Re: I can't see

[stoney]

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:17:34 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
> wrote in alt.atheism

>On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:15:30 -0500, BlueMantis
]> wrote:
>
>> Many rational people accept the existence of things they cannot
>>see. In January 1997, Discover magazine reported that astronomers
>>detected what they concluded were about a dozen planets orbiting
>>distant stars.
>>
>> "So far the new planets are known only from the way their gravity
>>perturbs the motion of the parent stars." Yes, for the astronomers,
>>the visible effects of gravity constituted a basis for believing in
>>the existence of unseen heavenly bodies.
>>
>> Related evidence—not direct observation—was an adequate basis for
>>scientists to accept what was yet invisible. Many who believe in a
>>Creator conclude that they have a similar basis for accepting what
>>they cannot see.
>
>When they have none. Stop pretending.

Jabbers is incapable of that.


--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:31:11 -0800, stoney > wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:17:34 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>>On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:15:30 -0500, BlueMantis
]> wrote:
>>
>>> Many rational people accept the existence of things they cannot
>>>see. In January 1997, Discover magazine reported that astronomers
>>>detected what they concluded were about a dozen planets orbiting
>>>distant stars.
>>>
>>> "So far the new planets are known only from the way their gravity
>>>perturbs the motion of the parent stars." Yes, for the astronomers,
>>>the visible effects of gravity constituted a basis for believing in
>>>the existence of unseen heavenly bodies.
>>>
>>> Related evidence—not direct observation—was an adequate basis for
>>>scientists to accept what was yet invisible. Many who believe in a
>>>Creator conclude that they have a similar basis for accepting what
>>>they cannot see.
>>
>>When they have none. Stop pretending.
>
>Jabbers is incapable of that.

I didn't realise who it was.

[stoney]

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:36:28 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
> wrote in alt.atheism

>On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:31:11 -0800, stoney > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:17:34 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
> wrote in alt.atheism
>>
>>>On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:15:30 -0500, BlueMantis
]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Many rational people accept the existence of things they cannot
>>>>see. In January 1997, Discover magazine reported that astronomers
>>>>detected what they concluded were about a dozen planets orbiting
>>>>distant stars.
>>>>
>>>> "So far the new planets are known only from the way their gravity
>>>>perturbs the motion of the parent stars." Yes, for the astronomers,
>>>>the visible effects of gravity constituted a basis for believing in
>>>>the existence of unseen heavenly bodies.
>>>>
>>>> Related evidence—not direct observation—was an adequate basis for
>>>>scientists to accept what was yet invisible. Many who believe in a
>>>>Creator conclude that they have a similar basis for accepting what
>>>>they cannot see.
>>>
>>>When they have none. Stop pretending.
>>
>>Jabbers is incapable of that.
>
>I didn't realise who it was.

Understood. The dumb****'s changing nics on a fast track. The key is
the presence of jehovahs witless's in the newsgroup line.


--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.