>
>How would you go about finding "evidence" for the non-existence of
>anything?
Contrary to my Religious upbringing, I came to ponder why God would give us
a brain, yet not expect us to use it (regarding, say, Southern Baptists and
their obey no matter what, question not, etc etc.)
Then there's the mother down here who not only lets her kid drink, but all
the kid's friends know they can come to that house and drink. And they
leave her house in their cars, and several of them won't be graduating now.
>The onus is on the advocate of something to provide
>evidence of its existence.
The existence of 40Hundred faiths puzzles me endlessly. As in, Jews make
nothing of Jesus, yet Christians make all of Him.
I seriously can't decide what's worse; this sniper, or the priests'
problems. The sniper isn't necessarily worse, because how many of those
kids may wind up killing themselves over stress.
>It's called 'the burden of proof."
You get my point
Oh, and vaguely unrelated, Mr. Richard Jewell is no longer a police chief in
a local burg.
Oddly, one paper said it was undisclosed. The other local rag, which I
disagree with, published the entire memo of reprimand and what the reason
was. Ought to be personal. Anyway, to the effect that he could not get
along with co workers and it was just not working out.
>Without positive evidence or with evidence that is explainable within
>the context of what is already known, the null hypothesis must be
>accepted.
At the same time, the wacked way my life has gone, I am convinced I didn't
get out of all my tight spots all by myself, and without non physical help
. . . too many amazing seeming coincidences.
Curious.
>One can always say "maybe this or maybe that" just as one
>can say there are very small whales living on the moon.
My main point here, never mind the world and states I no longer live in,
Atlanta is going the same way. News here would REALLY get you irritated.
that's an ultimate reality, which is what caused my opening comments above.
>I can't prove
>there aren't but I'm not about to give any credibility to the idea.
I don't pass it on, because it's unnecessary, but there have been
countless episodes of animal abuse involving microwaves. Murdering
mothers, with the latest starting a new job, taking her BABY with her,
parking her car on the ROOF of the parking deck, and well, it was a
typical hot Atlanta day.
What percent of feuding is between faiths? How can this make sense is the
Omnipotent Being is about love, but these people kill each other without a
thought over possessions.
>I
>am Acetacen with respect to the moon.
Yeah, and not to mention the sudden increased frequency of grown people just
mowing down brats?
And old taliban guy who tells his people they'll get 47 virgins in heaven
for destroying peoples. The utter perversion.
>>
>> All bullshit aside, the apparent theological contradictions do not negate
>> the existance of God, in the context of the discussed worldview or under
any
>> metaphysical outlook.
>
>No, they just negate the validity of the book in which they are
>written.
>
Not to be flippant, but another reason I'm glad I don't have any of these
books. Less to
worry about.
mk5000
"Aspirational rather than everyday-wearable. Suave rather than fun.
And that is the fundamental problem. Shopping for men's clothes can be
incredibly dull, not an adjective you could reasonably attach to the
Topshop experience. For many men, shopping is a means to an end, not an end
in itself.
--Gareth McLean
The Guardian
