Michael Gray
12-19-2007, 02:01 AM
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 06:40:30 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
>One fine day in alt.atheism, Ken <flakey714@aol.com> bloodied us up with
>this:
>
>> On Dec 17, 8:29 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>> One fine day in alt.atheism, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"
>>> <IlBeBa...@gmail.com> bloodied us up with this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > REPLY: Of course theres proof and good proof. Otherwise i wouldnt
>>> > believe in it and follow it. Id show you the proof but youd only
>>> > reply as you have done in the past using foul language and no
>>> > cogent reasoned response. You certainly dont resemble the retired
>>> > Chemist persona that one would expect Ken , as youve never
>>> > submitted any rational, scientific , rationalized response to ANY
>>> > of your closely held atheistic beliefs. All we read is just a
>>> > bunch of 'Fundy this, Fundy that, 'F' this and 'F' that and 'F' you
>>> > , and 'F.O.and Die' -- it fits the sterotype of a reprobate minded
>>> > Teenager who is wallowing in despair and anger. Your life could be
>>> > so much different and your eternity the same.
>>>
>>> What closely held atheistic beliefs, moron? To assume atheists have
>>> beliefs is to assume your sky fairy exists without evidence.
>>> Circulum in Demonstrando is the name of the logical fallacy. Before
>>> you make idiotic statements about atheistic beliefs, perhaps you need
>>> to first supply some evidence that your sky fairy exists. Got any?
>>> Any at all? Hint: you'd be the first.
>
>>
>> The P E R F E C T response to the endless, mindless, pointless,
>> useless, purposeless rantings of one brainwashed religious dupe
>>
>
>Yup, thanks. Gag 'em with a spoon.
I had no idea that you were a Valley Girl?
wrote:
>One fine day in alt.atheism, Ken <flakey714@aol.com> bloodied us up with
>this:
>
>> On Dec 17, 8:29 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>> One fine day in alt.atheism, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com"
>>> <IlBeBa...@gmail.com> bloodied us up with this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > REPLY: Of course theres proof and good proof. Otherwise i wouldnt
>>> > believe in it and follow it. Id show you the proof but youd only
>>> > reply as you have done in the past using foul language and no
>>> > cogent reasoned response. You certainly dont resemble the retired
>>> > Chemist persona that one would expect Ken , as youve never
>>> > submitted any rational, scientific , rationalized response to ANY
>>> > of your closely held atheistic beliefs. All we read is just a
>>> > bunch of 'Fundy this, Fundy that, 'F' this and 'F' that and 'F' you
>>> > , and 'F.O.and Die' -- it fits the sterotype of a reprobate minded
>>> > Teenager who is wallowing in despair and anger. Your life could be
>>> > so much different and your eternity the same.
>>>
>>> What closely held atheistic beliefs, moron? To assume atheists have
>>> beliefs is to assume your sky fairy exists without evidence.
>>> Circulum in Demonstrando is the name of the logical fallacy. Before
>>> you make idiotic statements about atheistic beliefs, perhaps you need
>>> to first supply some evidence that your sky fairy exists. Got any?
>>> Any at all? Hint: you'd be the first.
>
>>
>> The P E R F E C T response to the endless, mindless, pointless,
>> useless, purposeless rantings of one brainwashed religious dupe
>>
>
>Yup, thanks. Gag 'em with a spoon.
I had no idea that you were a Valley Girl?