Baptists and floobydust

[Clyde Slick]

form Wikepedia

this is the stuff Arny, our "Science Guy"
adheres to.

fine, its his business.
but it runs diametrically opposed to the Scientism he advocates here.
Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism, and
that a number of scientifically unexplained and impossible miracles
having occurred.

So which is it Arny?

Are you "Arny the Science Guy" or "Arny the Baptist?



Baptists share so-called "orthodox" Christian beliefs with most other
moderate or conservative Christian denominations. These would include
beliefs about one God; the virgin birth; miracles; atonement through
the death, burial, and bodily resurrection of Jesus; the Trinity (the
divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, together with God the Father);
the need for salvation (through belief in Jesus Christ as the son of
God, his death and resurrection, and confession of Christ as Lord);
grace; the Kingdom of God; last things (Jesus Christ will return
personally and visibly in glory to the earth, the dead will be raised,
and Christ will judge everyone in righteousness); and evangelism and
missions.


Baptists generally believe in the literal Second Coming of Christ at
which time God will sit in judgment and divide humanity between the
saved and the lost (the Great White Throne judgment Revelation 20:11)
and Christ will sit in judgment of the believers (the Judgment Seat of
Christ 2 Corinthians), rewarding them for things done while alive.


Baptists through the centuries have insisted that the Bible is the
sole ultimate written authority for Christian faith and practice.


'Baptist Faith and Message'

Article I. The Scriptures. The Holy Bible was written by men divinely
inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect
treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation
for its end, and truth, without a





ny mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is
totally true and trustworthy. It reveals the principles by which God
judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world,
the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which
all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. All
Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine
revelation.

[Harry Lavo]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
> form Wikepedia
>
> this is the stuff Arny, our "Science Guy"
> adheres to.
>
> fine, its his business.
> but it runs diametrically opposed to the Scientism he advocates here.
> Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
> testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism, and
> that a number of scientifically unexplained and impossible miracles
> having occurred.
>
> So which is it Arny?
>
> Are you "Arny the Science Guy" or "Arny the Baptist?
>
>
>
> Baptists share so-called "orthodox" Christian beliefs with most other
> moderate or conservative Christian denominations. These would include
> beliefs about one God; the virgin birth; miracles; atonement through
> the death, burial, and bodily resurrection of Jesus; the Trinity (the
> divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, together with God the Father);
> the need for salvation (through belief in Jesus Christ as the son of
> God, his death and resurrection, and confession of Christ as Lord);
> grace; the Kingdom of God; last things (Jesus Christ will return
> personally and visibly in glory to the earth, the dead will be raised,
> and Christ will judge everyone in righteousness); and evangelism and
> missions.
>
>
> Baptists generally believe in the literal Second Coming of Christ at
> which time God will sit in judgment and divide humanity between the
> saved and the lost (the Great White Throne judgment Revelation 20:11)
> and Christ will sit in judgment of the believers (the Judgment Seat of
> Christ 2 Corinthians), rewarding them for things done while alive.
>
>
> Baptists through the centuries have insisted that the Bible is the
> sole ultimate written authority for Christian faith and practice.
>
>
> 'Baptist Faith and Message'
>
> Article I. The Scriptures. The Holy Bible was written by men divinely
> inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect
> treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation
> for its end, and truth, without a
>
>
>
>
>
> ny mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is
> totally true and trustworthy. It reveals the principles by which God
> judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world,
> the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which
> all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. All
> Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine
> revelation.


If you've followed Arny over the years (and I know you have) then you
obviously know their is really no conflict. Arny talks "science" but he
basically treats his pet "scientific" evidence or techniques as "faith",
unable to be challenged in any way, shape, or form, or even dissected and
discussed rationally. It's called "religion". It's one of the reasons I
rarely post on RAHE anymore, because I was constantly kept from stressing
this point about Arny's system of beliefs.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message


> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...

>> form Wikepedia

>> this is the stuff Arny, our "Science Guy" adheres to.

Not necessarily.

>> fine, its his business.

Good place to stop, but I know Art and Harry, they are out for blood.

>> but it runs diametrically opposed to the Scientism he
>> advocates here.

Unh, scientism?

In which sense do you mean that?

From Wikipedia:

"
The term scientism can be used as a neutral term to describe the view that
natural science has authority over all other interpretations of life, such
as philosophical, religious, mythical, spiritual, or humanistic
explanations, and over other fields of inquiry, such as the social sciences.
It also can imply a criticism of a perceived misapplication or misuse of the
authority of science in either of two directions:
1.. The term is often used as a pejorative[1][2] to indicate the improper
usage of science or scientific claims.[3] In this sense, the charge of
scientism often is used as a counter-argument to appeals to scientific
authority in contexts where science might not apply,[4] such as when the
topic is perceived to be beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.
2.. The term is also used to pejoratively refer to "the belief that the
methods of natural science, or the categories and things recognized in
natural science, form the only proper elements in any philosophical or other
inquiry,"[2] with a concomitant "elimination of the psychological dimensions
of experience".[5][6] It thus expresses a position critical of (at least the
more extreme expressions of) positivism.[7][8] (Compare: scientific
imperialism.[9])
So, Art and Harry, which meaning of scientism do you have in mind?

Note that the following paragrpah does not seem to appear at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist

or:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Beliefs

This paragraph is obviously an invention of Art, and therefore represents
his own beliefs.
>> Baptist believe in the literal word of
>> the Old and New testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationism,
>> and that a number of scientifically unexplained and
>> impossible miracles having occurred.

Since Art made this up, I need not address it. It's a fabrication of his
mind.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 18, 8:13*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:

> Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
> testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism, and
> that a number of scientifically unexplained and impossible miracles
> having occurred.

If you want a good primer on whgat GOIA Buh-Leeeves, you can start
here. I note that every one of your claims is justified by the
Southern Baptist Conference:

(Um, Clyde, this is also why I say that your views of gay marriage are
based in religion) ;-)

"Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman in covenant
commitment for a lifetime. ... The husband and wife are of equal worth
before God, since both are created in God's image. A husband is to
love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given
responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A
wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her
husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of
Christ."

(Poor Mrs. GOIA.)

http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/basicbeliefs.asp

Another good one:

http://www.baptiststart.com/doctrine.htm

So you are *exactly* correct. GOIA will deny this, of course, as
"science" has no place regarding doctrine like this. Let's start
counting how many times the cock crows. :-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message

> On Feb 18, 8:13 am, Clyde Slick >
> wrote:

>> Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
>> testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism,
>> and
>> that a number of scientifically unexplained and
>> impossible miracles having occurred.

> If you want a good primer on whgat GOIA Buh-Leeeves, you
> can start here. I note that every one of your claims is
> justified by the Southern Baptist Conference:

I am most definately *not* a Southern Baptist, and disagree with some of
their teachings.

When I've lived in the South where just about every Baptist church is
Southern Baptist, my wife and I generally attend Methodist or Presbyterian
churches.

Since the whole lot of you can't read and comprehend, even when provided
with web pages, let me quote the following for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Beliefs

"
Soul freedom: the soul is competent before God, and capable of making
decisions in matters of faith without coercion or compulsion by any larger
religious or civil body

Church freedom: freedom of the local church from outside interference,
whether government or civilian (subject only to the law where it does not
interfere with the religious teachings and practices of the church)

Bible freedom: the individual is free to interpret the Bible for himself or
herself, using the best tools of scholarship and biblical study available to
the individual

Religious freedom: the individual is free to choose whether to practice
their religion, another religion, or no religion; Separation of church and
state is often called the "civil corollary" of religious freedom
"


There guys, you have some bones to chew on. Let's see if you can figure out
how the above proves you wrong.

[Clyde Slick]

On 18 Feb, 20:21, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
> > On Feb 18, 8:13 am, Clyde Slick >
> > wrote:
> >> Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
> >> testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism,
> >> and
> >> that a number of scientifically unexplained and
> >> impossible miracles having occurred.
> > If you want a good primer on whgat GOIA Buh-Leeeves, you
> > can start here. I note that every one of your claims is
> > justified by the Southern Baptist Conference:
>
> I am most definately *not* a Southern Baptist, and disagree with some of
> their teachings.
>
> When I've lived in the South where just about every Baptist church is
> Southern Baptist, my wife and I generally attend Methodist or Presbyterian
> churches.
>
> Since the whole lot of you can't read and comprehend, even when provided
> with web pages, let me quote the following for you:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Beliefs
>
> "
> Soul freedom: the soul is competent before God, and capable of making
> decisions in matters of faith without coercion or compulsion by any larger
> religious or civil body
>
> Church freedom: freedom of the local church from outside interference,
> whether government or civilian (subject only to the law where it does not
> interfere with the religious teachings and practices of the church)
>
> Bible freedom: the individual is free to interpret the Bible for himself or
> herself, using the best tools of scholarship and biblical study available to
> the individual
>
> Religious freedom: the individual is free to choose whether to practice
> their religion, another religion, or no religion; Separation of church and
> state is often called the "civil corollary" of religious freedom
> "
>
> There guys, you have some bones to chew on. Let's see if you can figure out
> how the above proves you wrong.

there,there, you skiped by the other good stuff I posted.
tell us about the scientific bases for all the flooby dust stories in
the Bible.
Ask Sue if you can't figure it out.
She teaches all those untrue myths to the kiddies, you know.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 18, 7:48*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:

> She teaches all those untrue myths to the kiddies, you know.

Do you mean that GOIA's obvious sexual addiction to little girls and
little boys is facilitated by his *wife*?

Just when I thought that the poor ******* couldn't be any sicker than
he is. :-(

[Clyde Slick]

On 18 Feb, 21:10, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 7:48 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > She teaches all those untrue myths to the kiddies, you know.
>
> Do you mean that GOIA's obvious sexual addiction to little girls and
> little boys is facilitated by his *wife*?
>

grosse point baptist church
their web site lists her as the children's director


> Just when I thought that the poor ******* couldn't be any sicker than
> he is. :-(

I want to find out exactly which floobydust stories Arny believes in
and which ones he does not. I remember that he once rejected
Creationism.
But their is nothing in the Bible that would contradict it.
Evidently Arny is a "Pick and choose" Chrisitian,
just as he is a "pick and choose" scientist, if
you could call him either a Chrisian or scientist at all.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 18, 8:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 18 Feb, 21:10, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Feb 18, 7:48 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > She teaches all those untrue myths to the kiddies, you know.
>
> > Do you mean that GOIA's obvious sexual addiction to little girls and
> > little boys is facilitated by his *wife*?
>
> grosse point baptist church
> their web site lists her as the children's director
>
> > Just when I thought that the poor ******* couldn't be any sicker than
> > he is. :-(
>
> I want to find out exactly which floobydust stories Arny believes in
> and which ones he does not. I remember that he once rejected
> Creationism.
> But their is nothing in the Bible that would contradict it.
> Evidently Arny is a "Pick and choose" Chrisitian,
> just as he is a "pick and choose" scientist, if
> you could call him either a Chrisian or scientist at all.

Since apparently GOIA can interpret the bible or religious tenets at
will and make *them* conform to *you*, then I suppose that I'm a
devout christian too. ;-)

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

> > She teaches all those untrue myths to the kiddies, you know.
>
> Do you mean that GOIA's obvious sexual addiction to little girls and
> little boys is facilitated by his *wife*?

Fortunately not. As you know, poor Susan has serious medical problems
for which she takes a lot of pills. Some days, Arnii lines up her pills
for her. If poor Susan has to take a rest after that, who else but Arnii
to continue the "training sessions"?

> Just when I thought that the poor ******* couldn't be any sicker than
> he is. :-(

They don't have a name for what he is.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message


> I suppose that I'm a devout christian too. ;-)

When did you find Christ as your personal savior?

[Clyde Slick]

On 18 Feb, 22:16, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
> > I suppose that I'm a devout christian too. ;-)
>
> When did you find Christ as your personal savior?

the last time floobydust flew up his nostrils.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 18, 9:19*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 18 Feb, 22:16, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> > wrote in
>
> > > I suppose that I'm a devout christian too. ;-)
>
> > When did you find Christ as your personal savior?
>
> the last time floobydust flew up his nostrils.

Now Clyde, we don't have an argument here. GOIA stipulated as much.
Even though I didn't agree to it, in GOIA's insane world, it's
binding. GOIA and I have reached an accord out-of-court, so there
never was an argument. And we didn't even have to go through ADR, a
Court-ordered pre-trial settlement conference, arbitration or
mediation.

Not that I'd know about such things. ;-)

[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in message
>
>> On Feb 18, 8:13 am, Clyde Slick >
>> wrote:
>
>>> Baptiswt believe in the literal word of the Old and New
>>> testaments. this includes antiscientific Creationsism,
>>> and
>>> that a number of scientifically unexplained and
>>> impossible miracles having occurred.
>
>> If you want a good primer on whgat GOIA Buh-Leeeves, you
>> can start here. I note that every one of your claims is
>> justified by the Southern Baptist Conference:
>
> I am most definately *not* a Southern Baptist, and disagree with some of
> their teachings.
>
> When I've lived in the South where just about every Baptist church is
> Southern Baptist, my wife and I generally attend Methodist or Presbyterian
> churches.

**Why? I was a Methodist many years ago (my mum still is). Whilst I admire
their stance on alcohol, pretty much all the other stuff is "floobydust".
They preach this abject nonsense about miracles, virgin births, life after
death and claim that this planet and all it's inhabitants were created by
some mythical creature, they refer to as "God". I figured out it was all
******** at age 12. Are you telling me that you subscribe to this hokum?
Wanna discuss just how many physical laws are violated by religious claims?
Let's start by discussing how old this "God" must be and how such a thing
can be remotely possible. By my figuring, this creature is around 12.5
billion years old and is likely to be alive for considerably longer. Seems
extremely unlikely to me. Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.

Trevor Wilson

[Arny Krueger]

"Trevor Wilson" > wrote
in message

> **Why? I was a Methodist many years ago (my mum still
> is). Whilst I admire their stance on alcohol, pretty much
> all the other stuff is "floobydust". They preach this
> abject nonsense about miracles, virgin births, life after
> death and claim that this planet and all it's inhabitants
> were created by some mythical creature, they refer to as
> "God".

You certainly have the right and even the responsibility to follow the
dictates of your conscience, Trevor.

>I figured out it was all ******** at age 12.

What else were you going through at that time?

> Are you telling me that you subscribe to this hokum?

What hokum?

> Wanna discuss just how many physical laws are violated by
> religious claims?

I believe the answer is none.

>Let's start by discussing how old this
> "God" must be and how such a thing can be remotely
> possible. By my figuring, this creature is around 12.5
> billion years old and is likely to be alive for
> considerably longer. Seems extremely unlikely to me.

How old do you think the Universe is?

> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.

It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the laws of
thermodynamics except the second. So, why must everything that we believe to
be true be explained?

[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Trevor Wilson" > wrote
> in message
>
>> **Why? I was a Methodist many years ago (my mum still
>> is). Whilst I admire their stance on alcohol, pretty much
>> all the other stuff is "floobydust". They preach this
>> abject nonsense about miracles, virgin births, life after
>> death and claim that this planet and all it's inhabitants
>> were created by some mythical creature, they refer to as
>> "God".
>
> You certainly have the right and even the responsibility to follow the
> dictates of your conscience, Trevor.

**My life is ruled by logic, common sense and science. The supernatural has
no place in it, as superntural concepts violate the pretexts of science.
IOW: You cannot believe in both. Which do you subscribe to?

>
>>I figured out it was all ******** at age 12.
>
> What else were you going through at that time?

**The usual stuff. Discovering girls were interestingly different, that
surfing on a Sunday morning was a whole lot more soul-enriching that sitting
on a church pew, building my first amplifier, etc.

>
>> Are you telling me that you subscribe to this hokum?
>
> What hokum?

**The miracles, the life after death, the virgin births, etc.

>
>> Wanna discuss just how many physical laws are violated by
>> religious claims?
>
> I believe the answer is none.

**Life after death seems to violate a whole bunch of stuff.

>
>>Let's start by discussing how old this
>> "God" must be and how such a thing can be remotely
>> possible. By my figuring, this creature is around 12.5
>> billion years old and is likely to be alive for
>> considerably longer. Seems extremely unlikely to me.
>
> How old do you think the Universe is?

**Approximately 12.5 billion years. How old do you think it is?

>
>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the laws of
> thermodynamics except the second. So, why must everything that we believe
> to be true be explained?

**Because that is how science works. Without science you have mysticism and
floobydust. You can't have both. One is true and one is not. Which do you
feel is true?

Trevor Wilson

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 19, 6:54*pm, "Trevor Wilson"
> wrote:

> **Because that is how science works. Without science you have mysticism and
> floobydust. You can't have both. One is true and one is not. Which do you
> feel is true?

The Earth is about 5,000 years old. Dinosaurs were planted by the
devil to sow confusion. Seas can be parted, no problem, if you have
the faith of a mustard seed. Ditto hitting your enemies with plagues.
Ditto with making it rain food, walking on water, or rising from the
dead. Ditto with impregnating a virgin. Why, right here in the US of
A, we had a woman impregnated, who was likewise a virgin, by being
shot in the stomach by a bullet that had first passed through a man's
scrotum. It was during our civil war. Just look it up. This is how
"miracles" occur!

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/bullet.asp

And christianity is the one "true" religion. All of the others are
fakes. And there are certain branches of christianity that are "truer"
then others.

Do you have any more questions? :-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Trevor Wilson" > wrote
in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..

>> "Trevor Wilson" >
>> wrote in message

>>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>>
>> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the
>> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
>> everything that we believe to be true be explained?

> **Because that is how science works.

If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have equal credibility
with most people who are interested, should be ignored. There is no
explanation for them, they are just statements about things people have
perceived.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message


> The Earth is about 5,000 years old.

The Bible verse that says this is where?

> Dinosaurs were
> planted by the devil to sow confusion.

Same question.

> Seas can be parted, no problem, if you have the faith of a mustard seed.

Again, same question, along with a question about whether or not there are
such things as figures of speech.

> Ditto hitting your enemies with plagues.

That's been done many times, so where is your problem?

> Ditto with making it rain food,

Edible items have indeed been found to fall from the sky from time to time.

> walking on water,

Never heard of water skiing, I take it? ;-)

> or rising from the dead.

So those suitcase things they have in airplanes in case someone has a heart
attack don't work?

> Ditto with impregnating a virgin.

Never heard of artificial insemination?

> Why, right here
> in the US of A, we had a woman impregnated, who was
> likewise a virgin, by being shot in the stomach by a
> bullet that had first passed through a man's scrotum. It
> was during our civil war. Just look it up. This is how
> "miracles" occur!

And your definition of miracle that makes all of the above impossible is???

> http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/bullet.asp

Also covered on my favorite *religious* show, Mythbusters.

> And christianity is the one "true" religion. All of the
> others are fakes. And there are certain branches of
> christianity that are "truer" then others.

Good that you finally got something right.

> Do you have any more questions? :-)

With answers like these ****R, why would anybody ask you which way is up?

[Clyde Slick]

On 20 Feb, 07:44, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Trevor Wilson" > wrote
> in
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >> "Trevor Wilson" >
> >> wrote in
> >>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> >> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the
> >> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
> >> everything that we believe to be true be explained?
> > **Because that is how science works.
>
> If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have equal credibility
> with most people who are interested, should be ignored. There is no
> explanation for them, they are just statements about things people have
> perceived.

Arny supports pick and choose science, whatever you believe to be
true, no explanations necessary
Arny supports pick and choose christianity, whatever you believe to be
true, no explanations necessary
Arny rejects pick and choose audio component preference, whatever you
believe to be true, no explanations necesary

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 20, 6:55*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 20 Feb, 07:44, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> > "Trevor Wilson" > wrote
> > in
>
> > > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> > >> "Trevor Wilson" >
> > >> wrote in
> > >>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> > >> It is widely believed that nobody can prove *any of the
> > >> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
> > >> everything that we believe to be true be explained?
> > > **Because that is how science works.
>
> > If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have equal credibility
> > with most people who are interested, should be ignored. There is no
> > explanation for them, they are just statements about things people have
> > perceived.
>
> Arny supports pick and choose science, whatever you believe to be
> true, no explanations necessary
> Arny supports pick and choose christianity, whatever you believe to be
> true, no explanations necessary
> Arny rejects pick and choose audio component preference, whatever you
> believe to be true, no explanations necesary

Once upon a time there was a woman over 2,000 years ago who was
artificially inseminated without her knowledge. To mark this momentous
occasion, and against all physical laws, a star was moved to
illuminate the birthplace of the resultant child. In a day, and in a
culture, where virginity prior to marriage was paramount, it turns out
the husband didn't give a ****. Perhaps he was so ugly he was grateful
to have a woman, any woman, wed him.

One day it rained grilled steaks. Nobody was in the least surprised.
Nor were they surprised when genetically-altered frogs and locusts
descended on their enemies. "Thank Dad they didn't hit us with anthrax
again!" said the man. "These army experiments are getting pretty old."

The man grew up and became somewhat of a rock star. He and a group of
his friends partied their asses off! One day they were out on a boat
drinking and doing guy stuff. A terrible storm blew in. The man (who
was pretty high at the time) said, "Fear not!" and amazed them all by
water-skiing by. No rock star has ever partied like that, before or
since!

Unfortunately, the hard living took its toll and the man died. Three
days later the local hospital brought a defibrillator and revived him.
He was escorted to a place called "heaven" by some otherwordly
creatures from another rock group called "The Angels". He hasn't been
heard from since.

Many people formed cults around this man, much like many people did a
couple of thousand years later around Jim Morrison or The Big Bopper.
Apparently some of these cults are considered better than the others.

It's all easily-explained and very sceireintific. ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> On 20 Feb, 07:44, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>> "Trevor Wilson" >
>> wrote
>> in
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>> "Trevor Wilson" >
>>>> wrote in
>>>>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>>
>>>> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the
>>>> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
>>>> everything that we believe to be true be explained?
>>> **Because that is how science works.
>>
>> If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have
>> equal credibility with most people who are interested,
>> should be ignored. There is no explanation for them,
>> they are just statements about things people have
>> perceived.

Art has no response to this, just posts a list of baseless charges.

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg winds itself up.

> Art has no response to this, just posts a list of baseless charges.

On the contrary, Turdy, Art has already observed that your feces purity
percentage is still hovering in the high 90s. That's your dream, right?

[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Trevor Wilson" > wrote
> in message
>
>> **Why? I was a Methodist many years ago (my mum still
>> is). Whilst I admire their stance on alcohol, pretty much
>> all the other stuff is "floobydust". They preach this
>> abject nonsense about miracles, virgin births, life after
>> death and claim that this planet and all it's inhabitants
>> were created by some mythical creature, they refer to as
>> "God".
>
> You certainly have the right and even the responsibility to follow the
> dictates of your conscience, Trevor.

**My life is ruled by logic, common sense and science. The supernatural has
no place in it, as superntural concepts violate the pretexts of science.
IOW: You cannot believe in both. Which do you subscribe to?

>
>>I figured out it was all ******** at age 12.
>
> What else were you going through at that time?

**The usual stuff. Discovering girls were interestingly different, that
surfing on a Sunday morning was a whole lot more soul-enriching that sitting
on a church pew, building my first amplifier, etc.

>
>> Are you telling me that you subscribe to this hokum?
>
> What hokum?

**The miracles, the life after death, the virgin births, etc.

>
>> Wanna discuss just how many physical laws are violated by
>> religious claims?
>
> I believe the answer is none.

**Life after death seems to violate a whole bunch of stuff.

>
>>Let's start by discussing how old this
>> "God" must be and how such a thing can be remotely
>> possible. By my figuring, this creature is around 12.5
>> billion years old and is likely to be alive for
>> considerably longer. Seems extremely unlikely to me.
>
> How old do you think the Universe is?

**Approximately 12.5 billion years. How old do you think it is?

>
>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the laws of
> thermodynamics except the second. So, why must everything that we believe
> to be true be explained?

**Because that is how science works. Without science you have mysticism and
floobydust. You can't have both. One is true and one is not. Which do you
feel is true?

Trevor Wilson

[Clyde Slick]

On 20 Feb, 13:36, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 6:55 am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Feb, 07:44, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> > > "Trevor Wilson" > wrote
> > > in
>
> > > > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > > . ..
> > > >> "Trevor Wilson" >
> > > >> wrote in
> > > >>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> > > >> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the
> > > >> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
> > > >> everything that we believe to be true be explained?
> > > > **Because that is how science works.
>
> > > If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have equal credibility
> > > with most people who are interested, should be ignored. There is no
> > > explanation for them, they are just statements about things people have
> > > perceived.
>
> > Arny supports pick and choose science, whatever you believe to be
> > true, no explanations necessary
> > Arny supports pick and choose christianity, whatever you believe to be
> > true, no explanations necessary
> > Arny rejects pick and choose audio component preference, whatever you
> > believe to be true, no explanations necesary
>
> Once upon a time there was a woman over 2,000 years ago who was
> artificially inseminated without her knowledge. To mark this momentous
> occasion, and against all physical laws, a star was moved to
> illuminate the birthplace of the resultant child. In a day, and in a
> culture, where virginity prior to marriage was paramount, it turns out
> the husband didn't give a ****. Perhaps he was so ugly he was grateful
> to have a woman, any woman, wed him.
>
> One day it rained grilled steaks. Nobody was in the least surprised.
> Nor were they surprised when genetically-altered frogs and locusts
> descended on their enemies. "Thank Dad they didn't hit us with anthrax
> again!" said the man. "These army experiments are getting pretty old."
>
> The man grew up and became somewhat of a rock star. He and a group of
> his friends partied their asses off! One day they were out on a boat
> drinking and doing guy stuff. A terrible storm blew in. The man (who
> was pretty high at the time) said, "Fear not!" and amazed them all by
> water-skiing by. No rock star has ever partied like that, before or
> since!
>
> Unfortunately, the hard living took its toll and the man died. Three
> days later the local hospital brought a defibrillator and revived him.
> He was escorted to a place called "heaven" by some otherwordly
> creatures from another rock group called "The Angels". He hasn't been
> heard from since.
>
> Many people formed cults around this man, much like many people did a
> couple of thousand years later around Jim Morrison or The Big Bopper.
> Apparently some of these cults are considered better than the others.
>
> It's all easily-explained and very sceireintific. ;-)
'
"at least' the followers of the Latter Day Saints (Saints Morrison,
Presley, Holly,
and Hendrix, and don't forget my favorite, Saint George)
got to use tubed equipment. The original Rocker
didn't have anything to record with. you had to be there to hear him,
or
else read a book written about him by his (hehehe) male groupies,
which was even more innacurate than the tubes.

[Clyde Slick]

On 20 Feb, 14:18, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 20 Feb, 07:44, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >> "Trevor Wilson" >
> >> wrote
> >> in
>
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" >
> >>>> wrote in
> >>>>> Still, you may care to explain how this can be so.
>
> >>>> It is widely believed that nobody can prove any of the
> >>>> laws of thermodynamics except the second. So, why must
> >>>> everything that we believe to be true be explained?
> >>> **Because that is how science works.
>
> >> If so, then the other laws of thermodynamics, which have
> >> equal credibility with most people who are interested,
> >> should be ignored. There is no explanation for them,
> >> they are just statements about things people have
> >> perceived.
>
> Art has no response to this, just posts a list of baseless charges.

When you talk to me, I might just respond.
The item in question was your response to someone else.
BTW, there was an 'excluded' middle to your previous post.
Are you confused or just stupid.

[Clyde Slick]

On 20 Feb, 14:42, George M. Middius <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net>
wrote:
> The Krooborg winds itself up.
>
> > Art has no response to this, just posts a list of baseless charges.
>
> On the contrary, Turdy, Art has already observed that your feces purity
> percentage is still hovering in the high 90s. That's your dream, right?

98.6%
normal for Turdy.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 20, 4:33*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 20 Feb, 14:42, George M. Middius <cmndr _ *george @ comcast . net>
> wrote:
>
> > The Krooborg winds itself up.
>
> > > Art has no response to this, just posts a list of baseless charges.
>
> > On the contrary, Turdy, Art has already observed that your feces purity
> > percentage is still hovering in the high 90s. That's your dream, right?
>
> 98.6%
> normal for Turdy.

Science is based on evidence. There is no evidence that any of the
laws of thermodynamics are incorrect. If some becomes available,
science will adjust accordingly. Science, while based on assumption,
is basing those assumptions on parsimony. Science is fluid.

Religion cannot change when new evidence comes into being. Religion
cannot say, for example, "You know what? The theory of evolution holds
true. I think it's right!" Religion is not even based on assumptions.
There is no evidence. You just have to have faith. That kind of
baseless faith is in no way different from somebody who has faith that
a new set of cables will "make all of the veils drop away".

Science, when confronted with a question that the answer is not
immediately available for, makes and tests hypotheses.

Religion, when confronted with a question that the answer is not
immediately available for, immediately defaults to "god's will".

Religion is a set of nice, pat answers for those who are
intellectually uncurious. The two (religion and science) are mutually
exclusive belief systems.

[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
...
On Feb 20, 4:33 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 20 Feb, 14:42, George M. Middius <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net>
> wrote:
>

Religion is a set of nice, pat answers for those who are
intellectually uncurious. The two (religion and science) are mutually
exclusive belief systems.

**Indeed. Mr Krueger is on shaky ground.

Trevor Wilson