to own up to his claims and failed
bluster.
What's the matter McShitFaced, record over that video with last weeks
pron fest?
For get that you said you would never post to TO again?
Lied about textbooks and Piltdown?
Gee, and you wonder why so many of us laugh our asses off at you.
McClueless, go away.
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHl7V9f+wl0F6+jvgRAs+DAJ9Z4w9m3jeQot3rKccNXHIUaqUNDACghYdq
B0KeR7WNQEGm0x6hESuN4Y8=
=0UEi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 03:01:16 PM |
|
|
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
So...? This video doesn't show anything, just one guy bickering about some
other guy. Just a rehashed version of a couple old arguments, with some
very flawed arguments and bad logic on one side, and some ***** who is
portrayed as a typical atheist (ad hominem? I think so!).
-- B
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 06:22:11 PM |
|
|
McCoy, I did promise a reply to this video, so here you go.
The very first minute of the video begins with ad hominem argument that
tries to depict a typical atheist as an ***** who wishes death on the
Christian creator of the video. It follows this up with an appeal to
Christians, with the atheist's assertion that religious people are immoral
being treated as if it was a completely ludicrous argument, that no one
with any sense could possibly make. Finally, after the personal attacks
and the misrepresentations of atheists and appeals to Christian ideals, the
creator of the video begins with his "logic."
His first logical argument is that the people who perpetrated the various
attacks on non-Christians were themselves non-Christian. A true Christian,
he implies, would never bring harm to others. It is, of course, impossible
to argue against that assertion, because it is a definition -- it defines a
Christian as someone who, at the very least, never brings harm to others.
If it sounds like a convenient way to win an argument, it's because it is
cheap. It's also not a logical argument. Redefining terms to break down
an opponents argument is not a way to win; it is more of a declaration that
one has no way of refuting a claim.
He also has an interesting take on what the crusades and inquisition
represented. In his view, they were not a Christian attack on Islam or
Judaism. He claims that they were slander against Jesus. I guess he
missed the part where slander has to be deliberate. And the part where the
people who perpetrated those crimes against humanity (that's basically what
they amount to) were doing so because the believed that it was morally
right, because their religious leaders told them it was. Of course,
accepting that would require one to accept that religious values are not
universal, neither across times nor across cultures. Especially since his
religious beliefs, while still Christian, differ from theirs.
OK, after we get past the poor knowledge of history and logic (and logical
argument), we get to matters of science, beginning with the origin of the
universe. He begins by insisting that there are only two choices:
everything came from nothing, or something that always existed created
everything. Why are those the only two choices? He tries to explain with
the "infinite regress" argument, but horribly botches it.
The actual infinite regress argument usually involves the cause-and-effect
problem, where the initial assertion is that everything must have a cause.
Although that assertion is debatable, it is irrelevant here, because his
argument is based on something even more easily shot down; it is something
to the effect of this:
If I say that, after an infinite amount of time, I will do something, then
clearly it will never happen. Therefore, there can't be an infinite amount
of time before right now, because then we would never reach "right now."
Now, for anyone thinking logically, it is clear that something is wrong with
that argument. Putting your finger on it, however, is a little difficult,
because the exact problem is a bit subtle. Consider the use of the
words "before" and "after." These words imply an order of events -- but
they imply opposite orders. It is true that if something happens an
infinite amount of time AFTER this moment, then it will never happen. It
is NOT true that if there was an infinite amount of time BEFORE this
moment, then this moment would never happen. After all, there are an
infinite number of integers BEFORE the number 3, but that does not preclude
the existence of the number 3. It just means that there is no "first"
integer.
He then pulls a bit of a sleight of hand. He quickly quotes the bible,
never bothering to explain why the bible, the Christian bible, must be
true, and then uses his bible quote to quickly (under 10 seconds for all of
it) show that God must exist outside of time. Therefore, he asserts,
either something created the universe, or everything came from nothing.
The entire argument happens to quickly, you could miss the fact that it is
only based on a bible quote, with no basis for the bible's truth and no
other facts to support it. He alludes to another video, which we are to
assume he explains the theory more fully in.
Then, more bible quotes, this time scrolling across the screen. This is an
obvious appeal to Christians -- who will assume that the bible is right,
and therefore readily accept the quotes. The quotes are meant to coincide
with what the atheist says -- if the atheist notes that God had a lot of
work to do to somehow create everything in the universe, a handy quote
about the heavens proclaiming the glory of God is flashed before us.
Atheist notes that these beliefs haven't changed in 2000 years, even though
human knowledge has, and a handy quote about the bible being true for all
time is flashed before us. The video is not, at this point, refuting the
atheists claims, it is merely trying to convince Christians that to stay in
their comfort zone and ignore what the atheist has to say -- the bible has
it all covered already.
If you thought the creator of the video was done redefining words when we
moved past the crusades, you were wrong. He also redefines the
word "death," so that, conveniently, the tree of knowledge story appears to
be totally fine. Knowledge didn't bring about their first death -- it was
their "second death." More bible quotes are flashed on the screen, again
reminding Christians that this is familiar to them, so they shouldn't
question any of it.
Then more science. We get into the flood, this time. A global flood, that
was supposed to happen 5000 years ago. Let's be clear here: the amount of
water necessary to cover the entire Earth in a flood, even Mount Everest,
would have had to come from somewhere and go to somewhere. The story
implies that it just sort of appeared and disappeared. Maybe it was formed
from just energy? Doubtful; if it went back to being energy to just
disappear, the entire world would have been destroyed from the explosion,
and even if Noah and his animals survived, the radiation would have killed
them.
Everything he says about the flood is based on finding facts to fit his
theories, and leaving out facts that don't. For example, he doesn't bother
to note that glacial ice forms in layers, one per winter, and that we can
count back 50,000 layers in the ice (e.g., 50,000 years of ice formation).
He neglects to point out that, while the oldest civilizations are indeed in
Mesopotamia, where the ark is said to have landed, the determination that
those cities are the "oldest" was made using radiometric dating -- which is
the same technique that is used to date fossils back by thousands and
millions of years, throwing a major wrench into young earth creationism.
This is why scientists determined, centuries ago, that it was necessary to
use deductive reasoning: find theories that fit the facts, NOT facts that
fit a theory.
Like most creationists, the creator of the video has trouble understanding
that the term "species." He states that new species form easily; hybridize
a lion with a tiger, and you get ligers and tions. What is conveniently
neglected is that the definition of "species" is arbitrary. Species names
and distinctions are voted upon by panels of biologists, for the purpose of
making a standard list of species names for use in scientific research.
Gorillas were recently reassigned; they now include 2 species with 2
subspecies each, rather than the 3 subspecies that they were before. This
sort of reassignment is common.
It is also interesting that he claims that saltwater fish formed by a
process of natural selection, rather than a process of evolution. Again,
he insists upon redefining terms. In this case, the word "evolution" is
redefined, to mean...apparently, to mean something other than transitions
between species. It is not clear what the creator of the video
thinks "evolution" means, but it would seem to be something involving a
transition between "forms" -- fish becoming birds, or something. Again,
hard to argue with someone who redefines words to suit their needs.
Amusing in this case: natural selection, "not evolution," should make
anyone laugh.
So this video is, like so many creationist arguments before it, not based on
deductive reasoning, but rather on a combination of inductive fact
cherry-picking and appeals to people who already believe that the bible
must be true. In fact, it is based on an appeal to specifically born-again
Christians. Note the various elements meant to appeal to born again types:
* Literal interpretations of key bible passages, taking them to mean exactly
the words they are composed of.
* A claim that Catholics (crusaders and inquisitors) are not truly
Christians.
* An assumption that morality is derived from Christianity, and that
non-Christians are not moral (and a portrayal of a "typically" immoral
atheist).
* Confidence derived from Christianity; a message that as a Christian, he
has nothing to fear, and that the non-Christian is the one who must be on
the defensive.
All these techniques, and all the claims in that video, can be found on
various born-again websites. Here is another one:
http://www.chick.com/
I have seen these tracts passed out, by dozens of people. It is certainly
not just one lunatic's ramblings. In that light, this video really isn't
so surprising, just another example of a worldwide religious movement.
-- B
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 07:24:42 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mr. B wrote:
| McCoy, I did promise a reply to this video, so here you go.
|
| The very first minute of the video begins with ad hominem argument that
| tries to depict a typical atheist as an ***** who wishes death on the
| Christian creator of the video. It follows this up with an appeal to
| Christians, with the atheist's assertion that religious people are immoral
| being treated as if it was a completely ludicrous argument, that no one
| with any sense could possibly make. Finally, after the personal attacks
| and the misrepresentations of atheists and appeals to Christian
ideals, the
| creator of the video begins with his "logic."
|
| His first logical argument is that the people who perpetrated the various
| attacks on non-Christians were themselves non-Christian. A true
Christian,
| he implies, would never bring harm to others. It is, of course,
impossible
| to argue against that assertion, because it is a definition -- it
defines a
| Christian as someone who, at the very least, never brings harm to others.
|
| If it sounds like a convenient way to win an argument, it's because it is
| cheap. It's also not a logical argument. Redefining terms to break down
| an opponents argument is not a way to win; it is more of a declaration
that
| one has no way of refuting a claim.
|
| He also has an interesting take on what the crusades and inquisition
| represented. In his view, they were not a Christian attack on Islam or
| Judaism. He claims that they were slander against Jesus. I guess he
| missed the part where slander has to be deliberate. And the part
where the
| people who perpetrated those crimes against humanity (that's basically
what
| they amount to) were doing so because the believed that it was morally
| right, because their religious leaders told them it was. Of course,
| accepting that would require one to accept that religious values are not
| universal, neither across times nor across cultures. Especially since his
| religious beliefs, while still Christian, differ from theirs.
|
| OK, after we get past the poor knowledge of history and logic (and logical
| argument), we get to matters of science, beginning with the origin of the
| universe. He begins by insisting that there are only two choices:
| everything came from nothing, or something that always existed created
| everything. Why are those the only two choices? He tries to explain with
| the "infinite regress" argument, but horribly botches it.
|
| The actual infinite regress argument usually involves the cause-and-effect
| problem, where the initial assertion is that everything must have a
cause.
| Although that assertion is debatable, it is irrelevant here, because his
| argument is based on something even more easily shot down; it is something
| to the effect of this:
|
| If I say that, after an infinite amount of time, I will do something, then
| clearly it will never happen. Therefore, there can't be an infinite
amount
| of time before right now, because then we would never reach "right now."
|
| Now, for anyone thinking logically, it is clear that something is
wrong with
| that argument. Putting your finger on it, however, is a little difficult,
| because the exact problem is a bit subtle. Consider the use of the
| words "before" and "after." These words imply an order of events -- but
| they imply opposite orders. It is true that if something happens an
| infinite amount of time AFTER this moment, then it will never happen. It
| is NOT true that if there was an infinite amount of time BEFORE this
| moment, then this moment would never happen. After all, there are an
| infinite number of integers BEFORE the number 3, but that does not
preclude
| the existence of the number 3. It just means that there is no "first"
| integer.
|
| He then pulls a bit of a sleight of hand. He quickly quotes the bible,
| never bothering to explain why the bible, the Christian bible, must be
| true, and then uses his bible quote to quickly (under 10 seconds for
all of
| it) show that God must exist outside of time. Therefore, he asserts,
| either something created the universe, or everything came from nothing.
| The entire argument happens to quickly, you could miss the fact that it is
| only based on a bible quote, with no basis for the bible's truth and no
| other facts to support it. He alludes to another video, which we are to
| assume he explains the theory more fully in.
|
| Then, more bible quotes, this time scrolling across the screen. This
is an
| obvious appeal to Christians -- who will assume that the bible is right,
| and therefore readily accept the quotes. The quotes are meant to coincide
| with what the atheist says -- if the atheist notes that God had a lot of
| work to do to somehow create everything in the universe, a handy quote
| about the heavens proclaiming the glory of God is flashed before us.
| Atheist notes that these beliefs haven't changed in 2000 years, even
though
| human knowledge has, and a handy quote about the bible being true for all
| time is flashed before us. The video is not, at this point, refuting the
| atheists claims, it is merely trying to convince Christians that to
stay in
| their comfort zone and ignore what the atheist has to say -- the bible has
| it all covered already.
|
| If you thought the creator of the video was done redefining words when we
| moved past the crusades, you were wrong. He also redefines the
| word "death," so that, conveniently, the tree of knowledge story
appears to
| be totally fine. Knowledge didn't bring about their first death -- it was
| their "second death." More bible quotes are flashed on the screen, again
| reminding Christians that this is familiar to them, so they shouldn't
| question any of it.
|
| Then more science. We get into the flood, this time. A global flood,
that
| was supposed to happen 5000 years ago. Let's be clear here: the
amount of
| water necessary to cover the entire Earth in a flood, even Mount Everest,
| would have had to come from somewhere and go to somewhere. The story
| implies that it just sort of appeared and disappeared. Maybe it was
formed
| from just energy? Doubtful; if it went back to being energy to just
| disappear, the entire world would have been destroyed from the explosion,
| and even if Noah and his animals survived, the radiation would have killed
| them.
|
| Everything he says about the flood is based on finding facts to fit his
| theories, and leaving out facts that don't. For example, he doesn't
bother
| to note that glacial ice forms in layers, one per winter, and that we can
| count back 50,000 layers in the ice (e.g., 50,000 years of ice
formation).
| He neglects to point out that, while the oldest civilizations are
indeed in
| Mesopotamia, where the ark is said to have landed, the determination that
| those cities are the "oldest" was made using radiometric dating --
which is
| the same technique that is used to date fossils back by thousands and
| millions of years, throwing a major wrench into young earth creationism.
| This is why scientists determined, centuries ago, that it was necessary to
| use deductive reasoning: find theories that fit the facts, NOT facts that
| fit a theory.
|
| Like most creationists, the creator of the video has trouble understanding
| that the term "species." He states that new species form easily;
hybridize
| a lion with a tiger, and you get ligers and tions. What is conveniently
| neglected is that the definition of "species" is arbitrary. Species names
| and distinctions are voted upon by panels of biologists, for the
purpose of
| making a standard list of species names for use in scientific research.
| Gorillas were recently reassigned; they now include 2 species with 2
| subspecies each, rather than the 3 subspecies that they were before. This
| sort of reassignment is common.
|
| It is also interesting that he claims that saltwater fish formed by a
| process of natural selection, rather than a process of evolution. Again,
| he insists upon redefining terms. In this case, the word "evolution" is
| redefined, to mean...apparently, to mean something other than transitions
| between species. It is not clear what the creator of the video
| thinks "evolution" means, but it would seem to be something involving a
| transition between "forms" -- fish becoming birds, or something. Again,
| hard to argue with someone who redefines words to suit their needs.
| Amusing in this case: natural selection, "not evolution," should make
| anyone laugh.
|
| So this video is, like so many creationist arguments before it, not
based on
| deductive reasoning, but rather on a combination of inductive fact
| cherry-picking and appeals to people who already believe that the bible
| must be true. In fact, it is based on an appeal to specifically
born-again
| Christians. Note the various elements meant to appeal to born again
types:
|
| * Literal interpretations of key bible passages, taking them to mean
exactly
| the words they are composed of.
| * A claim that Catholics (crusaders and inquisitors) are not truly
| Christians.
| * An assumption that morality is derived from Christianity, and that
| non-Christians are not moral (and a portrayal of a "typically" immoral
| atheist).
| * Confidence derived from Christianity; a message that as a Christian, he
| has nothing to fear, and that the non-Christian is the one who must be on
| the defensive.
|
| All these techniques, and all the claims in that video, can be found on
| various born-again websites. Here is another one:
|
| http://www.chick.com/
|
| I have seen these tracts passed out, by dozens of people. It is certainly
| not just one lunatic's ramblings. In that light, this video really isn't
| so surprising, just another example of a worldwide religious movement.
|
| -- B
Wait a minute. Is that that little dweeb VenomFangX that posts all that
religious noise on YouTube and has the hots for one of the atheists?
Yeah, I saw this little jokers mental masturbation exercise on how Satan
created Evolution.
He's a graduate, with honors, of the Kent Hovind school of "Make it up
as you go along". In fact, the little ***** even has a "special message
from Kent Hovind" out there.
What a tool. No wonder McShitStain likes him. Birds of a feather and
all that.
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHl+jaf+wl0F6+jvgRApKlAJ4hrFpK3hRRyVkY6Cz1ur5yBOiCGACePnXe
s+Dm+J4tgdjv8bO71q+9/rs=
=bfMI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 07:40:51 PM |
|
|
Do these people all belong to a club or something? Do they carry cards?
-- B
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "platothelapdog" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 02:44:30 PM |
|
|
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
The video was very boring. It's points were mute.
I'll let if people watch it, each person decide for themselves
were the Xian went wrong. But if your an Athiest, I wouldn't waste
your time on this lnk.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ghod" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 03:37:26 PM |
|
|
"platothelapdog" <platothelapdog@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:6eb6f15c-20e8-40ed-890b-a7c006e2994d@k39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
The video was very boring.
Probably. I won't waste my time on it just now.
It's points were mute.
Why, did someone put salt in it's mouth, then sew it shut?
Unless, of course, you meant "moot". If so, may I suggest that you not use
terms that you don't understand? It allows others to make a weapon of your
ignorance, eh?
I'll let if people watch it, each person decide for themselves
were the Xian went wrong. But if your an Athiest, I wouldn't waste
your time on this lnk.
Egad, son, may I suggest some practice of basic spelling & grammar? Don't
take this too hard, it's the same advice I'd give anyone.
Seriously though, it's important to have both grammar & spelling, if you
intend to convince anyone with more than half an education of anything.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 04:28:06 PM |
|
|
On Jan 23, 12:44=A0pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
Here's an excerpt from the video:
Atheist: "*@##$! you VenomFangX. I hope you die."
Later
Atheist: "Religious people are morally reprehensible." (Yes, the
same atheist said this.)
I only mention this because it happens all the time at Talk.origins
and alt.atheism.
JM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 04:42:18 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
JM20000000@hotmail.com wrote:
| On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
|
|
| Here's an excerpt from the video:
|
| Atheist: "*@##$! you VenomFangX. I hope you die."
|
| Later
|
| Atheist: "Religious people are morally reprehensible." (Yes, the
| same atheist said this.)
|
| I only mention this because it happens all the time at Talk.origins
| and alt.atheism.
|
| JM
|
Only to proven liars and frauds.
Now McShitHead, you know what you have to do to change that. But till
you do, you are a liar and will fucking be treated like the putrid pile
of dog ***** you are.
Don't like it? Well, WWJD? Sell your computer and give the money to
the poor. Then at least you will be doing ONE of the things your savior
on a stick said to do.
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHl8LKf+wl0F6+jvgRAgFqAJ9XegYZRwxN/QLG7+5sfG3965mYZgCfbl/T
zpB2PGQsfuTCoVt+288RuM8=
=+Vo1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:47:33 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:28:06 -0800 (PST),
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
Here's an excerpt from the video:
Atheist: "*@##$! you VenomFangX. I hope you die."
Later
Atheist: "Religious people are morally reprehensible." (Yes, the
same atheist said this.)
I only mention this because it happens all the time at Talk.origins
and alt.atheism.
JM
The McClueless Video Challenge is about to enter its 13th day
McClueless. Don't you think it is time you got those estimates sorted
out?
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:27:50 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:28:06 -0800 in
fc486740-c292-46f8-a107-b4b40a8cb264@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
JM20000000@hotmail.com wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
Here's an excerpt from the video:
Atheist: "*@##$! you VenomFangX. I hope you die."
Later
Atheist: "Religious people are morally reprehensible." (Yes, the same
atheist said this.)
I only mention this because it happens all the time at Talk.origins and
alt.atheism.
yawn
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“Theology is the effort to explain the unknowable
in terms of the not worth knowing.”
- H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 02:54:11 PM |
|
|
On Jan 23, 12:44=A0pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DwI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 03:46:30 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
mccoy@sunset.net wrote:
| On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
|> On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
|>
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
|
| Interesting. What are you afraid of?
|
Nothing.
What are you afraid of in regards to a video, some ISBN's and a news
group you said you'd never post to again?
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHl7W2f+wl0F6+jvgRAo/ZAJ9Dve3j0vWZZKod/iAHAKWmTa0NyACghKId
n/CJcxW79IL4FQPPu81gO0c=
=ytiA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 04:23:11 PM |
|
|
On Jan 23, 1:46=A0pm, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktaylo...@getnet.net>
wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
wrote:
| On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
|> On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
|>
|http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DwI_QWtMw3ME
|
| Interesting. =A0What are you afraid of?
|
Nothing.
What are you afraid of in regards to a video, some ISBN's and a news
group you said you'd never post to again?
And it looks like you're in the know. What's this "you afraid of" in
regard to anewsgroup that just started having problems again. What a
coincidene.
JM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 04:39:37 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
JM20000000@hotmail.com wrote:
| On Jan 23, 1:46 pm, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktaylo...@getnet.net>
| wrote:
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|> Hash: SHA1
|>
|> wrote:
|>
|> | On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
|> |> On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
|> |>
|> |http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
|> |
|> | Interesting. What are you afraid of?
|> |
|> Nothing.
|>
|> What are you afraid of in regards to a video, some ISBN's and a news
|> group you said you'd never post to again?
|>
|
|
| And it looks like you're in the know. What's this "you afraid of" in
| regard to anewsgroup that just started having problems again. What a
| coincidene.
|
| JM
|
You said you'd never post there again, but I see you.
You also are still trying to ignore the other two lies you've told in
the last two months, and longer.
SO, where's the video McLiar?
What are the ISBN's, McMoron?
Where is your evidence that you were censored on TO McClueless?
Come on, out with it liar.
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHl8Iif+wl0F6+jvgRAlIBAJkBGtb0ZJwQ1SKsoBYrDZUHlInP7QCfSqR9
kXN/JWBykf3LsNo5e/H8wZU=
=TW7i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:44:51 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:23:11 -0800 (PST),
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Jan 23, 1:46pm, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktaylo...@getnet.net>
wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
wrote:
| On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
|> On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
|>
|http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
|
| Interesting. What are you afraid of?
|
Nothing.
What are you afraid of in regards to a video, some ISBN's and a news
group you said you'd never post to again?
And it looks like you're in the know. What's this "you afraid of" in
regard to anewsgroup that just started having problems again.
The only problem is the one between your ears - you know, that vast
empty space.
What a
coincidene.
Drinking again tonight McClueless?
JM
McClueless Video Challenge. Still no valid answer. Why?
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 09:37:27 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:23:11 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
Turkey. Metal detector. Video. Get the hint?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 03:07:17 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
I'll be back online in roughly two hours. I don't have enough time right
now to even scratch the surface of the logical fallacies in this video, let
alone the simple facts that this guy can't seem to cover. The video is ten
minutes long, but it contradicts the material in about ten volumes of
scientific journals from almost every field of science.
If it weren't for the fact that a lot of people will watch this and think
that the Christian makes a good point, I wouldn't even waste my time
refuting it. If only people received a better education in this country...
-- B
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:03:58 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:54:11 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
Nothing. Not you, not your gods, nothing.
....well, except spiders :(
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 08:53:31 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:54:11 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
A video that does nothing but ridicule atheists by presenting
christians as atheists acting in obscene manners to prove how
'properly moral' christians are.
Just when I thought I couldn't think less of christianity.
What's next? You christians pretend to be guards at Auschwitz and
convert the Jews before slaughter?
There is NO QUESTION that ANY means justify's the end for your
superstitious agenda.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 09:39:06 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:54:11 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
Certainly nothing you can come up with, McAsshole.
Now, speaking of videos....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:26:57 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:54:11 -0800 in
32a7c73e-27db-45af-a735-a7ceaedef0cc@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com,
mccoy@sunset.net wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44 pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
<snork>
Not you.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Oh Log Cabin, full of taste, my stomach is with thee.
Blessed are three among syrups..."
- Homer
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 08:28:27 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:54:11 -0800, mccoy wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:44pm, platothelapdog <platothelap...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Jan 23, 12:30 pm, wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Interesting. What are you afraid of?
So many stupid arguments; so little time...
--
MarkA
(This space accidentally filled in)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 02:44:41 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:30:35 -0800 (PST), wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
Get. Help. Now.
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 09:40:57 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:30:35 -0800 (PST), wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
That isn't the video we're interested in, McLyingsackofshit.
Speaking of which - how dare a lying fuckwit like you question anyone
else's morality? You don't know the meaning of the word.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and morality |
23 Jan 2008 05:26:42 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:30:35 -0800 in
405bba35-edeb-46a9-b396-a0163a85eec9@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
mccoy@sunset.net wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_QWtMw3ME
http://*****.off/mcloser.now
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
How did you hurt your back? Running away from good taste?
-- Karen Walker
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
