Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts

Religions > Atheism > Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 1

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Star Smart"
Date:	15 May 2004 09:55:16 AM
Object:	Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

1) I renounce all faith in God. Anyone who believes in
God is an idiot. The only smart people in the world
are atheists. The only true scientists are atheists.

2) Jesus Christ is a fairy tale concocted by religious
fanatics to brainwash and control the masses. There
isn't an ounce of truth in the entire bible. Anyone
who believes in such fairy tales is mentally insane.
3) Even though we know that the Catholics are nutcases,
by sheer coincidence, we also dictate that civiliza-
tions date back no further than only seven thousand
years or so. There never was a global flood like in
the "Genesis" fairy tale, and the world's sealevels
have always been about where they are today--for at
least the last several million years or so. Asinine
rumors of "sunken cities" are pure hogwash. There's
not a shred of evidence to support such foolishness,
and certified charlatans like "Edgar Cayce" or "Nos-
tradamus" were nothing but liars and frauds. Anyone
who believes that human civilizations date back for
hundreds of thousands or even millions of years are
delusional freaks who deserve to be lobotomized. It
is mandatory that scientists reject all such lunacy,
or you will be excommunicated from our fine coterie
of scientific atheists. Hold the party line or else!
4) Since "God" is nothing but a fairy tale for foolish
nitwits, the universe and everything in it happened
only by random chance. Humans are only animals like
any other animal, they just happen to have superior
intelligence over most other creatures--at least we
atheists do. Of course, religious kooks haven't any
real intelligence to speak of. They're all retarded.
5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.
The only thoughts worthy of consideration are those
which the scientific community of atheists agree on.
Any scientific research which contradicts the party
line will be summarily ignored and debunked. If you
fail to renounce any such unauthorized work, you're
going to be blackballed, and the only job you'll be
able to hold will be washing dishes at a truck stop.
6) More than a third of a century ago, while Nixon was
President, NASA sent astronauts around ONE THOUSAND
times further into space than any manned spacecraft
has ever been able to go before or since. Six times
they made it all the way to the Moon and back--with
no casualties, and not a sign of radiation sickness
in any of the crew members. Don't you even dare say
otherwise, since if you do, you'll be called a kook.
7) The great pyramids at the al-Gizeh plateau were not
built by intelligent people, but by ignorant slaves
under the heavy-handed whips of the Pharoah's goons.
Only crude primitive construction methods were used,
and they were built more recently than cir. 3000 BC.
Today we could build even better pyramids if we wan-
ted to, but we don't want to and that's why haven't.
Anyone who believes what kooks like Edgar Cayce and
Ed Leedskalnin said about the pyramids, then you're
also a kook...you'll never find work as a scientist.
8) There's no such thing as "ETs" or alien "UFOs". Any-
one who claims to have seen a UFO mistook Venus for
a flying saucer. If you believe in ETs visiting our
planet even once then you must be absoultely insane.
Only kooks believe such fairy tales. Are you a kook?
9) Only since the days of Copernicus has science known
about the sidereal orbits of planets. Those who say
that ancient astronomers could see the planets move
against the starry background of Earth's caelestial
firmament is a liar and a fraud. Everyone knows the
planets were thought of only as "wanderers" because
ancient astronomers couldn't really see the planets
move over days, weeks, months and years against the
night sky. Obviously these ancient astronomers such
as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Mayans, et al, these
reptilian-brained oafs couldn't think, count or rea-
son. Just because ancient astronomers commonly knew
the sidereal order of the planets from the Moon out
to Pluto, this is nothing more than odd coincidence.
They were superstitious morons who believed in gods
and life after death, and other ridiculous nonsense.
Anyone who says the ancients could think, count and
track the motion of the planets belongs on deathrow.
10) Finally, if you want to work in a scientific profes-
sion, then you'd better learn how to "play the game"
by just playing along. It's okay if you want to sup-
port the party line. Do that and you'll fit in. But
don't make waves or rock the boat. Atheists are not
capable of defending our position. That's why we re-
ly solely on "peer review" for moral support. Other-
wise we'd be required to actually defend our ideals
with facts instead of our routine baseless rhetoric;
and if it came to that--naturally--we'd be defeated.
So be forewarned, you would-be scientist. We're not
able to scientifically defend our positions. That's
why we've defined science as only what we say it is.
There's no science beyond the approval of our venal
whims. Money decides what is science and what isn't.
Independent thought is prohibited. It's that simple.

*Min's Step-by-Step Lesson: How To Observe Sidereal &
Synodic Planetary Orbits With Our Unaided Human Eyes:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ZZ5B1I2037855.1969907407@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*All Apollo Moon Missions Were Unmanned:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=VTKA4X1O37500.9704861111@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Uncensored Apollo Moon Hoax Bookmarks:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7RL5KJIX37499.1691435185@Gilgamesh-frog.org

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min
_______________________________________________________

GOOGLE LINKS TO FINE ON-LINE BOOKS BY DANIEL JOSEPH MIN
_______________________________________________________

*Min's Interlinear Apocalypse & Concise Commentary (Min's fifth book):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=U69H2BPA38121.2360300926@Gilgamesh-Frog.org
*Min's Planetary Awareness Technique (Min's fourth book):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=OYJC9TOU37947.1559259259@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Light & Sound (Min's third book):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=HIDW4JQJ37765.6015509259@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Compleat Tarot Manual (Min's second book):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=DYR1OZ3237765.6052777778@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Historical Calendar Of Jesus (Min's first book):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=26e3a5d035bdf01fc61d36884deac0e4@cryptorebels.net

*Min's Heresy of Copernicus FAQ:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=PM8VBQE237765.9709143518@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Astro-Charts & Tarot Pages:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=BQ5ORF1937773.2172569444@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Beginner's Reference & FAQs:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=24WXVJ4W37773.6967939815@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Nostradamus Interlinear Translations:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=HFLYJA8S37766.7990856481@Gilgamesh-frog.org

*Min's Horoscopes & Souljourns of World-Famous Persons:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=OJUCPCWU37947.1949421296@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Horoscopes & Souljourns of Unknowns & Anonymous:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1IUBR0YD37947.1949305556@Gilgamesh-frog.org
*Min's Official PGP Public Key on the MIT server:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3XWB7QJO37766.971099537@Gilgamesh-frog.org

*Min's Google-Archived Home Page On The World Wide Web:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=5YTK57VH37948.6355092593@Gilgamesh-frog.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQKdzdZljD7YrHM/nEQKe8ACg8eZCIwVQUIF3y0l49qG1TUrLUuIAn2MB
khZc7DwPgidB45yVJEEUXe+a
=WDcv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.

User: "JD"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	20 May 2004 01:17:05 PM

"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...

I know you meant this to drip with irony, but a fair bit of it is basically
correct, if rather exaggerated. The worst error here is the lack of
differentiation. I would say, for example: idiot, but only in a sense;
insane, but only in a sense; delusional, but only in a sense. Obviously
there have been religious people with a great deal of intellectual capacity,
they just avoided applying it in certain areas. Of course, since scientific
methodology has evolved considerably, it is a greater error to believe in
god today than it was 500 years ago.
As for the section on bucking the establishment, you are correct up to a
point. One must be careful about contradicting accepted principles. Still,
I think that most scientists love a good idea enough to entertain the
evidence you present. If you are unable to convince even the open-minded,
maybe you should review your evidence or consider the possibility you might
be wrong. But in any case, many people have invested a great deal of time
and effort developing what are now considered more or less accepted
principles. It would be stupid of them to reverse themselves quickly in the
face of one man's dissent. You might get them to take a look at your
evidence, though.
Sorry if you were just trolling.
JD
.

User: "Cary Kittrell"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	20 May 2004 02:16:36 PM

In article <c8ismf$90a$1@online.de> <From: "JD" <substitutive@bookbiter.de> writes:
<
<
<"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
<news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...
<> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<>
<> What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
<> First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:
<>
<> 1) I renounce all faith in God. Anyone who believes in
<> God is an idiot. The only smart people in the world
<> are atheists. The only true scientists are atheists.
<>
<> 2) Jesus Christ is a fairy tale concocted by religious
<> fanatics to brainwash and control the masses. There
<> isn't an ounce of truth in the entire bible. Anyone
<> who believes in such fairy tales is mentally insane.
<>
<> 3) Even though we know that the Catholics are nutcases,
<> by sheer coincidence, we also dictate that civiliza-
<> tions date back no further than only seven thousand
<> years or so. There never was a global flood like in
<> the "Genesis" fairy tale, and the world's sealevels
<> have always been about where they are today--for at
<> least the last several million years or so. Asinine
<> rumors of "sunken cities" are pure hogwash. There's
<> not a shred of evidence to support such foolishness,
<> and certified charlatans like "Edgar Cayce" or "Nos-
<> tradamus" were nothing but liars and frauds. Anyone
<> who believes that human civilizations date back for
<> hundreds of thousands or even millions of years are
<> delusional freaks who deserve to be lobotomized. It
<> is mandatory that scientists reject all such lunacy,
<> or you will be excommunicated from our fine coterie
<> of scientific atheists. Hold the party line or else!
<>
<> 4) Since "God" is nothing but a fairy tale for foolish
<> nitwits, the universe and everything in it happened
<> only by random chance. Humans are only animals like
<> any other animal, they just happen to have superior
<> intelligence over most other creatures--at least we
<> atheists do. Of course, religious kooks haven't any
<> real intelligence to speak of. They're all retarded.
<>
<> 5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.
<> The only thoughts worthy of consideration are those
<> which the scientific community of atheists agree on.
<> Any scientific research which contradicts the party
<> line will be summarily ignored and debunked. If you
<> fail to renounce any such unauthorized work, you're
<> going to be blackballed, and the only job you'll be
<> able to hold will be washing dishes at a truck stop.
<>
<> 6) More than a third of a century ago, while Nixon was
<> President, NASA sent astronauts around ONE THOUSAND
<> times further into space than any manned spacecraft
<> has ever been able to go before or since. Six times
<> they made it all the way to the Moon and back--with
<> no casualties, and not a sign of radiation sickness
<> in any of the crew members. Don't you even dare say
<> otherwise, since if you do, you'll be called a kook.
<>
<> 7) The great pyramids at the al-Gizeh plateau were not
<> built by intelligent people, but by ignorant slaves
<> under the heavy-handed whips of the Pharoah's goons.
<> Only crude primitive construction methods were used,
<> and they were built more recently than cir. 3000 BC.
<> Today we could build even better pyramids if we wan-
<> ted to, but we don't want to and that's why haven't.
<> Anyone who believes what kooks like Edgar Cayce and
<> Ed Leedskalnin said about the pyramids, then you're
<> also a kook...you'll never find work as a scientist.
<>
<> 8) There's no such thing as "ETs" or alien "UFOs". Any-
<> one who claims to have seen a UFO mistook Venus for
<> a flying saucer. If you believe in ETs visiting our
<> planet even once then you must be absoultely insane.
<> Only kooks believe such fairy tales. Are you a kook?
<>
<> 9) Only since the days of Copernicus has science known
<> about the sidereal orbits of planets. Those who say
<> that ancient astronomers could see the planets move
<> against the starry background of Earth's caelestial
<> firmament is a liar and a fraud. Everyone knows the
<> planets were thought of only as "wanderers" because
<> ancient astronomers couldn't really see the planets
<> move over days, weeks, months and years against the
<> night sky. Obviously these ancient astronomers such
<> as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Mayans, et al, these
<> reptilian-brained oafs couldn't think, count or rea-
<> son. Just because ancient astronomers commonly knew
<> the sidereal order of the planets from the Moon out
<> to Pluto, this is nothing more than odd coincidence.
<> They were superstitious morons who believed in gods
<> and life after death, and other ridiculous nonsense.
<> Anyone who says the ancients could think, count and
<> track the motion of the planets belongs on deathrow.
<>
<> 10) Finally, if you want to work in a scientific profes-
<> sion, then you'd better learn how to "play the game"
<> by just playing along. It's okay if you want to sup-
<> port the party line. Do that and you'll fit in. But
<> don't make waves or rock the boat. Atheists are not
<> capable of defending our position. That's why we re-
<> ly solely on "peer review" for moral support. Other-
<> wise we'd be required to actually defend our ideals
<> with facts instead of our routine baseless rhetoric;
<> and if it came to that--naturally--we'd be defeated.
<> So be forewarned, you would-be scientist. We're not
<> able to scientifically defend our positions. That's
<> why we've defined science as only what we say it is.
<> There's no science beyond the approval of our venal
<> whims. Money decides what is science and what isn't.
<> Independent thought is prohibited. It's that simple.
<>
<
<I know you meant this to drip with irony, but a fair bit of it is basically
<correct, if rather exaggerated. The worst error here is the lack of
<differentiation. I would say, for example: idiot, but only in a sense;
<insane, but only in a sense; delusional, but only in a sense. Obviously
<there have been religious people with a great deal of intellectual capacity,
<they just avoided applying it in certain areas. Of course, since scientific
<methodology has evolved considerably, it is a greater error to believe in
<god today than it was 500 years ago.
<
<As for the section on bucking the establishment, you are correct up to a
<point. One must be careful about contradicting accepted principles. Still,
<I think that most scientists love a good idea enough to entertain the
<evidence you present. If you are unable to convince even the open-minded,
<maybe you should review your evidence or consider the possibility you might
<be wrong. But in any case, many people have invested a great deal of time
<and effort developing what are now considered more or less accepted
<principles. It would be stupid of them to reverse themselves quickly in the
<face of one man's dissent. You might get them to take a look at your
<evidence, though.
<
<Sorry if you were just trolling.
Google a half-dozen of Min's posts or so; I think you'll begin to see
a pattern.
Hey JD! How come your writings's improved so much lately? In
any event, keep it up.
-- cary
.

User: "Jd"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	20 May 2004 06:33:42 PM

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <c8ismf$90a$1@online.de> <From: "JD" <substitutive@bookbiter.de> writes:
<
<
<"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
<news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...
<> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<>
<> What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
<> First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:
<>
<> 1) I renounce all faith in God. Anyone who believes in
<> God is an idiot. The only smart people in the world
<> are atheists. The only true scientists are atheists.
<>
<> 2) Jesus Christ is a fairy tale concocted by religious
<> fanatics to brainwash and control the masses. There
<> isn't an ounce of truth in the entire bible. Anyone
<> who believes in such fairy tales is mentally insane.
<>
<> 3) Even though we know that the Catholics are nutcases,
<> by sheer coincidence, we also dictate that civiliza-
<> tions date back no further than only seven thousand
<> years or so. There never was a global flood like in
<> the "Genesis" fairy tale, and the world's sealevels
<> have always been about where they are today--for at
<> least the last several million years or so. Asinine
<> rumors of "sunken cities" are pure hogwash. There's
<> not a shred of evidence to support such foolishness,
<> and certified charlatans like "Edgar Cayce" or "Nos-
<> tradamus" were nothing but liars and frauds. Anyone
<> who believes that human civilizations date back for
<> hundreds of thousands or even millions of years are
<> delusional freaks who deserve to be lobotomized. It
<> is mandatory that scientists reject all such lunacy,
<> or you will be excommunicated from our fine coterie
<> of scientific atheists. Hold the party line or else!
<>
<> 4) Since "God" is nothing but a fairy tale for foolish
<> nitwits, the universe and everything in it happened
<> only by random chance. Humans are only animals like
<> any other animal, they just happen to have superior
<> intelligence over most other creatures--at least we
<> atheists do. Of course, religious kooks haven't any
<> real intelligence to speak of. They're all retarded.
<>
<> 5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.
<> The only thoughts worthy of consideration are those
<> which the scientific community of atheists agree on.
<> Any scientific research which contradicts the party
<> line will be summarily ignored and debunked. If you
<> fail to renounce any such unauthorized work, you're
<> going to be blackballed, and the only job you'll be
<> able to hold will be washing dishes at a truck stop.
<>
<> 6) More than a third of a century ago, while Nixon was
<> President, NASA sent astronauts around ONE THOUSAND
<> times further into space than any manned spacecraft
<> has ever been able to go before or since. Six times
<> they made it all the way to the Moon and back--with
<> no casualties, and not a sign of radiation sickness
<> in any of the crew members. Don't you even dare say
<> otherwise, since if you do, you'll be called a kook.
<>
<> 7) The great pyramids at the al-Gizeh plateau were not
<> built by intelligent people, but by ignorant slaves
<> under the heavy-handed whips of the Pharoah's goons.
<> Only crude primitive construction methods were used,
<> and they were built more recently than cir. 3000 BC.
<> Today we could build even better pyramids if we wan-
<> ted to, but we don't want to and that's why haven't.
<> Anyone who believes what kooks like Edgar Cayce and
<> Ed Leedskalnin said about the pyramids, then you're
<> also a kook...you'll never find work as a scientist.
<>
<> 8) There's no such thing as "ETs" or alien "UFOs". Any-
<> one who claims to have seen a UFO mistook Venus for
<> a flying saucer. If you believe in ETs visiting our
<> planet even once then you must be absoultely insane.
<> Only kooks believe such fairy tales. Are you a kook?
<>
<> 9) Only since the days of Copernicus has science known
<> about the sidereal orbits of planets. Those who say
<> that ancient astronomers could see the planets move
<> against the starry background of Earth's caelestial
<> firmament is a liar and a fraud. Everyone knows the
<> planets were thought of only as "wanderers" because
<> ancient astronomers couldn't really see the planets
<> move over days, weeks, months and years against the
<> night sky. Obviously these ancient astronomers such
<> as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Mayans, et al, these
<> reptilian-brained oafs couldn't think, count or rea-
<> son. Just because ancient astronomers commonly knew
<> the sidereal order of the planets from the Moon out
<> to Pluto, this is nothing more than odd coincidence.
<> They were superstitious morons who believed in gods
<> and life after death, and other ridiculous nonsense.
<> Anyone who says the ancients could think, count and
<> track the motion of the planets belongs on deathrow.
<>
<> 10) Finally, if you want to work in a scientific profes-
<> sion, then you'd better learn how to "play the game"
<> by just playing along. It's okay if you want to sup-
<> port the party line. Do that and you'll fit in. But
<> don't make waves or rock the boat. Atheists are not
<> capable of defending our position. That's why we re-
<> ly solely on "peer review" for moral support. Other-
<> wise we'd be required to actually defend our ideals
<> with facts instead of our routine baseless rhetoric;
<> and if it came to that--naturally--we'd be defeated.
<> So be forewarned, you would-be scientist. We're not
<> able to scientifically defend our positions. That's
<> why we've defined science as only what we say it is.
<> There's no science beyond the approval of our venal
<> whims. Money decides what is science and what isn't.
<> Independent thought is prohibited. It's that simple.
<>
<
<I know you meant this to drip with irony, but a fair bit of it is basically
<correct, if rather exaggerated. The worst error here is the lack of
<differentiation. I would say, for example: idiot, but only in a sense;
<insane, but only in a sense; delusional, but only in a sense. Obviously
<there have been religious people with a great deal of intellectual capacity,
<they just avoided applying it in certain areas. Of course, since scientific
<methodology has evolved considerably, it is a greater error to believe in
<god today than it was 500 years ago.
<
<As for the section on bucking the establishment, you are correct up to a
<point. One must be careful about contradicting accepted principles. Still,
<I think that most scientists love a good idea enough to entertain the
<evidence you present. If you are unable to convince even the open-minded,
<maybe you should review your evidence or consider the possibility you might
<be wrong. But in any case, many people have invested a great deal of time
<and effort developing what are now considered more or less accepted
<principles. It would be stupid of them to reverse themselves quickly in the
<face of one man's dissent. You might get them to take a look at your
<evidence, though.
<
<Sorry if you were just trolling.

Google a half-dozen of Min's posts or so; I think you'll begin to see
a pattern.

Hey JD! How come your writings's improved so much lately? In
any event, keep it up.

-- cary

Give me a break.
Jd
.

User: "Jez"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	21 May 2004 06:27:30 AM

"Jd" <Igo.B4u@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:6epra05nnckdf3pcntn46lver88lhlslbf@4ax.com...

Give me a break.

Sure....Where you want it ?
Leg ?
Arm ?
Neck ?
--
Jez
"The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious,
of being out of one's mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society
highly values its normal man.It educates children to lose themselves
and to become absurd,and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed
perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years."
R.D. Laing
.

User: "Cary Kittrell"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	20 May 2004 10:45:16 PM

In article <6epra05nnckdf3pcntn46lver88lhlslbf@4ax.com> Jd <Igo.B4u@worldnet.att.net> writes:
<Cary Kittrell wrote:
<
<>In article <c8ismf$90a$1@online.de> <From: "JD" <substitutive@bookbiter.de> writes:
<><
<><
<><"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
<><news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...
<><> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<><>
<><> {...}
<><>
<><
<><I know you meant this to drip with irony, but a fair bit of it is basically
<><correct, if rather exaggerated. The worst error here is the lack of
<><differentiation. I would say, for example: idiot, but only in a sense;
<><insane, but only in a sense; delusional, but only in a sense. Obviously
<><there have been religious people with a great deal of intellectual capacity,
<><they just avoided applying it in certain areas. Of course, since scientific
<><methodology has evolved considerably, it is a greater error to believe in
<><god today than it was 500 years ago.
<><
<><As for the section on bucking the establishment, you are correct up to a
<><point. One must be careful about contradicting accepted principles. Still,
<><I think that most scientists love a good idea enough to entertain the
<><evidence you present. If you are unable to convince even the open-minded,
<><maybe you should review your evidence or consider the possibility you might
<><be wrong. But in any case, many people have invested a great deal of time
<><and effort developing what are now considered more or less accepted
<><principles. It would be stupid of them to reverse themselves quickly in the
<><face of one man's dissent. You might get them to take a look at your
<><evidence, though.
<><
<><Sorry if you were just trolling.
<>
<>Google a half-dozen of Min's posts or so; I think you'll begin to see
<>a pattern.
<>
<>Hey JD! How come your writings's improved so much lately? In
<>any event, keep it up.
<>
<>
<>-- cary
<>
<
<Give me a break.
Beg pardon? Whassamatta, you one of these people who squirm whenever
anyone pays you a compliment? I genuinely do think that your writing
has improved hugely since I first started seeing you around here,
and in fact I was commenting on just that to FNC a couple of weeks
back.
-- cary
.

User: "Jim F."
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 06:53:12 PM

"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote in message
news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...

And anyone who makes such a claim concerning the scientific
community is himself a "cowardly sniveling lout." I take it
that Mr. Min flunked his science courses back in school.
Jim F.
.

User: "johac"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	16 May 2004 02:37:55 AM

In article <6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org>,
Star Smart <star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

Hey, I'm a scientist and all I can say is:
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Loon.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, but in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
.

User: "Michelle Malkin"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 07:54:04 PM

Min Mouse strikes again! Once more he charges in to leave a pile
of excrement, and then run back to his personal dunghill. Back,
back, Star Stupid, and take your body leavings with you! Sheesh,
didn't your mommy teach you how to use a toilet? Or is it just
that you need a package of Depends?
"Star Smart" <star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote in message
news:6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org...

When did you become an atheist, lying little Minny Mouse?

2) Jesus Christ is a fairy tale concocted by religious
fanatics to brainwash and control the masses. There
isn't an ounce of truth in the entire bible. Anyone
who believes in such fairy tales is mentally insane.

Not all Christian Churches drive their members insane, but
too many of them do.

3) Even though we know that the Catholics are nutcases,
by sheer coincidence, we also dictate that civiliza-
tions date back no further than only seven thousand
years or so. There never was a global flood like in
the "Genesis" fairy tale, and the world's sealevels
have always been about where they are today--for at
least the last several million years or so. Asinine
rumors of "sunken cities" are pure hogwash. There's
not a shred of evidence to support such foolishness,
and certified charlatans like "Edgar Cayce" or "Nos-
tradamus" were nothing but liars and frauds. Anyone
who believes that human civilizations date back for
hundreds of thousands or even millions of years are
delusional freaks who deserve to be lobotomized. It
is mandatory that scientists reject all such lunacy,
or you will be excommunicated from our fine coterie
of scientific atheists. Hold the party line or else!

Ah, so you're a Caycenut. I should have known that.

4) Since "God" is nothing but a fairy tale for foolish
nitwits, the universe and everything in it happened
only by random chance. Humans are only animals like
any other animal, they just happen to have superior
intelligence over most other creatures--at least we
atheists do. Of course, religious kooks haven't any
real intelligence to speak of. They're all retarded.

Didn't you just write that you are an atheist, Minny Mouse?
Now, you're insulting yourself.

5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.

You did this a long time ago, Minny Mouse. You just spout
what others tell you to spout.

The only thoughts worthy of consideration are those
which the scientific community of atheists agree on.
Any scientific research which contradicts the party
line will be summarily ignored and debunked. If you
fail to renounce any such unauthorized work, you're
going to be blackballed, and the only job you'll be
able to hold will be washing dishes at a truck stop.

Wow! I never knew a nose could grow so long so fast!

6) More than a third of a century ago, while Nixon was
President, NASA sent astronauts around ONE THOUSAND
times further into space than any manned spacecraft
has ever been able to go before or since. Six times
they made it all the way to the Moon and back--with
no casualties, and not a sign of radiation sickness
in any of the crew members. Don't you even dare say
otherwise, since if you do, you'll be called a kook.

Oh, yeah. It was all done on a set up stage just so a bunch of
dummies would fall for it. Just like the idea that it was all
set up on a sound stage was created so that dummies like
you would fall for it.

7) The great pyramids at the al-Gizeh plateau were not
built by intelligent people, but by ignorant slaves
under the heavy-handed whips of the Pharoah's goons.
Only crude primitive construction methods were used,
and they were built more recently than cir. 3000 BC.
Today we could build even better pyramids if we wan-
ted to, but we don't want to and that's why haven't.
Anyone who believes what kooks like Edgar Cayce and
Ed Leedskalnin said about the pyramids, then you're
also a kook...you'll never find work as a scientist.

The ancient Egyptians were a lot smarter than your or your
godlet Cayce ever were.

8) There's no such thing as "ETs" or alien "UFOs". Any-
one who claims to have seen a UFO mistook Venus for
a flying saucer. If you believe in ETs visiting our
planet even once then you must be absoultely insane.
Only kooks believe such fairy tales. Are you a kook?

Nope, but you certainly are, or you wouldn't insist on posting
your dreck to newsgroups that aren't at all interested in it. I'm
just responding to let you know how stupid I believe you are.

9) Only since the days of Copernicus has science known
about the sidereal orbits of planets. Those who say
that ancient astronomers could see the planets move
against the starry background of Earth's caelestial
firmament is a liar and a fraud. Everyone knows the
planets were thought of only as "wanderers" because
ancient astronomers couldn't really see the planets
move over days, weeks, months and years against the
night sky. Obviously these ancient astronomers such
as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Mayans, et al, these
reptilian-brained oafs couldn't think, count or rea-
son. Just because ancient astronomers commonly knew
the sidereal order of the planets from the Moon out
to Pluto, this is nothing more than odd coincidence.
They were superstitious morons who believed in gods
and life after death, and other ridiculous nonsense.
Anyone who says the ancients could think, count and
track the motion of the planets belongs on deathrow.

A lot of ancient astronomers and scientists had more
knowledge than they are given credit for. Much of
their lnowledge was lost thanks to the Church during
the Dark Ages. Some was rediscovered cecnturies later,
but much was lost.

10) Finally, if you want to work in a scientific profes-
sion, then you'd better learn how to "play the game"
by just playing along. It's okay if you want to sup-
port the party line. Do that and you'll fit in. But
don't make waves or rock the boat. Atheists are not
capable of defending our position. That's why we re-
ly solely on "peer review" for moral support. Other-
wise we'd be required to actually defend our ideals
with facts instead of our routine baseless rhetoric;
and if it came to that--naturally--we'd be defeated.
So be forewarned, you would-be scientist. We're not
able to scientifically defend our positions. That's
why we've defined science as only what we say it is.
There's no science beyond the approval of our venal
whims. Money decides what is science and what isn't.
Independent thought is prohibited. It's that simple.

No, it's as simple of your being in deathly fear of peer
review. If you put your so-called knowledge out for
peer review, you would be seen as the fake you are by
the entire world, not just some people in newsgroups.

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min

I do. Your messages are very funny.
.

User: "Gray Shockley"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 11:31:40 PM

On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:54:04 -0500, Michelle Malkin wrote:

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min

I do. Your messages are very funny.

And he /certainly/ need have
no fear of a /peer/ review.
Gray Shockley
-----------------------------------------
Don't Change Horsemen in
the Middle of an Apocalypse.
- Mrs. Betty Bowers
.

User: "Michelle Malkin"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	16 May 2004 02:14:27 AM

"Gray Shockley" <gray-87a@cybercoffee.org> wrote in message
news:zMSdnS-6jpIxczvd4p2dnA@giganews.com...

On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:54:04 -0500, Michelle Malkin wrote:

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min

I do. Your messages are very funny.

And he /certainly/ need have
no fear of a /peer/ review.

Probably true. No one is that dumb.
I guess that makes him without peer.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
alt.atheism atheist/agnostic list name collector
BAAWA Knight Who Says SPONG! & EAC Bible thumper thumper
http://questioner.www2.50megs.com
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^

Gray Shockley
-----------------------------------------
Don't Change Horsemen in
the Middle of an Apocalypse.
- Mrs. Betty Bowers

User: "Peter van Velzen"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	16 May 2004 11:32:51 AM

"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<yfKdnSpMYvdQiTrdRVn-vA@comcast.com>...

"Gray Shockley" <gray-87a@cybercoffee.org> wrote in message
news:zMSdnS-6jpIxczvd4p2dnA@giganews.com...

On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:54:04 -0500, Michelle Malkin wrote:

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min

I do. Your messages are very funny.

And he /certainly/ need have
no fear of a /peer/ review.

Probably true. No one is that dumb.
I guess that makes him without peer.

O I am sorry,
Peer happens to be the scandinavian redering of my first name,
so I made the mistake to get in to Min seriously.
About 2 % of what he says bears some thruth.
Maybe I can get that figure doubled?
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen, May 2004
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen (just South of Amsterdam)
The Netherlands (Aug 5, 1950)
.

User: "Michelle Malkin"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	16 May 2004 06:48:49 PM

"Peter van Velzen" <pbamvv@worldonline.nl> wrote in message
news:7716bb89.0405160832.657d9166@posting.google.com...

"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:<yfKdnSpMYvdQiTrdRVn-vA@comcast.com>...

"Gray Shockley" <gray-87a@cybercoffee.org> wrote in message
news:zMSdnS-6jpIxczvd4p2dnA@giganews.com...

On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:54:04 -0500, Michelle Malkin wrote:

Enjoy!
Daniel Joseph Min

I do. Your messages are very funny.

And he /certainly/ need have
no fear of a /peer/ review.

Probably true. No one is that dumb.
I guess that makes him without peer.

O I am sorry,

Peer happens to be the scandinavian redering of my first name,
so I made the mistake to get in to Min seriously.

Oy! A Scandinavian pun. Plus, you actually read his stuff.
After you've seen a couple more of his 'missives', you'll
learn not to bother going past the first paragraph. He
generally shows up about once every 2 or 3 months with
more of his nonsense.

About 2 % of what he says bears some thruth.
Maybe I can get that figure doubled?

Good luck. I wouldn't even say 2%. Min's pure drivel..
Mickey

Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen, May 2004
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen (just South of Amsterdam)
The Netherlands (Aug 5, 1950)

User: "Mark K. Bilbo"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	16 May 2004 10:11:50 AM

On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:54:04 -0400 in episode
<X_CdnSbg4aQ7JjvdRVn-hw@comcast.com> we saw our hero "Michelle Malkin"
<hypatiab7@comcast.net>:

Min Mouse strikes again! Once more he charges in to leave a pile of
excrement, and then run back to his personal dunghill. Back, back, Star
Stupid, and take your body leavings with you! Sheesh, didn't your mommy
teach you how to use a toilet? Or is it just that you need a package of
Depends?

Ain't it funny that he's accusing other people of being "cowardly" when he
spends so much time and effort on being anonymous on Usenet?
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism,
because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Mussolini
.

User: "JPG"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 10:33:40 AM

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

1) I renounce all faith in God.

Sounds like a good idea.
Snip rest of rant.
JPG
.

User: "Gray Shockley"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 12:26:02 PM

On Sat, 15 May 2004 10:33:40 -0500, JPG wrote
(in article <9pdca05k6bk1knpfsp687ksjufvd0lmd2o@4ax.com>):

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

1) I renounce all faith in God.

Sounds like a good idea.

Why bother?

Snip rest of rant.

JPG

Gray
.

User: "Thomas P."
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 01:17:49 PM

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

Right away you have revealed yourself to be an idiot and ignorant.
snip
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.

User: "raven1"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 02:38:43 PM

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

1) I acknowledge that Daniel Joseph Min is a genuine Usenet kook who
desperately needs appropriate medication.
.

User: "Andrew Lias"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 10:52:20 AM

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

No... you don't. There are plenty of scientists who are also theists
and no scientist worth his salt would claim that theism, including
Christian theism, precludes one from being a scientist.
The real question is, why you are lying about this?
--
Andrew Lias
http://andrewlias.blogspot.com
.

User: "Clayton Cant Find His Left Sock"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 07:49:29 PM

"Andrew Lias" <anrwlias@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k2fca0du5s9o1tq7h212m8jtciununjrn9@4ax.com...

On 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200, Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

No... you don't. There are plenty of scientists who are also theists
and no scientist worth his salt would claim that theism, including
Christian theism, precludes one from being a scientist.

The real question is, why you are lying about this?

Because he needs to lie to keep his delusions alive. The concept magical
super fairy can't survive without lies...lies are the basis of theist
belief.
.

User: "Mark K. Bilbo"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 08:27:33 PM

On Sat, 15 May 2004 16:55:16 +0200 in episode
<6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org> we saw our hero Star Smart
<star.smart@astro.university.edu>:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

-----BEGIN MORE MIN DROOLING-----
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism,
because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Mussolini
.

User: "Gray Shockley"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 12:20:14 PM

On Sat, 15 May 2004 27:65:16, Star Burned-Out wrote:

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

1) I renounce all faith in God.
2) Jesus Christ is a fairy tale
3) Even though we know that
4) Since "God" is nothing but a
5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.
6) More than a third of a century ago,
7) The great pyramids at the
8) There's no such thing as
9) Only since the days of
10) Finally, if you want to work

--------------------------------------------------------
Simply (in more ways than one) amazing.
The Ten Commandments of the Religion of Atheism.
However, it's nice to be able to say that rational atheists are
not convinced by El Wack's "NewTime Religion".
El Wack is, of course, welcome to practice her/his/its religion
but s/he/it is not going to get very good at it.
Ever been to a blind dentist?
Gray Shockley
-------------------------------------------
For every complex problem there is an answer
that is clear, simple, and wrong. - H. L. Mencken
.

User: "Peter van Velzen"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 02:01:45 PM

Star Smart <star.smart@astro.university.edu> wrote in message news:<6Z87OAPN38122.7043171296@Gilgamesh-Frog.org>...

1. Anyone who believes in God, is making a mistake,
he can however still be able to consume his food neatly and to visit
the toilet. Hence he does not have to be an "Idiot"
2. Altough really smart people are mostly Atheists, there may be some
smart people, who still hang on to some sort of believe in God.
3. There were many and there still are some good scientist who were
and are theists.
4. Renouncing all faith is not needed to be a scientist,
however faith should not show up anywere in your scientific work.
(contradictory to your general argument: Even faith in you peers!)

1. Jesus Christ is not a fairy tale. He is a person, either historical
or fictional. The only scientists that ponder over the question wether
he was one or the other, should be historians.
2. The bible is to big a compilation of books, as no to contain some
true statements. The presence of many obvious mistakes does not mean
it is all a lie.
On the other hand truth cannot be meisured by weight, so an ounce of
truth,
cannot be shown I guess.
3. Many children believe in fairy tales. This however does not mean
they have any mental problem.
4. Only scientist that are studying sociology and connecting sciences,
can tell you if anyone is trying to use the ideas about "Jesus Christ"
as a means to control the masses. Other scientist do not need to
ponder over that question at all.

1. I used to be a Roman Catholic, and I do mind anyone calling
Catholics nutcases. I was not a notcase, I was just misled. Anyway
apart from psychologists, scientists should not bother with that.
2. The dating of cicilization should be done by ways that are
repeatable under controlled ircumstanzes. It should not be done by any
dogma.
However apart from archeoligists scientist should not bother with
that.
3. A global flood as suggested by genesis would require a severe
diminshing of the profile of the earth. It can be accepted as a fact
that there was none for the last million years, but "never" goes a bit
far.
Anyway, apart from mythologists and geologists scientist should not
bother with that.
4. The sea-level was considerably lower during the ice ages (ony about
10.000 years ago), but apart from geologists, archeologists, and
paleantogists and the like. scientists should not bother with that.
5. A sunken city has been found off Alexandria Egypt.
6. The work Nostradamus is so unclear, that one cannot tell what he
meant,
so there is no way to prove he was lying:).
7. There is no need to lobotomize anyone who supposes that
neanderthals or even Homo Erectus created a civilizations.
Scientifically those people should just be ignored unless they have
positive proofs to their claims.
Generally any scientist is allowed to have any delusional idea on any
subject,
as long as it does not appear in his scientific work.

1. The universe did not happen (it is not an event).
Events general happen because of one of the four basis "powers". That
is gravitation, Electro-magnetics, strong nuclear force and weak
nuclear force.
The latter three can also be described as parts of one more basical
concept.
Random chance happens only in two instances. a: At the sub atomical
level. where aufficient data is impossible (Heisenbergs uncertainty
princiapl
B; Anywhere were the scientist simply lack the data as in the wheather
report for instance. (chaos theory).
2. Humans are animals, but even though not unlike other animals (at
least 95% alike), we have yet to discover any non-human that is a
scientist. Whether there intelligence is superior is open to dispute.
Biologists agree, that it requires quite a lot of intellengce to be a
religious kook. The average intelligence neede to be theist is
probably 95% of that needed to be an atheist.

5) I renounce any and all forms of independent thought.
The only thoughts worthy of consideration are those
which the scientific community of atheists agree on.
Any scientific research which contradicts the party
line will be summarily ignored and debunked. If you
fail to renounce any such unauthorized work, you're
going to be blackballed, and the only job you'll be
able to hold will be washing dishes at a truck stop.

1. A scientist that is not capable of "independent thought" (no
thought is totally independent), is generally useless.
2. The only thought that are scientifically worthy of considerations,
are those, that have not yet excesively been tested.
3. Scientist who are not capable of independent thought, can probably
not function at a truck stop either.

Sorry I have no idea how far astronauts went before or after the
presicency of Nixon. I doubt that there was any relation between Nixon
and the distance. But as I am no scholar on the subject, I cannot say
wether this is right or wrong.
Again this is also true for many scientists.

1. The general view is that the pyramids were build by well trained
craftsmen, led by a great architect. The builders were certainly NOT
slaves. The last estimate to the time they were built was 2.400 BC or
so. Any pyramids built after those at the al-Gizeh plateau were
inferior. I have no knowledge of Edgar Cayce or Ed Leedskalnin, but I
would suppose, that if the assumptions about the available tools,
Eygptologists make are correct, the builders have proven themselves
quite a lot more intelligent on the subject of pyramid building that
anyone today!

1. Scientist considered assume extraterrestial Intelligence is more
likely that not. However the estimates about the average distance to
any Extraterrestial Civilizations are such, that ET's are not likely
to be the explanation to UFO sightings. Althoug some UFO sightings
were dismissed as sightings of Venus, most are not. Having read a book
about the subject, I get the feelling that many sightings were
airships (like the Hindenburg) airplanes, and exhaust gasses from
rockets. Others may simply have been optical delusions.
So far, there is no positive evidecne of ETs visiting our planets.
Most scientists however can do their work well, without ever pondering
over that subject.

1. Only since the days of Copernicus establised european science had
known about the true orbits of planets. However the objects called
planets (originally the sun and the moon were also assumed to be
planets), have always been seen to move against the background of
"fixed stars".
This whole argument is totally unscientifical.
Be that as it may, it is true that the capabilities of ancient
astrologists are generally underestimated. The Greeks for one, were
already aware of the rings of Saturn, as they called it Kronus, which
means, the crowned one, or the horned one. Probably someone even saw
the red spot on Jupiter, as Pallas Athena is supposed to come out ot
the forehead of Zeus, leaving a big bloody gap there.
Hoever this is pure speculation.

1. Playing the game is getting your work published and getting as many
references about really good scientists into them as you can.
2. Never rocking the boat is not clever. You'll never become a great
scientist, without rocking the boat heavily. You should however, not
rcok the boat unless there is good scientific reason for it.
Scientist do wonder however why - while the number of scientist today
is thousandfold, the number of great minds does not seem to grow.
A tendency to follow into the steps of others, may indeed be the
reason.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen, May 2004
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen (just South of Amsterdam)
The Netherlands (Aug 5, 1950)
.

User: "Roy Jose Lorr"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	17 May 2004 07:16:54 PM

Star Smart wrote:

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

As the majority of the articles in this thread prove: it doesn't
take much to send the Sciencism Fundies off the deep end.
--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
.

User: "Richard Smol"
Title: Re: Secular Scientists Are Cowardly Sniveling Louts	15 May 2004 03:58:14 PM

Star Smart wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

What does it take to be a scientist in the 21st century?
First you must learn to obey the following set of rules:

I take it that you couldn't get your degree...
<- snip drivel ->
RS
.

Page 1 of 1

Post reply

Secular Jews Are Dying Off, Religious Jews Are Fruitful And Multiplying
Secular Christmas Celebration Are Pointless, Pope Says
Despite Secular Propaganda, English Children Are Asking Questions About God
The Seven Sacraments Of Secular Liberalism Are Abortion, Buggery, Contraception, Divorce, Euthanasia, Feminism And Genetic Experimentation
Do Secular Rationalists Believe They Are Master Race?
OT: Freewheeling 'bloggers' are rewriting rules of journalism
Re: Well Known Liberal -> Michael Jackson! HE SHOWS HOW SICK LIBERALS ARE.
OT: Iraqis are disgusted but not surprised at PoW abuse

ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS AND LIBERALS ARE THE TRUE CRIMINALS OF THE WORLD
Stephen Hawking notes Bush regime are war criminals
Are You Older Than Dirt?
Re: I want to ask you the most important question of your life. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die? The reason s
HERE THEY ARE! - The Cowardly Republicans Who Voted Against the Anti-Lynching Aopology
Liberalism Is An Actual Mental Disorder. ==> Liberals are leading toward a new Dark Ages...
Semi-OT: If classical time travel is possible, then we are already immortal.

NEWER

pg.3585 pg.2749 pg.2106 pg.1612 pg.1232 pg.940 pg.716 pg.544 pg.412 pg.311 pg.234 pg.175 pg.130 pg.96 pg.70 pg.50 pg.35 pg.24