You have got to be kidding right? all i asked was that you applied the same requirements for gravity and the belief in god and you came up with Nothing , Nada, zilch...You can show me the 'effects' of gravity but little else....I can show you the effects of God but you won;lt accept that right?
Could have sworn this was you....insulting, and avoiding the questions, and then proving my point that all you can show is the *effects* of gravity...
love is a molecule. or partly so. we can say this but anything more is PURE SPEC. and you know how fallible pure spec can be. i dont care what "faith" or "love" represents to you.. your fantasies and foibles have no meaning to me.. as mine have none to you. now, if you have something more to show me (us) [something along a rational line] than residual childhood dreams,, we are waiting.. ahhh but alas all we have is your faith in your "faith". what a disappointment, and you speak so confidently.. sigh. :-/
TM: >You have got to be kidding right? About what?...your lies and fabrications? It matters not a whit whether I'm kidding or serious...they remain on the record. >all i asked was that you applied the same >requirements for gravity and the belief in god >and you came up with Nothing , Nada, zilch... You describe this call for a test as "Nothing, Nada, zilch..."? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=433583#post433583 In that thread I totally accept the notion that both should be tested by applying the same criteria. LET'S GO!!!!!! >You can show me the 'effects' of gravity but >little else....I can show you the effects of God >but you won;lt accept that right? As I continue to state and you continue to ignore... >I (and all of those of like mind that I know) would >happily believe in god if the evidence of his effects >even *remotely* approached the repeatable, predicable >nature of gravity. That's from previous post of mine BTW (do you even read the posts on this thread?) Why do you continue to insist that my position is different from the one that is stated here on the record? JB
TM: >Show me a picture of Gravity.... Again TM: >Could have sworn this was you....insulting, >and avoiding the questions, There is no question there to avoid TM -- there is only a command. Do you just enjoy looking foolish with your assertions? JB
what is god? care to define her? is she in your image? what is nature of this "god" or yours.. i doubt you will or can.. we shall see :-/
Your doing it again...You avoid the question and then throw out insults....It seems like that is all your capable of doing....Why is that?
Oh baby, pretty baby Oh honey, you let me down honey I ain't playin' childhood games no more I said it's time for me to even the score So stake your claim, your claim to fame But baby call another name When you feel the fire, and taste the flame Back off, back off bitch Down in the gutter dyin' in the ditch You better back off, back off bitch Face of an angel with the love of a witch Back off, back off bitch Back off, back off bitch
I guess he does want to look foolish by calling a command a question. I'll let him. JB PS. just let it be known that if there was a question there to answer, I'd answer it.