| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gregory Gadow" |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2004 02:35:00 PM |
| Object: |
God's priorities |
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
Giant waves washed floodwaters up to 2 miles inland at Yala National
Park in the ravaged southeast, Sri Lanka's biggest wildlife reserve and
home to hundreds of wild elephants and several leopards.
"The strange thing is we haven't recorded any dead animals," H.D.
Ratnayake, deputy director of the national Wildlife Department, told
Reuters on Wednesday.
"No elephants are dead, not even a dead hare or rabbit," he added. "I
think animals can sense disaster. They have a sixth sense. They know
when things are happening."
At least 40 tourists, including nine Japanese, were drowned.
The tsunami was triggered by an earthquake in the Indian Ocean on
Sunday, which sent waves up to 15 feet high crashing onto Sri Lanka's
southern, eastern and northern seaboard, flooding whole towns and
villages, destroying hotels and causing widespread destruction.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary,
in
the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary,
self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very
definition
of tyranny." - James Madison, _The Federalist_, #47
.
|
|
| User: "Specter133" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
29 Dec 2004 04:35:43 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
Specter133 wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:50:06 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
Why bring 'God' into it ?
He doesn't exist....how much more proof do ya' all need ?
How can you prove a negative?
You can't. Now you are starting to get it.
Exactly. You can't prove that God doesn't exist.
So how does that fact buttress your case exactly?
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
29 Dec 2004 07:31:22 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:35:43 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
Specter133 wrote:
How can you prove a negative?
You can't. Now you are starting to get it.
Exactly. You can't prove that God doesn't exist.
Which is why the burden of proof isn't on those who refuse to accept
the claim that he exists, but rather it's on those who make that
positive claim.
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Since you're so fond of telling people to look things up, look up
"objective" and "evidence".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 12:03:10 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:35:43 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
Specter133 wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:50:06 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
Why bring 'God' into it ?
He doesn't exist....how much more proof do ya' all need ?
How can you prove a negative?
You can't. Now you are starting to get it.
Exactly. You can't prove that God doesn't exist.
So how does that fact buttress your case exactly?
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets. If a theist claims he has evidence, and he is asked for it;
the same response is given. The term "song and dance" comes to mind.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ernobe" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
31 Dec 2004 11:09:34 PM |
|
|
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets. If a theist claims he has evidence, and he is asked for it;
the same response is given. The term "song and dance" comes to mind.
No matter what an atheist claims, atheism ignores evidence which theism
takes for granted, and accuses theists of being at fault. Which atheist has
objective evidence? Any atheist, I don't care which. You pick it.
--
http://www.costarricense.cr/pagina/ernobe
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
01 Jan 2005 10:33:01 AM |
|
|
On 1 Jan 2005 05:09:34 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets. If a theist claims he has evidence, and he is asked for it;
the same response is given. The term "song and dance" comes to mind.
No matter what an atheist claims,
What claim?
atheism ignores evidence which theism
takes for granted,
What evidence?
and accuses theists of being at fault. Which atheist has
objective evidence? Any atheist, I don't care which. You pick it.
Objective evidence for what?
Do you ever post anything that makes sense?
.
|
|
|
| User: "ernobe" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
02 Jan 2005 01:29:17 PM |
|
|
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
--
http://www.costarricense.cr/pagina/ernobe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
03 Jan 2005 07:28:26 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <33r0cdF43eop6U1@individual.net>, ernobe lept out of
the bushes shouting:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
We exist.
There's the evidence "for atheism."
(Try learning what the word means)
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
-- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
03 Jan 2005 12:41:13 AM |
|
|
On 2 Jan 2005 19:29:17 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god? You are silly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ernobe" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
04 Jan 2005 03:02:24 PM |
|
|
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god?
That is the definition of an atheist, but if you lack objective evidence of
atheism, what objective evidence could there be to being an atheist?
--
"The world of existence is an emanation of the merciful attribute of God."
Abdul-Baha
http://www.costarricense.cr/pagina/ernobe
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
05 Jan 2005 09:16:59 AM |
|
|
On 4 Jan 2005 21:02:24 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god?
That is the definition of an atheist, but if you lack objective evidence of
atheism, what objective evidence could there be to being an atheist?
Lewis Carroll would have admired your talent.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
03 Jan 2005 07:28:46 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <o0qht0ddt7orh6pkpj5t4dn5f1cbitgn91@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On 2 Jan 2005 19:29:17 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god? You are silly.
Breathtakingly so.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
-- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
03 Jan 2005 03:49:26 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:28:46 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <o0qht0ddt7orh6pkpj5t4dn5f1cbitgn91@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On 2 Jan 2005 19:29:17 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god? You are silly.
Breathtakingly so.
Depressingly so.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
03 Jan 2005 01:59:54 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:28:46 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <o0qht0ddt7orh6pkpj5t4dn5f1cbitgn91@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On 2 Jan 2005 19:29:17 GMT, ernobe <ernobe@yahoo.com> wrote:
Objective evidence for what?
For atheism.
The lack of belief in a god? Why would I need evidence that I lack a
belief in a god? You are silly.
Breathtakingly so.
I'd indicate breathtakingly brain dead.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
31 Dec 2004 11:36:37 PM |
|
|
ernobe wrote:
No matter what an atheist claims,
Atheism makes no claim.
It rejects unsupported claims of hypothetical god existence
presented by believers.
... atheism ignores evidence which theism takes for granted,
and accuses theists of being at fault.
Excuse me, but taking evidence for granted means that you assume
that there is persuasive evidence but that you do not actually examine
it,
evaluate it and understand what it actually means.
I will not base my opinions on 'assumed' evidence,
but only on evidence I can examine and evaluate.
Which atheist has objective evidence? Any atheist, I don't care which. You pick it.
Since atheism makes no claim, it has no burden to support any claim.
If you want me to have any confidence that any hypothetical god
exists,
make a persuasive case for that claim...
and quit whining.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
01 Jan 2005 10:44:45 AM |
|
|
ernobe wrote:
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets. If a theist claims he has evidence, and he is asked for it;
the same response is given. The term "song and dance" comes to mind.
No matter what an atheist claims, atheism ignores evidence which theism
takes for granted, and accuses theists of being at fault. Which atheist has
objective evidence? Any atheist, I don't care which. You pick it.
What you fail to comprehend earlobe, is that I have no gods to prove.
You clowns on the other hand, all claim there is some great big deity in
the sky, that for some stupid reason, you feel duty bound to tell the
heathen atheists about. And yet, when asked to support your claims
about this deity, you fail. Every single time, you fail.
Prove there is a god, earlobe, then we can discuss if it's yours or not.
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor
A.A #1143 PLONKED by Bob
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 02:46:26 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:03:10 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> said in alt.atheism:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:35:43 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets.
Unless one gets the "I already posted it" response. Or the equivalent
"posting it to atheists would be a waste of effort" response.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
31 Dec 2004 02:46:15 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:46:26 -0500, Al Klein
<CellPhones@optonline.com> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:03:10 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> said in alt.atheism:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:35:43 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets.
Unless one gets the "I already posted it" response. Or the equivalent
"posting it to atheists would be a waste of effort" response.
Smith Computer uses both of the above.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
31 Dec 2004 03:18:10 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:46:15 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> said in alt.atheism:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:46:26 -0500, Al Klein
<CellPhones@optonline.com> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:03:10 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> said in alt.atheism:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:35:43 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
<ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote:
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Ask a theist for evidence and the above response is invariably what
one gets.
Unless one gets the "I already posted it" response. Or the equivalent
"posting it to atheists would be a waste of effort" response.
Smith Computer uses both of the above.
What a surprise. Even Dumbo (is that how one shortens DuckGumbo?)
uses both of them. Doesn't demonstrate anything but a clean (read:
washed) brain.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
29 Dec 2004 04:55:28 PM |
|
|
Specter133 wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:15:55 -0700, "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"
< > wrote:
Specter133 wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:50:06 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
Why bring 'God' into it ?
He doesn't exist....how much more proof do ya' all need ?
How can you prove a negative?
You can't. Now you are starting to get it.
Exactly. You can't prove that God doesn't exist.
So how does that fact buttress your case exactly?
So, what is your objective evidence for the existence of a god. Any
god, I don't care which god. You pick it.
What is your standard for "objective evidence"? Do you know?
Already posted.
Do you have any Spec? Or are you just making noise?
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor
A.A #1143 PLONKED by Bob
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 01:57:35 AM |
|
|
In article <41D314F4.1D15D19D@serv.net>,
Gregory Gadow <techbear@serv.net> wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
Giant waves washed floodwaters up to 2 miles inland at Yala National
Park in the ravaged southeast, Sri Lanka's biggest wildlife reserve and
home to hundreds of wild elephants and several leopards.
"The strange thing is we haven't recorded any dead animals," H.D.
Ratnayake, deputy director of the national Wildlife Department, told
Reuters on Wednesday.
"No elephants are dead, not even a dead hare or rabbit," he added. "I
think animals can sense disaster. They have a sixth sense. They know
when things are happening."
At least 40 tourists, including nine Japanese, were drowned.
The tsunami was triggered by an earthquake in the Indian Ocean on
Sunday, which sent waves up to 15 feet high crashing onto Sri Lanka's
southern, eastern and northern seaboard, flooding whole towns and
villages, destroying hotels and causing widespread destruction.
Many animals have keener senses than we do. It's been reported many
times that animals can sense an earthquake and react before humans can
feel it. Perhaps the same is true with tsunamis. I don't think that they
can say that there were absolutely no dead animals since small animals
like rabbits could have been easily buried under the debris.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
29 Dec 2004 04:21:35 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out that given
just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he can
away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds, I'd
expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 03:50:46 AM |
|
|
--------------042ACC3DBBE7B55A5E3C5F43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"L. Raymond" wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out that given
just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he can
away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds, I'd
expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.
Very few animals inhabit resort beaches, they don't like all the humans that are
there with their gods.
Bob
humanist Brit.
Hong Kong
--
L. Raymond
--------------042ACC3DBBE7B55A5E3C5F43
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<p>"L. Raymond" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow
wrote:
<p>> Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals.
From
<br>> Reuters, reposted in full from
<br>> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231">http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231</a>
<br>>
<br>> COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned --
the
<br>> worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the
Indian
<br>> Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
<br>>
<p> I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out
that given
<br>just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he
can
<br>away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
<br>came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds,
I'd
<br>expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.</blockquote>
Very few animals inhabit resort beaches, they don't like all the humans
that are there with their gods.
<p>Bob
<br>humanist Brit.
<br>Hong Kong
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<p>--
<br>L. Raymond</blockquote>
</html>
--------------042ACC3DBBE7B55A5E3C5F43--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Specter133" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
29 Dec 2004 04:25:04 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:21:35 -0600, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out that given
just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he can
away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds, I'd
expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.
On the other hand, Gregory seems to want to spin this story into some
vast conspiracy by God and his angels to spare the animals and kill
people. In fact, this story only refers to Sri Lanka and says nothing
about India, Thailand, Indonesia or Africa. In addition, I'd expect
that officials are paying far more attention at this point to human
dead. I expect time will tell.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 12:03:11 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:25:04 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:21:35 -0600, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out that given
just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he can
away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds, I'd
expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.
On the other hand, Gregory seems to want to spin this story into some
vast conspiracy by God and his angels to spare the animals and kill
people.
Since he is an atheist, that is obviously what he is not doing.
In fact, this story only refers to Sri Lanka and says nothing
about India, Thailand, Indonesia or Africa. In addition, I'd expect
that officials are paying far more attention at this point to human
dead. I expect time will tell.
I expect you will continue to evade the point.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 12:35:34 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:03:11 +0100, thomas p wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:25:04 -0500, Specter133 <specter@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:21:35 -0600, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:35:00 -0800, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Twenty two thousand dead humans in Sri Lanka, but no dead animals. From
Reuters, reposted in full from
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7200231
COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan wildlife officials are stunned -- the
worst tsunami in memory has killed around 22,000 people along the Indian
Ocean island's coast, but they can't find any dead animals.
I'm not surprised. An expert I listened to pointed out that given
just a few minutes warning, a person running flat out as fast as he can
away from the beach just might be able to get to safety before a tsunami
came ashore. With their better senses and much faster speeds, I'd
expect wild animals to have no problem getting away.
[snip]
I expect you will continue to evade the point.
I have that Specter goober killfiled so I missed his response, but I
feel the need to agree with you that it takes a bit of an idiot to
misinterpret something as badly as he's missing Mr. Gadow's point. I
wonder if it's on purpose or if he's really quite that thick.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: God's priorities |
30 Dec 2004 08:00:23 AM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" wrote:
I have that Specter goober killfiled so I missed his response, but I
feel the need to agree with you that it takes a bit of an idiot to
misinterpret something as badly as he's missing Mr. Gadow's point.
<shrug> This is Specter you're talking about.
I wonder if it's on purpose or if he's really quite that thick.
The scarey thing is, you can't tell with some people.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in
the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary,
self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition
of tyranny." - James Madison, _The Federalist_, #47
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
