“The who whating how...”

Since: Dec 12

"...with huh?"

#592153 Sep 17, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>They put 50 pills in a bottle that will hold 100...they need the cotton to keep them from rattling.

I thought those mysterious little packets of unknown content was what kept the moisture out.

I also think that the cotton was put in so that you would get a headache trying to get it out...thus needing to take more aspirins.
Makes sense. Thanks :)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#592154 Sep 17, 2013
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't see how you can know that?
That's because you're not looking my way..

“The who whating how...”

Since: Dec 12

"...with huh?"

#592155 Sep 17, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Let's see now:

The myth tells us that the serpent was in the garden. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that the serpent was either put there or that it went in of its own accord.

You have a third option for how the serpent got in the garden?
She could fly anywhere she wanted.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#592156 Sep 17, 2013
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
Not that is cute! She licks her cub's face just like mother cats do.
Yeah ~ love is simply amazing :)(brings a smile to the face thinking about it)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#592157 Sep 17, 2013
Epiphany2 wrote:
Today's Prayer
Good morning, Lord. Thank you for this absolutely beautiful day. God, I need for You to please tell me something. Do I place too much emphasis on my wants? my relaxation time? my family time? my job? anything? Please show me, help me know in my spirit, if there are any "rights" I need to relinquish that may be hindering my freedom to experience Your love and grace. Please help me to balance my time and activities, my desires and needs, my work and play; every area of my life. May You receive all the glory. In Jesus' name I pray, amen.
Prime time with God
Amen :)

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592158 Sep 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, ok.
Demonstrate nothing for me, so I can figure out how to make it go big bang-bang.
Science does not claim that our universe began from nothing.

duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592159 Sep 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Sigh.
You claim to have stayed on topic, but you didn't.
Here was the posts.
RR: My analogy is based on your comment that if I believe in one religion's miracles, I "have to" believe in all religion's miracles.
(to which you replied)
Hiding: Creation science isn't science.
---
How the flick is that staying on topic?!?
You are a complete and utter liar. That is not the conversation at all.

To my brilliant remark "if you believe in one religion's miracles, because all religions share equal evidence, then you have to accept all the miracle claims in all religions"

To which you replied, using a semantic argument so that you wouldn't have to address the point "waaa! then you have to accept Creationist science as science!"

So, no, dishonest one, I am not the person who avoided the argument. You are and you did through semantic bs.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#592160 Sep 17, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Incidentally, I just flashed back to that horrible feeling I had at the start of every shift I worked in that factory in the summer of '70 between high school and UCLA, so I know a little about your world. Those shifts seemed to last forever because the work was so tedious by virtue of being so mindless and repetitive - what you brag about when you call your work easy.
Skombolis wrote:
And nah my day goes by quickly at work.
Sure it does.

Work needs to be challenging and to consume your attention in order for time to pass quickly.

And it needs to be meaningful to be satisfying.

Your job is neither.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592161 Sep 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I stayed on topic.
As good as you did.
No. Pedantry is an attempt at distraction and nothing more. Unfortunately for you, we're all familiar with your tricks now.

“~ Prince of Peace~”

Since: Apr 08

~ And the greatest is LOVE~

#592162 Sep 17, 2013
Have a great day....See ya

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592163 Sep 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Nano wrote this, it's perfect.
<quoted text>It is easy to mock when you have never been touched by the supernatural. I get that, I've been there, but some people have had experiences that cannot be explained by the limited science of man. Eyewitness accounts are all we have, IOWs, what effect the supernatural had on the "natural" world. The funny thing IS that even those of us who have experienced the inexplicable are skeptical of others who claim similar experiences. It is the nature of man to hold the stories of strangers as suspect.
I think it's funny when an atheist who declares there is no God also go on to say that he/she believes in ghosts. One must, logically, admit that if one type of entity exists there is always the possibility that the other type also does. I call them "entity bigots".
Now, it's your turn to call every supernatural event the result of drugs, mental illness or whatever your favorite argument against it is.
Those of us who have experienced the inexplicable know that it exists in spite of the lack of empirical, physical evidence.
No. Those of you who have experienced what you believe to be inexplicable are naive and misinterpret your brain signals. You're basically like children.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592164 Sep 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Sigh.
You claim to have stayed on topic, but you didn't.
Here was the posts.
RR: My analogy is based on your comment that if I believe in one religion's miracles, I "have to" believe in all religion's miracles.
(to which you replied)
Hiding: Creation science isn't science.
---
How the flick is that staying on topic?!?
This was your second post to me, dishonest one:
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do I have to allow anything from all religions?
That's like me telling you that if you allow for your version of science, then you also have to allow for the Creationist version of science.
So, no, you aren't being honest above. Your analogy is a total failure, for it relies upon a misuse of the word science. Apparently that is so far beyond you, that you cannot understand it. I've explained it to you, but for you, since the words are spelled the same, that's all you see.

Is this seriously the best you can do? This is what passes for argument from you?

Since: May 11

UK

#592165 Sep 17, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I see deceit everywhere in your arguments. You don't know how to argue honestly - and you don't even seem to realize that you're silly word games, cherry picking of evidence, is dishonest.
And your initial statement on our different training is true. You argue this way because you were never trained to - you can't recognize the serious flaws in your personal use of logic.
You're arguing with the religious, and I'm afraid your expectations are too high.

This is the man who exhibits perfect 'cultish' behaviour. He is able to change his point of view, reasoning and interpretation of the facts depending upon the point be argued. The truth is whatever makes the dogma work against whatever particular criticism is being levelled at it. It is the perfection of double-think and Orwell would be proud.

I say "argument" because this is not debate. The folks arguing for god here have never participated in a moderated debate. A winning gambit for them would be, "You're wrong, look it up" or "you spelled "favour" wrong".

They can dishonestly compartmentalise each point being argued, for example acknowledging that the Sumerians developed written communication way before the Hebrews yet postulating that Adam wrote down the creation story and passed it to moses. This ability to reconcile obvious conflict within hours of each post occurs with no hesitation. Their entire worldview is whatever is convenient at the time and they see absolutely no problem with that because they are fools for the lawd and don't mind appearing so, even seeing it as a virtue.

Their 'religion' or scriptures morph and twist to meet the demands of critical thought. I can only imagine the internal struggle they have to keep it together, sometimes I literally blush for them when they post such howlers.

I also think you're being very charitable in attributing any spark of logic to them. Their brains work very differently and their internal filters validate every new fact they hear(using a form of pidgin logic) against their own permissible logic which is this:

Religious logic on Topix.

Question: "Does this idea threaten my dogma?

If "yes", discount or seek apologetics to reinforce dogma(a form of mantra meditation), attempt to change subject or seek out typographical, grammatical or spelling errors in the post one finds uncomfortable without delay and fixate on them.

If "no", accept and claim credit for said idea.(i.e. "The christian church practised science before 'scientists'").

Use the Vietnam lacuna(declare victory and leave). END

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#592166 Sep 17, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
You're arguing with the religious, and I'm afraid your expectations are too high.
This is the man who exhibits perfect 'cultish' behaviour. He is able to change his point of view, reasoning and interpretation of the facts depending upon the point be argued. The truth is whatever makes the dogma work against whatever particular criticism is being levelled at it. It is the perfection of double-think and Orwell would be proud.
I say "argument" because this is not debate. The folks arguing for god here have never participated in a moderated debate. A winning gambit for them would be, "You're wrong, look it up" or "you spelled "favour" wrong".
They can dishonestly compartmentalise each point being argued, for example acknowledging that the Sumerians developed written communication way before the Hebrews yet postulating that Adam wrote down the creation story and passed it to moses. This ability to reconcile obvious conflict within hours of each post occurs with no hesitation. Their entire worldview is whatever is convenient at the time and they see absolutely no problem with that because they are fools for the lawd and don't mind appearing so, even seeing it as a virtue.
Their 'religion' or scriptures morph and twist to meet the demands of critical thought. I can only imagine the internal struggle they have to keep it together, sometimes I literally blush for them when they post such howlers.
I also think you're being very charitable in attributing any spark of logic to them. Their brains work very differently and their internal filters validate every new fact they hear(using a form of pidgin logic) against their own permissible logic which is this:
Religious logic on Topix.
Question: "Does this idea threaten my dogma?
If "yes", discount or seek apologetics to reinforce dogma(a form of mantra meditation), attempt to change subject or seek out typographical, grammatical or spelling errors in the post one finds uncomfortable without delay and fixate on them.
If "no", accept and claim credit for said idea.(i.e. "The christian church practised science before 'scientists'").
Use the Vietnam lacuna(declare victory and leave). END
Very well said, sir. I will have to give it some thought.

My one question would then be: why bother interacting with these irrational people at all?

No amount of cogent discussion is going to appeal to their senses. No logic, not rationality.

Might as well just laugh at their displays of incoherence and move on.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#592167 Sep 17, 2013
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>That's because you're not looking my way..
I agree

Since: May 11

UK

#592168 Sep 17, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
1. No one aborts babies. That is, by definition, impossible.
2. Using abortion as a weapon to put someone down...? What are you talking about?
It's called an, ignorantio elenchi.

"I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out under another Democrat president, Jimmy Carter. Iím not blaming this on President Obama, I just think itís an interesting coincidence."

...It broke out under Gerald Ford but hey it's a christian-dominionist, historical-revisionist republican speaking.

"I think this war is wrong"..."Why do you hate America?"

or more simplistically, "Won't someone think of the children!"~Helen Lovejoy.

There are Helen Lovejoys' everywhere. Who cannot get their heads around the simple fact that someone who has been born has more rights than someone who has not been born yet.

Since: May 11

UK

#592169 Sep 17, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Very well said, sir. I will have to give it some thought.
My one question would then be: why bother interacting with these irrational people at all?
No amount of cogent discussion is going to appeal to their senses. No logic, not rationality.
Might as well just laugh at their displays of incoherence and move on.
Laugh and move on or stay...but just keep laughing.
Bongo

Brentwood, NY

#592170 Sep 17, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
What a moron you are. You have no idea what you are talking about, but still argue.
Dude: You might fool the Mexican government if you came to it with your last six months of pay stubs upon expatriation. What would you show them a year later when your visa came up for renewal?
They would show you the Rio Grande.
Why doesn't the USA have criteria like this? And is the Mexican govt. setting up ex/pats to have a ransom if needed?

“Electronic graffiti”

Since: Jun 13

Down Under

#592171 Sep 17, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Laugh and move on or stay...but just keep laughing.
Good advice...LOL.
Bongo

Brentwood, NY

#592172 Sep 17, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
You're arguing with the religious, and I'm afraid your expectations are too high.
This is the man who exhibits perfect 'cultish' behaviour. He is able to change his point of view, reasoning and interpretation of the ", accept and claim credit for said idea.(i.e. "The christian church practised science before 'scientists'").
Use the Vietnam lacuna(declare victory and leave). END
Charrington ol chap, youre a long winded blowhard. Who practiced law before law , savages? or was it barbarians? Those who have Jesus always win, no matter how much your ilk maligns them. Don't you know sheep drown if they look upwards when its raining.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min New Age Spiritual... 796,429
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min Michael 568,485
Is colin powell a traitor??? (Oct '08) 13 min Tell it like it is 538
Scientific proof for God's existence 15 min eyeful 624
Where do you get your news? Todd Charske (Jan '09) 47 min Todd Charske 9
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rick in Kansas 267,560
The movements of O.J. Simpson on the night of J... 1 hr Senecus 10
Sleeping with mother (Oct '13) 13 hr Ntakudyaunya 12
More from around the web