Re: TOBS: WDDK
From: Spartacus (J_at_rogers.com)
Date: 10/05/04
- Next message: Jabriol: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Previous message: Elmer Bataitis: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- In reply to: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Next in thread: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Reply: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 17:05:24 -0400
>
> >Cameras produce a flat two dimentional rendition.
>
> So do your eyes.
More semantics... We're binocular aren't we? Do you see things in
3 dimentions or two? And how does a camera render it?
>
>
> >i.e. birds don't need air ports or runways...
>
> And none are supersonic or carry tons of cargo.
Yes, this has so changed my life... There are advantages
and disadvantages to everything...
>
> >Those with eye afflictions don't represeent the average.
>
> I sure see a lot of optometrist's stores around.
Always jam packed are they? My eyes aren't great but I can
get by under most circumstances without wearing them. Lots
of people who wear glasses can... Glasses don't necessarily
mean blindness.
>
> > Film has a specific ISO rating. Your eyes adapt
> >over a wide range of ISO to accomodate fpr either light or darkness.
>
> But not over as wide a range as some optical systems.
Your confusing an optical system with film which continues to collect light
as long as the shutter remains open.
> >
> >That's cuz you don't facts when they're presented to you!
>
> "I don't facts"?
You're intelligent... Fill in the blanks...
>
> > Why would I lie?
>
> You don't have to lie to be wrong, just mistaken.
I'm mistaken to marvel at human anatomy? Or cuz I disagree with your
conception
of The Bible? Or both? What would you suggest then? That I just lay down and
rot?
>
> >Plus you make hastey decisions about what kind of person you think I am.
>
> For example?
That I'm ignorant, close minded, unable to understand you cuz I'm just
another brainwashed
and feable minded creationist... You don't know me; what I'm capable to
understand or not.
>
> >
> >The "nut fringe" line seems to vary from time to time.
>
> Agreed. Nut fringers dispute each other as often as they dispute
> mainstream science. There! See? You've managed a truth!
So you agree all you'll get back is flack? Maybe we're getting somewhere
after all... Sure...
Science ant Technology provide all kinds of answers and more as time goes
on; for those who
can afford the price tag! Everyone else can go fish... What good is
immortality in a world that
finds your very existance problematic? This is achievement for us? My slum
lord will be so
pleased I don't kick before rent date... For all he knows, Man is a major
screw up...
>
> >I came here to have my belief in God and His son reconfirmed
> >and established, in good faith!
>
> And, to some degree, I came to have my disbelief in your concept of
> God and his son confirmed, but not as a matter of faith. I don't use
> faith.
Opposite reasons... Imagine...
>
> >It's not enough that Winesses and Ex-Witnesses might argue
> >amoungst themselves, but you have to further compound the
> >issue by slopping all over The Bible!
>
> One of the reasons for my disbelief is that very arguing among the
> "Witnesses" and the cause of most of it is the Bible.
If you want to twist it to The WTS rendition, yes... That doesn't mean
The Bible isn't usefull or is rendered invalid. Some Witnesses attempt
to follow it in spite of the enormous limitations The WTS imposses on
them. If you'd ever been a Witness, you'd know this. Were's your successful
discussions with Witnesses via your approach? I'd like to see them.
>
> >I haven't been alotted the time to banter indefinately... Or maybe
> > I just don't value being so right all the time as consistently as you
do.
>
> You don't value truth?
Caught in a loop of disagreement? This is truth?
>
> >At least I don't go to a Mechanic and tell him I have
> >Drywall experience!
>
> What are you seeking to imply with that analogy?
That your posts are cross posted. This is alt.religion. jehovah's witn...
Not alt. biology,
alt.creationism, sci.bio, paleontology, sci.anthropology or any other ology.
It just brings
in more arguers, more critisisms, more hate mail, more junk... I'm sick of
whenever I
find an NG, this is always the case. A lot of people are!
>
> >I look for reasons to bring people together.
>
> Even if you use untruths to do so? The end justifies the means?
What untruths? That people should agree on something without sighting little
flaws
as big ones? That freedom of expression must always be bantered with...
Always
looking for wrong? To make "what" right? That believing in God makes you an
automatic, first class idiot? Did I ever say I disagreed with science or
refuse to
discuss it? No... It's all the bring down that goes with it...
>
> >You look for reasons to divide and seperate them.
>
> Now who's making hasty decisions about what kind of person someone
> else is? I can think of no other factor in human society more divisive
> than religion.
And you're here to see to it that this continues cuz The Bible's full of
such
BS? If this is your contention, what do you expect from this NG? These
are people that believe at least that God sent his son to earth on our
behalf.
Do you believe this?
>
> >I'd encourage but you belittle.
>
> You encourage untruth and I belittle it. Yes.
I said I would encourge them to speak but can't... They're too busy telling
you
and your supporters to go home and comb your monkey's hair! You made a good
impression all right. Stop with the favoures already. It's killing any
attempt to reach
them at all... Like I said. Cross posters ruin NGs...
>
> >Start tayloring your posts
> >in the appropriate NGs and then talk to me about nut fringes...
>
> I am in the appropriate newsgroup for the subject. I have no idea
> which one you are in so how can I trim if that could result in
> trimming my response so you never see it?
By entering the appropriate NG with the appropriate reasoning to do so. You
can't find
a thing to agree with and think this will get them to listen to you? They
give them egos
the size of Buicks and getting their backs up is the answer? All righty
then...
>
> >> > as some Internet vigil anti seeking to dominate and destroy!
> >>
> >> Well it is an internet vigil in a way. I'm a vigilante against
> >> Creationist lies and fundamentalist theology.
Perpetrated by Witnesses who police Witnesses and run to elders with the
juicy details;
By the GB which dictates the course of a Witnesses life from start to
finish... Had The
WTS followed biblical concepts properly in the first place, I wouldn't even
be here...
> >
> >Knowing the fundamentals can get you places.
>
> Fundamentalism isn't a matter of knowing the fundamentals of anything.
>
> >That's a step up from blind acceptance!
>
> On the contrary, fundamentalism IS blind acceptance.
It comes out to that... Yes... I thought putting others before myself,
learning to instill
a value system and give my family direction I thought was Bible based would
help to
cement a lasting relationship and help me appreciate what wonders God would
be
so pleased with and shower blessings on me... Boy, was I wrong! Give, give,
give...
That's all I did... In return, the only witness I have left is that of
watching body parts
drop off; all that I ever had, wiped out and all that I ever was, completely
alien to me.
>
> >It's not what's taught in The Bible that's at question here.
>
> It is in my newsgroups (alt.bible, alt.religion, alt.talk.creationism)
Well yes... Kind of... I didn't expect to come here and spill my guts to
1800 other
individuals that can't associate with the witness problem or really give a
rats *ss about it.
So every curmudgeon this side of Idaho will be taking their shot. If you
have any NG
experience, you know that too. This is getting too long and drawn for now...
Anyway,
you don't sound vindictive or anything... That's a plus... Address something
to this NG
only, and I'll be more able and willing to answer you without inciting
withdrawl.
>
>
- Next message: Jabriol: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Previous message: Elmer Bataitis: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- In reply to: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Next in thread: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Reply: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|