Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin

From: David Iain Greig (greig_at_ediacara.org)
Date: 12/27/04 

Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:54:49 +0000 (UTC)

George Hammond <nowhere@nomailspam.net> wrote:
>
> "stew dean" <stewart@webslave.dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1104084862.136866.184680@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>
>
>> > > Anyway let me ask my question again.
>> > >
>> > > Using your theory how do I prove the existance of god?
>> > > Or perhaps this question is too trivial?
>> >
>> > [Hammond]
>> > No the question is too tongue in cheek for me to bother with.
>> >
>> > The SPOG *IS* a scientific proof of God.
>> >
>> > 1. You don't need to "use" Newton's theory to prove F=ma,
>> > it *IS* a proof that F=ma
>>
>> You are saying a theory is proof of it's self. This is known as a
>> tautalogy. It is not how science works - something you should be aware
>> of. You are saying X is because X is.
>
> [Hammond]
> Hey ***... Hammond's God=G_uv is a PROVEN DISCOVERY,
> it is not a "theory".... I only use the word "theory" as a bend over
> backwards
> pandering to ignorant halfass pedants like you.

George, did you understand science better before you went insane
all those years ago? The scientist I suspect you once were would
really be horrified to see what sort of howling madman you've
turned into. I'm sorry for him.

I think we're all very, very sorry for you. I just wanted to say
that when we make fun of your insanity, it's not his fault, and
that I hope whatever is left of him inside you, staring out in
horror, understands that.

I understand some of the medications you could take to control
your problems can have bad side effects. Hopefully you're
somewhere safe and warm this winter, and not roaming the streets.

--D.