Quote:I will actively pursue terse verse in the future. How's that?

Terrific.

Oh,it's perfectly Ok to piss people as long as you don't break forum rules.

Having people disagree ,no matter how bluntly, will hopefully get you to think and improve your skills of argument. Being ignored is far more insulting. That's why I avoid addressing our resident apologists directly.


Nah,I haven't assumed you're female, just very young and still working things out. At 18-25 I thought I knew a lot of stuff,if not everything. At 64 I am constantly stunned at the depth of my ignorance. Of course that doesn't stop me from having and expressing opinions on just about anything. I do with the realisation that most of my views are probably wrong or incomplete.

(February 26, 2012 at 8:47 pm)padraic Wrote:

Quote:I will actively pursue terse verse in the future. How's that?

Terrific.

Oh,it's perfectly Ok to piss people as long as you don't break forum rules.

Having people disagree ,no matter how bluntly, will hopefully get you to think and improve your skills of argument. Being ignored is far more insulting. That's why I avoid addressing our resident apologists directly.


Nah,I haven't assumed you're female, just very young and still working things out. At 18-25 I thought I knew a lot of stuff,if not everything. At 64 I am constantly stunned at the depth of my ignorance. Of course that doesn't stop me from having and expressing opinions on just about anything. I do with the realisation that most of my views are probably wrong or incomplete.

It was actually Rhythm that referred to me as a "Her".

I'm 63. I'm retired from a highly scientific and technical career. In the last few years of active employment I taught college physics. I really miss those days. In fact, I'd still be teaching today if it wasn't for health problems that forced me to retire.

I've heard every apologetic argument that I can imagine over the course of my life. There's only so far a dead horse can be beaten. Christianity cannot be salvaged even by the most dedicated believer. In fact, Isaac Newton was actually attempting to salvage the religion when he finally concluded that it's not salvageable. I basically did the very same thing even before I had learned that Isaac Newton had already done it.

There isn't much I don't know about the sciences either. I understand the theories, and under what circumstances they are believed to be true, and upon which premises they depend. I also fully understand that all theories are ultimately dependent upon a belief in specific underlying axioms and premises, most of which are themselves unprovable.

Finally, other than my extreme rejection of the Hebrew fables, I do not make absolute statements about much of anything, other than to perhaps convey what is actually accepted by modern day science.

I don't have an agenda to 'push magic'. In fact, that very notion has been pushed onto me by the false assumptions of other people. Mostly what they object to really has nothing at all to do with me or my position on things, but rather it has to do with their very own delusions of what they imagine my position to be.

However, I do confess that my definition for "Wiccan" in my sig file probably contributes to that. That's just intended as comedy, but I'm sure that some people take it seriously.

Ok, sorry for the wall of information, but without writing it in bullet form that was about as terse as I could get.

My bad, thought you were a her, no disrespect intended. It's not your sig, and the notion wasn't pushed on you, I can link your many posts if you like. You argued for magic, no one made you argue for magic. This is why I criticize your arguments for magic.

Quote:There isn't much I don't know about the sciences either.

Really. I certainly didn't spot that. From your posts I had assumed an autodidact,not a university trained scientist. I guess that will teach me to make assumptions. (OK probably not)

Quote:Ok, sorry for the wall of information, but without writing it in bullet form that was about as terse as I could get.

That's what I figured.To me that suggests an undisciplined mind

(February 26, 2012 at 9:41 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You argued for magic, no one made you argue for magic.

No. no. I argued for my concepts and definition of magick.

You demanded Harry Potter magic and so forth. I even attempted to explain to you that if you check out various views on things such as Wicca you will clearly see that even within those communities it's very rare to find two people who have the same idea on what they mean by 'magic'.

So you're arguing against Harry Potter magic. Fine. Go argue with Harry Potter then.

You say I piss you off, but I'm the one who should be upset that you demand that I become whatever you imagine me to be. That should piss me off.

But, like Jesus, I forgive you for you know not what the fuck you do.

Your concepts and definitions of magic range from whimsical misuse of language (and misrepresentation of science) to exactly the same type of magic as Harry Potter nonsense. Whether or not two people can agree on the specifics of a fairy tale isn't my problem.

Like Jesus, you speak directly from your ass.

(February 26, 2012 at 9:58 pm)padraic Wrote:

Quote:Ok, sorry for the wall of information, but without writing it in bullet form that was about as terse as I could get.

That's what I figured.To me that suggests an undisciplined mind

• So
  
• To
  
• Demonstrate
  
• A
  
• Disciplined
  
• Mind
  
• I
  
• Need
  
• To
  
• Speak
  
• In
  
• Bullets?
  

Next, you're be asking me to speak in tongues.

---

(February 26, 2012 at 10:20 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Like Jesus, you speak directly from your ass.

• I used to own horses, but I never owned an ass.
  
  
• I know Jesus rode an ass.
  
  
• But didn't he get off his ass when he preached?
  
  
• I don't recall reading about the "Sermon on the Mounted Ass".
  

Classic sign of someone who's run out of things to say - going from one extreme to the other simply to take the piss.

Quote:So
To
Demonstrate
A
Disciplined
Mind
I
Need
To
Speak
In
Bullets?

Don't be fatuous. That YOU are incapable of expressing yourself clearly and succinctly does not mean it cannot be done.At present,your posts tend to be neither. Regardless of reason,people here will not read walls of text,at least until you establish some credibility. I really,truly don't care, if you simply can't, I'll simply ignore you. You're too hard,can't be bothered.

(February 26, 2012 at 10:45 pm)padraic Wrote: Don't be fatuous. That YOU are incapable of expressing yourself clearly and succinctly does not mean it cannot be done.At present,your posts tend to be neither. Regardless of reason,people here will not read walls of text,at least until you establish some credibility. I really,truly don't care, if you simply can't, I'll simply ignore you. You're too hard,can't be bothered.

Well, most of my posts have been aimed at Christian proselytizers and apologists. They clearly eat up ever single word. There can be no question that they do this because they break up my quotes responding to every paragraph I write.

When speaking to them it makes sense to repeat the same points over and over again in many different ways.

In fact, if I wanted to be concise I could just do the following, then log off, and be finished:

• The Old Testament has no more merit than Greek Mythology.
  
• Jesus could not have been the demigod Son of the God of Abraham.
  
• Jesus clearly disagreed with the immoral teachings of the Torah
  
• Jesus was most likely a misunderstood Jewish Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva.
  
• The New Testament is riddled with blatant irresolvable contradictions.
  
• The New Testament is most likely nothing more than absurd superstitious rumors
  

Do you think they'll buy that?

(that is a nice looking post) Maybe I should start talking that way.