Re: What is wrong with this argument?
From: kathryn (bob_at_bobbybobbobthebobster.com)
Date: 03/27/05
- Next message: kathryn: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Previous message: sttscitrans_at_tesco.net: "Re: Infinitude of Primes proof; most math professors incapable of a clear valid proof Re: duality in physics, not tri-ality, implies that only Riemannian and Lobachevskian geometries exist and that Euclidean is not a geometry"
- Maybe in reply to: Woden: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Next in thread: kathryn: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:14:35 +0000 (UTC)
"The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000@yahoo.ca> wrote in
message news:1111874993.415822.226320@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> What is wrong with saying that God works in Mysterious ways?
There is no god
Something that doesn't exist cannot work in anyway let alone mysteriously
- Next message: kathryn: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Previous message: sttscitrans_at_tesco.net: "Re: Infinitude of Primes proof; most math professors incapable of a clear valid proof Re: duality in physics, not tri-ality, implies that only Riemannian and Lobachevskian geometries exist and that Euclidean is not a geometry"
- Maybe in reply to: Woden: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Next in thread: kathryn: "Re: What is wrong with this argument?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
