Evidence for God from Science

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Yeah Audie, you need to read better.
You said:

I know how to read. Im not hypersensitive. How about turn about is fair play? "Rarely do you meet an open and honest Christian." No dig there? Just stating the facts?

BUT I didn't writer that, I wrote:

Rarely do you read such and honest and open atheist.

See the difference?
READ not meet.
I have read the vast majority of atheist writings against religion and faith ( I can't see I have read all of course, no one can).
And I stand by my statement.

Ohhh, that so makes all the difference!



Here is the properly written counter statement:

"Rarely, yes, oh so very seldom it is that you read anything honest written by a Christian."


Does seeing that clarify things, seem equally fair?

Yes, it makes a difference.
And you are entitled to your opinion about Christian writers as well.
I would aks you WHO those writers were and why you felt that way and I would hope that, like my view on atheist writers, yours would be supported by facts and evidence and not just emotion.

Audie wrote:Great. First the bigoted stereotype. Is it admitted, or taken back? No! The poster stands by his words.

Next, someone else hops in to say its the atheists' problem, and adds in some more to the pig pile.

What splendid "Christians" here.

I have warned you in the past to watch your condescending tone.
I don't see anyone here attacking you personally and yet, here you are, doing just that by this comment:

What splendid "Christians" here.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:Great. First the bigoted stereotype. Is it admitted, or taken back? No! The poster stands by his words.

Next, someone else hops in to say its the atheists' problem, and adds in some more to the pig pile.

What splendid "Christians" here.

I have warned you in the past to watch your condescending tone.
I don't see anyone here attacking you personally and yet, here you are, doing just that by this comment:

What splendid "Christians" here.

I do not acccept the comment on the honestly of atheists as anything but a completely gratuitous swipe at the honesty of all atheists. Limiting it to atheist writers doesnt make it a bit better. We all write.

I dont accept the pig-pile as anything other than jumping on a chance to take another swipe.

I do not accept that there was any condescension in what I said, no more than there was sarcasm for which I was criticized, in an earlier comment that said exactly what I meant.

I dont accept without comment the many condescending things said to me, "young lady" being a recent one. I could go back and mine a whole lot more.

I dont accept false statements made about me from anyone. When people make things up and state them as fact, its the same as what in court they call perjury.

I dont accept the negative stereotyping of atheists as being representative of Christian values. My statement had nothing to do with condescension, it was a direct criticism of blatant hypocrisy.

I will accept that this is a debate forum, and that you have a different opinion.
I accept that you have your finger on a button with which you can threaten me when opinions differ.

I also accept the responsibility to be better than some of the examples set before me here.

I gave it some thought, and like all responsibilities, I take it seriously.

Audie wrote:I do not acccept the comment on the honestly of atheists as anything but a completely gratuitous swipe at the honesty of all atheists. Limiting it to atheist writers doesnt make it a bit better. We all write.I dont accept the pig-pile as anything other than jumping on a chance to take another swipe.I do not accept that there was any condescension in what I said, no more than there was sarcasm for which I was criticized, in an earlier comment that said exactly what I meant.I dont accept without comment the many condescending things said to me, "young lady" being a recent one. I could go back and mine a whole lot more. I dont accept false statements made about me from anyone. When people make things up and state them as fact, its the same as what in court they call perjury.I dont accept the negative stereotyping of atheists as being representative of Christian values. My statement had nothing to do with condescension, it was a direct criticism of blatant hypocrisy. I will accept that this is a debate forum, and that you have a different opinion.I accept that you have your finger on a button with which you can threaten me when opinions differ.I also accept the responsibility to be better than some of the examples set before me here. I gave it some thought, and like all responsibilities, I take it seriously.

Oaaaaaa! Ruvry rung rady vely angly

Anonymous

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:I do not acccept the comment on the honestly of atheists as anything but a completely gratuitous swipe at the honesty of all atheists. Limiting it to atheist writers doesnt make it a bit better. We all write.I dont accept the pig-pile as anything other than jumping on a chance to take another swipe.I do not accept that there was any condescension in what I said, no more than there was sarcasm for which I was criticized, in an earlier comment that said exactly what I meant.I dont accept without comment the many condescending things said to me, "young lady" being a recent one. I could go back and mine a whole lot more. I dont accept false statements made about me from anyone. When people make things up and state them as fact, its the same as what in court they call perjury.I dont accept the negative stereotyping of atheists as being representative of Christian values. My statement had nothing to do with condescension, it was a direct criticism of blatant hypocrisy. I will accept that this is a debate forum, and that you have a different opinion.I accept that you have your finger on a button with which you can threaten me when opinions differ.I also accept the responsibility to be better than some of the examples set before me here. I gave it some thought, and like all responsibilities, I take it seriously.

Oaaaaaa! Ruvry rung rady vely angly

Anonymous

49 kg of fightin' chinkette at your service, sir!

Audie wrote: I will accept that this is a debate forum, and that you have a different opinion.
I accept that you have your finger on a button with which you can threaten me when opinions differ.

While it is true that we moderators have some extra buttons we can click on, we have no desire to threaten anyone when opinions differ. We are moderators. We moderate. Not threaten.

Audie wrote:49 kg of fightin' chinkette at your service, sir!

49Kg ??? wow! you're a wee little thing!

I would also like to lodge an official complaint regarding the disgusting racist term "chinkette". It upset me greatly and has caused great mental anguish. I've also had trouble keeping my breakfast down. Please refer to "chinkette" as The C word in the future.

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:49 kg of fightin' chinkette at your service, sir!

49Kg ??? wow! you're a wee little thing!

I would also like to lodge an official complaint regarding the disgusting racist term "chinkette". It upset me greatly and has caused great mental anguish. I've also had trouble keeping my breakfast down. Please refer to "chinkette" as The C word in the future.

FL

My bad. Subsequenrmente, I will self reference as "the C- thing".

1over137 wrote:

Audie wrote: I will accept that this is a debate forum, and that you have a different opinion.
I accept that you have your finger on a button with which you can threaten me when opinions differ.

While it is true that we moderators have some extra buttons we can click on, we have no desire to threaten anyone when opinions differ. We are moderators. We moderate. Not threaten.

Thanks 1/137, I misunderstood what he meant about warning me.

Thank you as well.

Audie wrote:My bad. Subsequenrmente, I will self reference as "the C- thing".

Here in Canada, we have C-things, N-things, W-things, FN-things. A lot of L-things came to this country in the 1990s, which is good because I speak their language. Personally, I am an F-thing but I also speak UK language. I may open a bank account at HSBC. Right now, I bank at BNP and BoA. When in Germany, I use the DB ATM.

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:My bad. Subsequenrmente, I will self reference as "the C- thing".

Here in Canada, we have C-things, N-things, W-things, FN-things. A lot of L-things came to this country in the 1990s, which is good because I speak their language. Personally, I am an F-thing but I also speak UK language. I may open a bank account at HSBC. Right now, I bank at BNP and BoA. When in Germany, I use the DB ATM.

FL

I do some banking at HKSB.

American banks dont serm to much do acronyms.

I always find it humorous when Atheists take a dig at religion as the problem.
The fact is, the blights of religion are always mentioned.

I don't care where you fall on this issue
Fact is, if the religious movement of New Atheists (I think it an important distinction to be made) like Dawkins had their way, I fear Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc would all be rounded up.
I'm familiar with venom in people, and Dawkins has lots. Secular ideology is definitely not liberalising, but quite scary if you look at history. Truly bigoted.

Kurieuo wrote:I always find it humorous when Atheists take a dig at religion as the problem.
The fact is, the blights of religion are always mentioned.

I don't care where you fall on this issue
Fact is, if the religious movement of New Atheists (I think it an important distinction to be made) like Dawkins had their way, I fear Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc would all be rounded up.
I'm familiar with venom in people, and Dawkins has lots. Secular ideology is definitely not liberalising, but quite scary if you look at history. Truly bigoted.

Looks as if you giving another example of religion being the problem.

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I always find it humorous when Atheists take a dig at religion as the problem.
The fact is, the blights of religion are always mentioned.

I don't care where you fall on this issue
Fact is, if the religious movement of New Atheists (I think it an important distinction to be made) like Dawkins had their way, I fear Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc would all be rounded up.
I'm familiar with venom in people, and Dawkins has lots. Secular ideology is definitely not liberalising, but quite scary if you look at history. Truly bigoted.

Looks as if you giving another example of religion being the problem.

Reckon, of a secular variety.