Can we agree that you misquoted me. I didn't write that.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Betelgeuse" wrote in message
news On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:


As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.



We finally agree on something

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/17/2012 3:56 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/16/2012 10:51 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 10:23 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 9:44 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Harry K" wrote in message
...


On Jan 14, 2:26 am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 13, 10:34 pm, Harry K wrote:





On Jan 13, 10:43 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:35 am, Tony Miklos
wrote:

On 1/13/2012 10:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 8:27 am, Tony
wrote:

Hey! The bible was written by the same people who said
the
earth was
flat. It's got to be true!

You're showing your ignorance. Genesis/Creation refers to
the
"Great
Dome" of the Earth (its atmosphere).

Now you are showing your ignorance. A dome is not the same
as a
sphere
A dome would refer to the atmosphere of a flat Earth. The
bottom of a
dome would be flat.

Your interpretation...hope you don't choke on it!

He won't because he is correct.

"Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome

A dome is a structural element of architecture that resembles
the
hollow upper half of a sphere..."

Harry K

Your explanation didn't say anything about the flat base
though...did
it?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what part of "top half" did you miss? Clue: the bottom would be
flat.n It it isn't clear enought, grab a ball and cut it in half.


NOPE
What if your "platform is NOT through the center of the sphere ?
Would the curved part be less of a "dome" for all that ?
Funny how doing a search for "geodesic dome" brings your pictures
of
partial and COMPLETE spheres...

http://www.google.com/search?q=geode...w=1050&bih=581





No one here described the atmosphere as a geodesic dome, try the
definition of dome silly.

Whooosh.
So tell me, can you actually hear the sound made by a concept that
goes
in of your ears, out the other and never slows down in between ?
Or are we talking about vacuum between your ears ?

A geodesic "dome" IS a "dome, silly
So if a geodesic dome happens to be more or less than "half a
sphere",
is it less of a "Dome" for all that ??

A dome by definition is NOT restricted to the curved form of
HALF of a sphere
as originally claimed
It would be the inside or outside curved surface ANYWHERE between
1 = "sphere" 0

It is also NOT depended on the shape of any base that the sphere
may be
attached to, or apparently resting on.


Draw a picture of the spherical earth we live on with a domed
atmosphere around it and post a link.


LOL
Here's something easier to do
Get yourself on a boat in the middle of the ocean, with no land in
sight
Look around you and tell us that the atmosphere does not form a dome
around you, with the ocean as the flat base.
Then tell yourself the atmosphere above you, or the earth under you is
no a sphere.


Of course is would look that way, that's why back then they thought
the earth was flat. It sounds like you don't know it, but you are
agreeing with me. If not, go ahead and draw that picture I asked, I'd
love to see it.

You can always hope that I agree with your flawed and circular logic
But it ain't going to happen soon.

As to your picture.
I leave that for those who are still in childish thought processes and
need pictures


It's sad when one can't admit when they can't do something. I've decided
not to read your rubbish anymore, goodbye.


I'm even sadder to see an idiot unable to grasp a simple concept difference
like between "can't" and "won't".
Or the fact that a dome is NOT the flat part, if there is one.

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/17/2012 3:57 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/16/2012 10:54 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 9:46 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Bob_Villa" wrote in message
...


On Jan 14, 12:10 pm, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 14, 2:26 am, Bob_Villa wrote:









On Jan 13, 10:34 pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:43 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:35 am, Tony Miklos
wrote:

On 1/13/2012 10:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 8:27 am, Tony
wrote:

Hey! The bible was written by the same people who said
the
earth was
flat. It's got to be true!

You're showing your ignorance. Genesis/Creation refers to
the "Great
Dome" of the Earth (its atmosphere).

Now you are showing your ignorance. A dome is not the
same as
a sphere
A dome would refer to the atmosphere of a flat Earth. The

bottom of a
dome would be flat.

Your interpretation...hope you don't choke on it!

He won't because he is correct.

"Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome

A dome is a structural element of architecture that resembles
the
hollow upper half of a sphere..."

Harry K

Your explanation didn't say anything about the flat base
though...did
it?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what part of "top half" did you miss? Clue: the bottom would be
flat.n It it isn't clear enought, grab a ball and cut it in half.

Harry K

Top half, right...of a sphere!

Does not even have to be "half"
If you stand on the inside wall of a sphere, everything that
surrounds
you is effectively a "dome".


Now you describe being inside the earth looking out.

NO stupid
I'm talking about the atmosphere


Please draw a picture of the earth we live on with a dome for our
atmosphere and post a link.

Simpler still
Get your stupid lazy ass on a boat in the middle of a sea with no land
in sight
And then tell yourself that the atmosphere that forms a dome above you,
or the ocean forming the flat base under in are not part of the
planetary sphere.


Yes it would look that way, that's why they thought the earth was
flat. If you want to argue, stop agreeing with me.


Too bad you're so stupid that you imagine I agree with you
Ah well.


Too bad you have to resort to name calling. I guess that's what your god
wants you to do. Goodbye.


Hey, I thought you already said goodbye earlier.
As to your stupid presumption about "my god", well, hey, that's just part
of all your other stupid presumptions

Don't let the door slam your ass as you scuttle out.

There you go being stupid a

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 5:50 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Betelgeuse" wrote in message

news
On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

We finally agree on something

I always love the logic of those that claim that evidence SHOULD exist
And that the absence of such evidence, is magically proof of something
else.

Absence of evidence is just that and nothing more
ABSENCE of EVIDENCE.
The ONLY thing it proves is that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.

Apparently this concept is far too complex for some of the dolts of the
planet.

So the lack of any world wide layer of mud dated to only about 6,000
years ago is not evidence there was no Ye Floode?


Yes
1) What makes you imagine that it's 6000 years ago ??
2) What makes you imagine that over millennia of tectonic and glacial
activity such a layer would be preserved ?

If the idiots come up with false premises, it follows that the idiots
conclusions are also false.



The presence of ice cores from the Arctic and Antarctic going back
over 100,000 years is positive evidence that Ye Floode never
happened. To point out the obviouse - ice floats, there shuld have
been no ice cores going back more than about 6,000 years.


You mean, it didn't happen in the last 100,000 years
OK, I'll buy it with THAT correction
Now then how old is the planet ??
100,000 years old ?
Or much older ??
Which means that again you are limited by your dataset.

False premise = false conclusion.


Then there is the biggee.

1. Where did all that water come from? Approximately 5 miles deep
would have been needed. Don't even try the old "canopy" crap. That
is impossible by the laws of physics on so many fronts. To start with
the earth would have been in total darkness prior to the flood. Don't
even try the "the mountains weren't as high. The amount and rate of
mountain building that would be needed afterward wouild have rndered
the entire earth uninhability for centuries.


We'll let's see.
Make the planet flatter without the deep trenches or the tall mountains.
Melt all the ice
Oops
All of a sudden it's quite possible to have a planet covered in water.
Not to mention all that Global Warming **** telling us that we'll soon drown
from all the ice melting..



2. Where did it go?

Why have none of the expeditions retruned with hard evidence that
tehre is an ark on that mountain? No, the wood that has been produced
was tested and found to be far too young. Alllthe rest of the
'evidence' you people put ofrth is nothing but stories. "we saw, I
found, etc" and oddly not even one picture even of the "we found"


Following 1), trigger some tectonic activity
Ocean trenches and mountains form.
Big fat honking valleys to keep the water from the high ground.
Just like these days..

You guys can now return to your usual kindergarten insults.


Maybe you should just go back to kindergarten and restart your education...
Put some emphasis on logical thinking and the dangers of makes stupid
assumptions when you reach the high school level.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 12:54 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:35 am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:39 pm, Harry K wrote:

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can 'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

Harry K

Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. (you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. I know because I was there!

It may be a "leap" of faith...but it is a kinder, gentler place to be.

Well, goody for you. I prefer to stick to science rather than myths.

Maybe you need to do some reading
Try "The Science of God" by Gerald Schroeder
Then go on to some of his other works
At least, it might make you think- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. If you
actually _did_ any thinking you wouild recognize the foundation of
quicksand the bibible is built on.


So you don't even know who Gerald Schroeder is, and summarily dismiss what
he has to say...
Mmmm
Such a CLEAR demonstration of an open mind and intellectual curiosity.
Apparently you are so scared of a different point-of-view, that you avoid it
like the plague.
In other words, what you really mean is that you only stick to what already
fits your preconceptions, prejudices and bigoted point-of-view

Got it.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 12:52 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and evidence.
Lack of evidence is not evidence

So point out some of the evidence we accept that you think isn't
evidence or a fact.

The whole circular argument that since theists can not prove the
existence
of God by actually pointing at God, therefore there is no God

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

Funny how there're all kinds of Geological evidence that raises the
possibility of a Great Flood- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, trot some out and we will discuss it.


Google is your friend
I'll leave you to do your own research
Particularly in the context that some other dolt wrote:
"When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. "
Since the Great Flood qualifies as myth by your terms, clearly it's not
going to get much of your limited attention.

If you actually _did_ any thinking you would recognize the foundation of
quicksand the bibible is built on.

The bible is not "built" on ANYTHING, you idiot.
The bible is an oral history.
As such, it has inconsistencies that ANY intelligent honest person can
recognize.
The idiots who intentionally try to interpret the Bible literally, from
EITHER side of the argument, are just trying to manipulate things for their
own agendas
It's called INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY in most circles
Recognize yourself there, bub ?

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is
that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and evidence.
Lack of evidence is not evidence

Lack of evidence is the great stumbling block for all theists. There
isn't any evidence that even Jesus ever existed.


That's right
Too bad Jesus wasn't trapped in silt deposits to satisfy some idiots
On the other hand, there were the people who knew him.
There is a unbroken connection to those people.

But hey, since there was no OFFICIAL record available, that means it just
myth.
By that same toke, Julius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, Alexander the Great,
are all just myths as well.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 4:52 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
The Mormon approach is never to debate. Because debate brings anger,
which
drives the Spirit away. Now, if a church represents Satan, that's fine.
But,
a church of Christ should do as the Mormons do. Teach correct principles,
and invite others to follow.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Harry K" wrote in message



And I suppose all those proselytizers that I can't get to leave from
my front porch with a simple "not interested" are examples of that?
I have learned that the ony way to cut the "debate" short is outright
insult at the beginning. They will not take a simple "no".


Funny
I never had a problem telling them courteously that I'm not interested,

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 4:15 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 16, 7:39 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al Goar
wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry

wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Jack wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to
tithe
the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and
you
would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never
heard
one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

You need to read what Blaise Pascal, the father of Probabilities and
Statistics, had to say about belief in God
It's called Pascal's Wager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep. It ties in with the theists usual threat "Believe...OR ELSE!".
A **** poor reason to believe in anything.

Funny how that sillyness is alaways a fall back argument for some
There's no threat except in paranoid minds.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.


The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a mountain
should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those rigidly
encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?

On Jan 18, 6:25*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:15 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

....

On Jan 16, 7:39 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al Goar
wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry

wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
*wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Jack *wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to
tithe
the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and
you
would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never
heard
one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

You need to read what Blaise Pascal, the father of Probabilities and
Statistics, had to say about belief in God
It's called Pascal's Wager
* *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep. *It ties in with the theists usual threat "Believe...OR ELSE!".
A **** poor reason to believe in anything.

Funny how that sillyness is alaways a fall back argument for some
* * There's no threat except in paranoid minds.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I lost a post from I think it was you. *Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. *Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.

The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a mountain
should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
* * Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those rigidly
encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparantly you are one of those creatinists incapable of learining
learning _anything_ even when you are spoon fed. Re-read why those
fossils could not be due to flood and then learn about tectonic place
activity and what builds mountains. It is all known science and most
of it has been known for over 150 years.

You don't even have to take my word for it. Just do a bit of
googling....oops sorry, I forgot that real science scares the crap out
of you.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 4:27*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
You sure those are Mormons, and not Jehovas Witnesses? Ask them for some
literature, and let me know what the literature says.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Harry K" wrote in message

...
On Jan 17, 4:52 am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
The Mormon approach is never to debate. Because debate brings anger, which
drives the Spirit away. Now, if a church represents Satan, that's fine.
But,
a church of Christ should do as the Mormons do. Teach correct principles,
and invite others to follow.

And I suppose all those proselytizers that I can't get to leave from
my front porch with a simple "not interested" *are examples of that?
I have learned that the ony way to cut the "debate" short is outright
insult at the beginning. *They will not take a simple "no".

Harry K

JVs doe not dress all in black and they don't id themselves as
Mormons. Youwant their literature? It is your churck, go ask them
for it. I jsut ran two of them off about a month ago rudely enough
that I hope my address is on the 'do not call' list...at least with
JVs when I do that it holds for about 6-8 years before I am bothered
again.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 6:23*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:52 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
The Mormon approach is never to debate. Because debate brings anger,
which
drives the Spirit away. Now, if a church represents Satan, that's fine..
But,
a church of Christ should do as the Mormons do. Teach correct principles,
and invite others to follow.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Harry K" wrote in message

And I suppose all those proselytizers that I can't get to leave from
my front porch with a simple "not interested" *are examples of that?
I have learned that the ony way to cut the "debate" short is outright
insult at the beginning. *They will not take a simple "no".

Funny
I never had a problem telling them courteously that I'm not interested,- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of coruse not, you are a fellow believer and like to 'debate' religion
with them.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 4:33*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Tony Miklos" wrote in message

...





On 1/17/2012 3:57 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/16/2012 10:54 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 9:46 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Bob_Villa" wrote in message
...

On Jan 14, 12:10 pm, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 14, 2:26 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:34 pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:43 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:35 am, Tony Miklos
wrote:

On 1/13/2012 10:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 8:27 am, Tony
wrote:

Hey! The bible was written by the same people who said
the
earth was
flat. It's got to be true!

You're showing your ignorance. Genesis/Creation refers to
the "Great
Dome" of the Earth (its atmosphere).

Now you are showing your ignorance. A dome is not the
same as
a sphere
A dome would refer to the atmosphere of a flat Earth. The

bottom of a
dome would be flat.

Your interpretation...hope you don't choke on it!

He won't because he is correct.

"Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome

A dome is a structural element of architecture that resembles
the
hollow upper half of a sphere..."

Harry K

Your explanation didn't say anything about the flat base
though...did
it?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what part of "top half" did you miss? Clue: the bottom would be
flat.n It it isn't clear enought, grab a ball and cut it in half..

Harry K

Top half, right...of a sphere!

Does not even have to be "half"
If you stand on the inside wall of a sphere, everything that
surrounds
you is effectively a "dome".

Now you describe being inside the earth looking out.

NO stupid
I'm talking about the atmosphere

Please draw a picture of the earth we live on with a dome for our
atmosphere and post a link.

Simpler still
Get your stupid lazy ass on a boat in the middle of a sea with no land
in sight
And then tell yourself that the atmosphere that forms a dome above you,
or the ocean forming the flat base under in are not part of the
planetary sphere.

Yes it would look that way, that's why they thought the earth was
flat. If you want to argue, stop agreeing with me.

Too bad you're so stupid that you imagine I agree with you
Ah well.

Too bad you have to resort to name calling. *I guess that's what your god
wants you to do. *Goodbye.

Hey, I thought you already said goodbye earlier.
As to your stupid presumption *about "my god", well, hey, that's just part
of all your other stupid presumptions

Don't let the door slam your ass as you scuttle out.

There you go being stupid a- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Did you every grow up past the kindergarten insult stage? Most people
do at least by the 6th grade. I see you haven't matured to that level
yet.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 4:31*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Tony Miklos" wrote in message

...





On 1/17/2012 3:56 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/16/2012 10:51 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 10:23 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 9:44 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Harry K" wrote in message
...

On Jan 14, 2:26 am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 13, 10:34 pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:43 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:35 am, Tony Miklos
wrote:

On 1/13/2012 10:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 8:27 am, Tony
wrote:

Hey! The bible was written by the same people who said
the
earth was
flat. It's got to be true!

You're showing your ignorance. Genesis/Creation refers to
the
"Great
Dome" of the Earth (its atmosphere).

Now you are showing your ignorance. A dome is not the same
as a
sphere
A dome would refer to the atmosphere of a flat Earth. The
bottom of a
dome would be flat.

Your interpretation...hope you don't choke on it!

He won't because he is correct.

"Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome

A dome is a structural element of architecture that resembles
the
hollow upper half of a sphere..."

Harry K

Your explanation didn't say anything about the flat base
though...did
it?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what part of "top half" did you miss? Clue: the bottom would be
flat.n It it isn't clear enought, grab a ball and cut it in half.

NOPE
What if your "platform is NOT through the center of the sphere ?
Would the curved part be less of a "dome" for all that ?
Funny how doing a search for "geodesic dome" brings your pictures
of
partial and COMPLETE spheres...

http://www.google.com/search?q=geode...=imvns&tbm=isc...

No one here described the atmosphere as a geodesic dome, try the
definition of dome silly.

Whooosh.
So tell me, can you actually hear the sound made by a concept that
goes
in of your ears, out the other and never slows down in between ?
Or are we talking about vacuum between your ears ?

A geodesic "dome" IS a "dome, silly
So if a geodesic dome happens to be more or less than "half a
sphere",
is it less of a "Dome" for all that ??

A dome by definition is NOT restricted to the curved form of
HALF of a sphere
as originally claimed
It would be the inside or outside curved surface ANYWHERE between
1 = "sphere" 0

It is also NOT depended on the shape of any base that the sphere
may be
attached to, or apparently resting on.

Draw a picture of the spherical earth we live on with a domed
atmosphere around it and post a link.

LOL
Here's something easier to do
Get yourself on a boat in the middle of the ocean, with no land in
sight
Look around you and tell us that the atmosphere does not form a dome
around you, with the ocean as the flat base.
Then tell yourself the atmosphere above you, or the earth under you is
no a sphere.

Of course is would look that way, that's why back then they thought
the earth was flat. It sounds like you don't know it, but you are
agreeing with me. If not, go ahead and draw that picture I asked, I'd
love to see it.

You can always hope that I agree with your flawed and circular logic
But it ain't going to happen soon.

As to your picture.
I leave that for those who are still in childish thought processes and
need pictures

It's sad when one can't admit when they can't do something. *I've decided
not to read your rubbish anymore, goodbye.

I'm even sadder to see an idiot unable to grasp a simple concept difference
like between "can't" and "won't".
* * Or the fact that a dome is NOT the flat part, if there is one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And to repeat what I, at least, have already said. NOONE EVER SAID IT
WAS. Set up another strawman but be sure you include your usual
kindergarten insults.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 3:25*am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:29*pm, Harry K wrote:





On Jan 17, 11:54*am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:49*pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 17, 4:35*am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 16, 10:39*pm, Harry K wrote:

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can 'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

Harry K

Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. *(you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. *I know because I was there!

It may be a "leap" of faith...but it is a kinder, gentler place to be.

Well, goody for you. *I prefer to stick to science rather than myths.

Harry K

Very mature response.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Far more so than the replies I have been given which boil down to
insults only.

Harry K

Perhaps...but I haven't been doing the insulting. *So...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So that "very mature response" wasn't at least sarchasm if not
outright insult?

And just what do you call this?

"Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. (you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. I know because I was there!"

I jsut have to find that verse in the bible that says it is okay to
lie for jayzuss.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 6:11*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 12:54 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

....

On Jan 17, 4:35 am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:39 pm, Harry K wrote:

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can 'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

Harry K

Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. *(you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. *I know because I was there!

It may be a "leap" of faith...but it is a kinder, gentler place to be.

Well, goody for you. *I prefer to stick to science rather than myths.

Maybe you need to do some reading
* * Try "The Science of God" by Gerald Schroeder
* * Then go on to some of his other works
At least, it might make you think- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. *If you
actually _did_ any thinking you wouild recognize the foundation of
quicksand the bibible is built on.

So you don't even know who Gerald Schroeder is, and summarily dismiss what
he has to say...
Mmmm
Such a CLEAR demonstration of an open mind and intellectual curiosity.
Apparently you are so scared of a different point-of-view, that you avoid it
like the plague.
In other words, what you really mean is that you only stick to what already
fits your preconceptions, prejudices and bigoted point-of-view

Got it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't have to read him to know by the title it will be a rehash of
all the NON scientific crap put out by the ICR, the DI and like
sources. I will read that when it shows up in the science section of
the library;.

"Gerald Schroeder and his New Variation on the - Answers in Genesis"

That says it all.


Harry K

On Jan 18, 5:54*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 5:50 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Betelgeuse" wrote in message

news

On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. *Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

We finally agree on something

I always love the logic of those that claim that evidence SHOULD exist
And that the absence of such evidence, is magically proof of something
else.

Absence of evidence is just that and nothing more
* * ABSENCE of EVIDENCE.
The ONLY thing it proves is that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.

Apparently this concept is far too complex for some of the dolts of the
planet.

So the lack of any world wide layer of mud dated to only about 6,000
years ago is not evidence there was no Ye Floode?

Yes
1) * *What makes you imagine that it's 6000 years ago ??
2) * *What makes you imagine that over millennia of tectonic and glacial
activity such a layer would be preserved *?


So you are among the 10,000 YOA group? If not what is your date for
Ye Floode?

If the idiots come up with false premises, it follows that the idiots
conclusions are also false.

Unless of course the "idiots" find facts and evidence that show their
premises are true. Which is the case.

Denial does not make facts disappear


The presence of ice cores from *the Arctic and Antarctic going back
over 100,000 years is positive evidence that Ye Floode never
happened. *To point out the obviouse - ice floats, *there shuld have
been no ice cores going back more than about 6,000 years.

You mean, it didn't happen in the last 100,000 years
OK, I'll buy it with THAT correction
Now then how old is the planet ??

Per scientific facts, evidence, experiments, study, etc it is over 1
billions years. I know what the real figure is, do you?



* * 100,000 years old *?
* * * * Or much older ??
Which means that again you are limited by your dataset.

Yep, my data set that matches known physical laws, known physical
evidence and stuff that has been known by real science for around 2
centuries now.



False premise = false conclusion.



Then there is the biggee.

1. Where did all that water come from? *Approximately 5 miles deep
would have been needed. *Don't even try the old "canopy" crap. *That
is impossible by the laws of physics on so many fronts. *To start with
the earth would have been in total darkness prior to the flood. *Don't
even try the "the mountains weren't as high. * The amount and rate of
mountain building that would be needed afterward wouild have rndered
the entire earth uninhability for centuries.

We'll let's see.
Make the planet flatter without the deep trenches or the tall mountains.
Melt all the ice
Oops

Oops indeed. I already pointed out that that doesn't work as the
uproar caused by reraising the mountains in 6 or 10 or whatever time
you pick for Ye Flud would render the enitre earth uninhabitable for
millenium.



* * All of a sudden it's quite possible to have a planet covered in water.
Not to mention all that Global Warming **** telling us that we'll soon drown
from all the ice melting..

2. *Where did it go?

Why have none of the expeditions retruned with hard evidence that
tehre is an ark on that mountain? *No, the wood that has been produced
was tested and found to be far too young. *Alllthe rest of the
'evidence' you people put ofrth is nothing but stories. *"we saw, *I
found, etc" and oddly not even one picture even of the "we found"

Following 1), trigger some tectonic activity
Ocean trenches and mountains form.
Big fat honking valleys to keep the water from the high ground.
* * Just like these days..

All in a few thousand years? You do know what happened recently with
tsunamis? And the total change in land was very limited to local
areas and didnt' raise land but a few feet in limited spots.
Translate that into a worlkd wide cataclism raising mountians 5 miles
high.

Not only do you deny facts, you don't even think about the obvious
effects your theories would have. And worse don't even think about
them when they are pointed out to you.

My usual advice: Just say "goddidit" and drop the subject. When you
try to explain it, it makes you look like a total fool...which you
certainly appear to be in this thread.


Harry K

On Jan 18, 4:28*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Can we agree that you misquoted me. I didn't write that.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Betelgeuse" wrote in message

news On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:



As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. *Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

We finally agree on something

?? Youdidn't include whatever that was and I can't find it. I'll look
at it if you repost. I'm assuming you are responding to one of my
posts.

Harry K

On Jan 18, 6:18*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 12:52 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

....

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and evidence..
* * Lack of evidence is not evidence

So point out some of the evidence we accept that you think isn't
evidence or a fact.

The whole circular argument that since theists can not prove the
existence
of God by actually pointing at God, therefore there is no God

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. *Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

Funny how there're all kinds of Geological evidence that raises the
possibility of a Great Flood- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, trot some out and we will discuss it.

Google is your friend
* * I'll leave you to do your own research
Particularly in the context that some other dolt wrote:
* * "When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. *"
Since the Great Flood qualifies as myth by your terms, clearly it's not
going to get much of your limited attention.

If you actually _did_ any thinking you would recognize the foundation of
quicksand the bibible is built on.

The bible is not "built" on ANYTHING, you idiot.
The bible is an oral history.
As such, it has inconsistencies that ANY intelligent honest person can
recognize.
The idiots who intentionally try to interpret the Bible literally, from
EITHER side of the argument, are just trying to manipulate things for their
own agendas
It's called INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY in most circles
* * Recognize yourself there, bub ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I hope you recognize _yourself_. l am quoting known facts, evidence,
etc. and all you are doing (in amongst juvenile insults) is deny,
deny, deny and come out with "maybe this, maybe that" proposing things
that run agains all known science. Stick to 'goddidit'

Harry K

On Jan 18, 6:22*am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is
that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and evidence.
* * Lack of evidence is not evidence

Lack of evidence is the great stumbling block for all theists. *There
isn't any evidence that even Jesus ever existed.

That's right
* * Too bad Jesus wasn't trapped in silt deposits to satisfy some idiots
On the other hand, there were the people who knew him.
There is a unbroken connection to those people.

But hey, since there was no OFFICIAL record available, that means it just
myth.
* * By that same toke, Julius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, Alexander the Great,
are all just myths as well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The difference being that those other people actually left records as
did the people who knew them. Even the puported record of Jesus'
execution sent to Rome was discovered to be a forgery inserted way
after publication of the document it was in.

Considering the uproar Jesus supposedly was causing don't you thinkl
that at leasst _some_ official document about it would exist? Soem
reliable report or it?

Harry K

"Attila.Iskander" writes:

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 4:15 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message
I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.


The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a
mountain should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those
rigidly encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?

Harry is right, sea shells on mountains as the result of a one
year (or 40 day) flood? That's crazy talk.

The shells are up there for a reason but there is no logical
way a flood put them up there.

However there are simple geologic reasons for the shells to be
there. Very well known reasons with multiple lines of evidence
to support those reasons.

Well, I guess I've already qualified as "stupid" so I've said
enough. This is basic high school science folks. Learn a little
about our world. It's pretty interesting.


--
Dan Espen

On Jan 18, 10:21*am, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 18, 3:25*am, Bob_Villa wrote:









On Jan 17, 10:29*pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 17, 11:54*am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:49*pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 17, 4:35*am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 16, 10:39*pm, Harry K wrote:

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can 'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

Harry K

Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. *(you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. *I know because I was there!

It may be a "leap" of faith...but it is a kinder, gentler place to be.

Well, goody for you. *I prefer to stick to science rather than myths.

Harry K

Very mature response.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Far more so than the replies I have been given which boil down to
insults only.

Harry K

Perhaps...but I haven't been doing the insulting. *So...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So that "very mature response" wasn't at least sarcasm if not
outright insult?

And just what do you call this?

"Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. *(you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and feeling
on the subject. *I know because I was there!"

I just have to find that verse in the bible that says it is okay to
lie for jayzuss.

Harry K

Well...it wasn't name calling! And are you saying you lie for Jesus?
(By the way...it's called "The New Testament"). And you won't find
anything about it being okay to lie. People died when all they had to
do was deny Jesus to save themselves.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 4:33 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Tony Miklos" wrote in message

...





On 1/17/2012 3:57 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/16/2012 10:54 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Tony Miklos" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2012 9:46 AM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Bob_Villa" wrote in message
...

On Jan 14, 12:10 pm, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 14, 2:26 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:34 pm, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:43 am, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 10:35 am, Tony Miklos
wrote:

On 1/13/2012 10:53 AM, Bob_Villa wrote:

On Jan 13, 8:27 am, Tony
wrote:

Hey! The bible was written by the same people who
said
the
earth was
flat. It's got to be true!

You're showing your ignorance. Genesis/Creation refers
to
the "Great
Dome" of the Earth (its atmosphere).

Now you are showing your ignorance. A dome is not the
same as
a sphere
A dome would refer to the atmosphere of a flat Earth.
The

bottom of a
dome would be flat.

Your interpretation...hope you don't choke on it!

He won't because he is correct.

"Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome

A dome is a structural element of architecture that
resembles
the
hollow upper half of a sphere..."

Harry K

Your explanation didn't say anything about the flat base
though...did
it?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

what part of "top half" did you miss? Clue: the bottom would be
flat.n It it isn't clear enought, grab a ball and cut it in
half.

Harry K

Top half, right...of a sphere!

Does not even have to be "half"
If you stand on the inside wall of a sphere, everything that
surrounds
you is effectively a "dome".

Now you describe being inside the earth looking out.

NO stupid
I'm talking about the atmosphere

Please draw a picture of the earth we live on with a dome for our
atmosphere and post a link.

Simpler still
Get your stupid lazy ass on a boat in the middle of a sea with no
land
in sight
And then tell yourself that the atmosphere that forms a dome above
you,
or the ocean forming the flat base under in are not part of the
planetary sphere.

Yes it would look that way, that's why they thought the earth was
flat. If you want to argue, stop agreeing with me.

Too bad you're so stupid that you imagine I agree with you
Ah well.

Too bad you have to resort to name calling. I guess that's what your
god
wants you to do. Goodbye.

Hey, I thought you already said goodbye earlier.
As to your stupid presumption about "my god", well, hey, that's just
part
of all your other stupid presumptions

Don't let the door slam your ass as you scuttle out.


Did you every grow up past the kindergarten insult stage? Most people
do at least by the 6th grade. I see you haven't matured to that level
yet.


How could you see anything with your head so solidly planted ?

On 1/18/2012 10:11 AM, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:25 am,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:15 am,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 7:39 pm,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al
wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry

wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Jack wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to
tithe
the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and
you
would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never
heard
one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

You need to read what Blaise Pascal, the father of Probabilities and
Statistics, had to say about belief in God
It's called Pascal's Wager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep. It ties in with the theists usual threat "Believe...OR ELSE!".
A **** poor reason to believe in anything.

Funny how that sillyness is alaways a fall back argument for some
There's no threat except in paranoid minds.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.

The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a mountain
should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those rigidly
encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparantly you are one of those creatinists incapable of learining
learning _anything_ even when you are spoon fed. Re-read why those
fossils could not be due to flood and then learn about tectonic place
activity and what builds mountains. It is all known science and most
of it has been known for over 150 years.

You don't even have to take my word for it. Just do a bit of
googling....oops sorry, I forgot that real science scares the crap out
of you.

Harry K

The believers are not near as scared of science as you are of the truth.

--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 5:54 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 5:50 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Betelgeuse" wrote in message

news

On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

We finally agree on something

I always love the logic of those that claim that evidence SHOULD exist
And that the absence of such evidence, is magically proof of something
else.

Absence of evidence is just that and nothing more
ABSENCE of EVIDENCE.
The ONLY thing it proves is that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.

Apparently this concept is far too complex for some of the dolts of
the
planet.

So the lack of any world wide layer of mud dated to only about 6,000
years ago is not evidence there was no Ye Floode?

Yes
1) What makes you imagine that it's 6000 years ago ??
2) What makes you imagine that over millennia of tectonic and glacial
activity such a layer would be preserved ?


So you are among the 10,000 YOA group? If not what is your date for
Ye Floode?


Wow
From 6000 to 10,000, talking about a planet that's been around for millions
??
You do have a limited horizon.
Must come with the small mind.



If the idiots come up with false premises, it follows that the idiots
conclusions are also false.

Unless of course the "idiots" find facts and evidence that show their
premises are true. Which is the case.


Too bad that still remains to be demonstrated


Denial does not make facts disappear


What facts are those ?
The ones that don't exist that lead you to conclusions based on facts
that don't exist..
Got it...




I'll stop here and leave you chasing your tail like a young pup.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 6:11 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 12:54 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 17, 4:35 am, Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 16, 10:39 pm, Harry K wrote:

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can
'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

Harry K

Actually, that is the point...you gave-up thinking 50 years ago and
assume that thinking was correct. (you have to admit, it is a
stand...and you don't cross the line) You cut-off reason and
feeling
on the subject. I know because I was there!

It may be a "leap" of faith...but it is a kinder, gentler place to
be.

Well, goody for you. I prefer to stick to science rather than
myths.

Maybe you need to do some reading
Try "The Science of God" by Gerald Schroeder
Then go on to some of his other works
At least, it might make you think- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. If you
actually _did_ any thinking you wouild recognize the foundation of
quicksand the bibible is built on.

So you don't even know who Gerald Schroeder is, and summarily dismiss
what
he has to say...
Mmmm
Such a CLEAR demonstration of an open mind and intellectual curiosity.
Apparently you are so scared of a different point-of-view, that you avoid
it
like the plague.
In other words, what you really mean is that you only stick to what
already
fits your preconceptions, prejudices and bigoted point-of-view

Got it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't have to read him to know by the title it will be a rehash of
all the NON scientific crap put out by the ICR, the DI and like
sources. I will read that when it shows up in the science section of
the library;.


There you go demonstrating that you
1) Don't know ****
2) Are a superficial twit
3) Are ignorant to boot


"Gerald Schroeder and his New Variation on the - Answers in Genesis"

That says it all.


As I said
You remind me of a paranoid claim in a field of starfish.
Too bad it reflects so poorly on any claim to intelligence you may have.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 6:18 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 12:52 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how
do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds
say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and
evidence.
Lack of evidence is not evidence

So point out some of the evidence we accept that you think isn't
evidence or a fact.

The whole circular argument that since theists can not prove the
existence
of God by actually pointing at God, therefore there is no God

As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.

Funny how there're all kinds of Geological evidence that raises the
possibility of a Great Flood- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, trot some out and we will discuss it.

Google is your friend
I'll leave you to do your own research
Particularly in the context that some other dolt wrote:
"When I do research I stick to actual science, not myths. "
Since the Great Flood qualifies as myth by your terms, clearly it's not
going to get much of your limited attention.

If you actually _did_ any thinking you would recognize the foundation
of
quicksand the bibible is built on.

The bible is not "built" on ANYTHING, you idiot.
The bible is an oral history.
As such, it has inconsistencies that ANY intelligent honest person can
recognize.
The idiots who intentionally try to interpret the Bible literally, from
EITHER side of the argument, are just trying to manipulate things for
their
own agendas
It's called INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY in most circles
Recognize yourself there, bub ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I hope you recognize _yourself_. l am quoting known facts, evidence,
etc. and all you are doing (in amongst juvenile insults) is deny,
deny, deny and come out with "maybe this, maybe that" proposing things
that run agains all known science. Stick to 'goddidit'


When you start out with the premise that the "Bible was built"
You just disqualified yourself from ANY serious consideration of
intelligent discourse on the subject

Keep wanking in your ignorance and bigotry
.. And then pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 6:22 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:13 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 4:22 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

The difficulty with atheists is not that they don't believe; the
problem
is
that atheists believe too many things.

Ya mean like the facts and evidence that science has found?

Yes they actually believe that somehow they have facts and evidence.
Lack of evidence is not evidence

Lack of evidence is the great stumbling block for all theists. There
isn't any evidence that even Jesus ever existed.

That's right
Too bad Jesus wasn't trapped in silt deposits to satisfy some idiots
On the other hand, there were the people who knew him.
There is a unbroken connection to those people.

But hey, since there was no OFFICIAL record available, that means it just
myth.
By that same toke, Julius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, Alexander the
Great,
are all just myths as well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The difference being that those other people actually left records as
did the people who knew them.

Never heard of the various documents in the New Testament, have you ?
Why am I not surprised at your abyssal ignorance

Your selective approach at cherry picking historical documents, and deciding
which one goes along with your bias and prejudices is noted



Even the puported record of Jesus'
execution sent to Rome was discovered to be a forgery inserted way
after publication of the document it was in.


That does not DISprove anything
It only shows that in ONE INSTANCE, some zealous individual down the time
line suffered from bad judgment


Considering the uproar Jesus supposedly was causing don't you thinkl
that at leasst _some_ official document about it would exist? Soem
reliable report or it?


Well gee.
Maybe they should have bought some insurance to make sure those documents
were preserved for the likes of you..


Why don't you provide an "official document" of the sack of Troy.
Because otherwise it's just a myth as well.

All in black? I've never seen that as dress code. Wonder if they are Amish?

Sure, curious what the literature is.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Harry K" wrote in message
...

JVs doe not dress all in black and they don't id themselves as
Mormons. Youwant their literature? It is your churck, go ask them
for it. I jsut ran two of them off about a month ago rudely enough
that I hope my address is on the 'do not call' list...at least with
JVs when I do that it holds for about 6-8 years before I am bothered
again.

Harry K

Allah, not Jesus.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Harry K" wrote in message
...

I jsut have to find that verse in the bible that says it is okay to
lie for jayzuss.

Harry K

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 6:25 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:15 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 7:39 pm, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al Goar
wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry

wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Jack wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to
tithe
the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above
and
you
would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never
heard
one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for
eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

You need to read what Blaise Pascal, the father of Probabilities
and
Statistics, had to say about belief in God
It's called Pascal's Wager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep. It ties in with the theists usual threat "Believe...OR ELSE!".
A **** poor reason to believe in anything.

Funny how that sillyness is alaways a fall back argument for some
There's no threat except in paranoid minds.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.

The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a mountain
should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those rigidly
encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparantly you are one of those creatinists incapable of learining
learning _anything_ even when you are spoon fed.

UNable to argue the issue, you're reduced to stupid projection ?
Why am I not surprised...



Re-read why those fossils could not be due to flood
and then learn about tectonic place
activity and what builds mountains. It is all known science and most
of it has been known for over 150 years.


yawn
You are so busy making stupid assumptions about me, that you fail to read
for COMPREHENSION..
So I'll repeat myself for the resident idiot
The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are
on top of a mountain should be
a clue for stupid atheists, that THINGS CHANGE..
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


You don't even have to take my word for it. Just do a bit of
googling....oops sorry, I forgot that real science scares the crap out
of you.


There you go with more stupid projections
I've worked with "Real science" and "real scientists" most of my life.

But hey, don't let me get in the way of YOU making STUPID PRESUMPTIONS.

"Steve Barker" wrote in message
...
On 1/18/2012 10:11 AM, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:25 am,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...





On Jan 17, 4:15 am,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...

On Jan 16, 7:39 pm,
wrote:
"Harry wrote in message

...

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al
wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry

wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Jack wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to
tithe
the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and
you
would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never
heard
one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do
you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? The odds say
that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

You need to read what Blaise Pascal, the father of Probabilities and
Statistics, had to say about belief in God
It's called Pascal's Wager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep. It ties in with the theists usual threat "Believe...OR ELSE!".
A **** poor reason to believe in anything.

Funny how that sillyness is alaways a fall back argument for some
There's no threat except in paranoid minds.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.

The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a mountain
should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those
rigidly
encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparantly you are one of those creatinists incapable of learining
learning _anything_ even when you are spoon fed. Re-read why those
fossils could not be due to flood and then learn about tectonic place
activity and what builds mountains. It is all known science and most
of it has been known for over 150 years.

You don't even have to take my word for it. Just do a bit of
googling....oops sorry, I forgot that real science scares the crap out
of you.

Harry K

The believers are not near as scared of science as you are of the truth.


Funny how so many believers are actually practitioners of the hard
sciences.
As a matter of fact, to them, the universe is evidence of the mystery of God

Which is why as an agnostic, I do enjoy their company far more than those
intolerant atheistic idiots like our harry K. (maybe the "K" is for "kook")

"Dan Espen" wrote in message
...
"Attila.Iskander" writes:

"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Jan 17, 4:15 am, "Attila.Iskander"
wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message
I lost a post from I think it was you. Can't find it so I will answer
it he

You, or some one else put forthe seashell fossils on tops of mountains
as proof of Ye Floode.

Problem is that fossils do not form in just a year. Fossils need to
be buried in mud and that mud dried, compressed and turned to rock.
They would have been laying loose and washed away when all that water
went somewhere and for sure would not be encased in rock.

But then those are jsut some of those scientifc facts that the
creationist just waves his hand and ignores.


The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are on top of a
mountain should be a clue for stupid atheists, that things change.
Apparently accepting such a fact is most difficult for those
rigidly encased in their beliefs.
Recognize yourself ?

Harry is right, sea shells on mountains as the result of a one
year (or 40 day) flood? That's crazy talk.


False argument.
Never made such a claim
Let me repeat myself, and even underline it for you.
The very fact that those fossilized sea shells are
on top of a mountain should be a clue for stupid atheists,
that things change.
^^^^^^^^^^^^

The shells are up there for a reason but there is no logical
way a flood put them up there.


Never claimed they were put there by a flood..
Reading carefully is a good habit.
You should try it sometime

However there are simple geologic reasons for the shells to be
there. Very well known reasons with multiple lines of evidence
to support those reasons.

Well, I guess I've already qualified as "stupid" so I've said
enough. This is basic high school science folks. Learn a little
about our world. It's pretty interesting.


snicker
Too bad you weren't paying much attention, when reading skills were being
taught
Problem is that far too many people don't read for comprehension, as you
have just demonstrated
You would qualify for "stupid" if you keep insisting on doing it, like harry
is wont to do.

On 1/17/2012 7:55 PM, Betelgeuse wrote:
On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:


As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.



We finally agree on something


Was Noah a Mormon?

After Noah loaded all those ****ing animals on the ark, did he still
have room for all his wives?

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:27:16 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 17, 5:44*pm, "
wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 05:29:59 -0500, Juan Deere wrote:
On 1/16/2012 11:37 PM, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 16, 8:58 am, "
*wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:29:13 -0800 (PST), Harry
wrote:

On Jan 15, 10:04 pm, "
*wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:41:44 -0800 (PST), Harry
wrote:

On Jan 15, 8:26 pm, "
*wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al *wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry
wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
* *wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Jack * *wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to tithe the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and you would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never heard one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

As I said, you're crazy (and filled with hate). *...and it really is that
simple.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Odd, one word from an atheist and the theist instantly begins with the
"hate" and lies about atheist's morals. *If you can't address a point
that is made, then don't bother replying at all. *Won't make you look
like such an ass.

I did address the point dummy. *You're a hate-filled, crazy, asshole. *No
doubt about it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Odd that it is the theist every time that resorts to insults. *Perhaps
because they know they have nothing to support their beliefs?

Harry K

Yep, give yourself a pat on the back.
You know you've won the debate when they start slinging insults.

Not insults at all. *Just stating the facts. *He *is* stupid. *...as are you
if you've actually been following this thread.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So I'm stupid for knowing what is a fact and what is a myth?

If you can't support your argument, insults do exactly what he said,
shows that you have lost.

No, you're stupid for 1) not being able to read 2) hating Cristians and
Cristianity.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:28:08 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 17, 5:43*pm, "
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:37:48 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:





On Jan 16, 8:58*am, "
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:29:13 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 15, 10:04*pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:41:44 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 15, 8:26*pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:56:58 -0500, Al Goar wrote:
On 1/15/2012 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:36:11 -0800 (PST), Harry
wrote:

On Jan 15, 4:57 am, "Stormin Mormon"
*wrote:
I think he'd be better off to attend church, and hear what
God has to say.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Jack *wrote in message

...

And if want a front row seat in heaven, don't forget to tithe the
science department of your local university.

Replace the word "science" with "religion" in the above and you would
be spot on.

Harry K

Whooooosh!

Odd, I was drug to church every week for 14 years and never heard one
word except from that guy asking for money.

We certainly know what's important to you.

If you're not a true believer, you'll roast in hell for eternity.
Now I ask you again, are you a true believer?

My answer: You're crazy!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

As I said, you're crazy (and filled with hate). *...and it really is that
simple.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Odd, one word from an atheist and the theist instantly begins with the
"hate" and lies about atheist's morals. *If you can't address a point
that is made, then don't bother replying at all. *Won't make you look
like such an ass.

I did address the point dummy. *You're a hate-filled, crazy, asshole. *No
doubt about it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Odd that it is the theist every time that resorts to insults. *Perhaps
because they know they have nothing to support their beliefs?

Well, you've certainly proven that you are indeed stupid.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Still with the insults? Don't have anything intelligent to
contribute.

No, just calling a spade a spade. Sorry if the truth offends you.

Not unusual for a creationist.

There you go, stupid!

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:31:45 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 17, 5:46*pm, "
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:39:38 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:





On Jan 16, 8:58*am, "
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:30:32 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 16, 8:08*am, "
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 05:22:04 -0500, Al Goar wrote:
On 1/15/2012 11:41 PM, Harry K wrote:

Out of all the religions, sects, cults that are out there, how do you
know tht you have your money down on the right one? *The odds say that
you are betting on a losing one.

Atheists just believe in one less god than you do.

Harry K

So true!

No, it's so FALSE.

Explain how me _not_ believing a god is _not_ beliving in one less god
than you.

Think about it, dummy.

You will probably have to think about that at least a bit
before replying again.

Something you should try sometime.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Done 50 years ago and discovered that there is nothing behind the
curtain.

I'm sorry you are so embarrassed about your beliefs you can 'debate'
them but have to resort to insults.

I'm sorry that you're so stupid you can't follow simple logic. *You're hate
level is so high that you can't read what's in front of you. *oh well- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I keep hoping you will raise the level of your response out of 1st
grade insults but I see that is all you have.

Not first grade insults, rather top grade truth. You *are* an illiterate
idiot, as you insist on proving with each response.

On 1/18/2012 7:28 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Can we agree that you misquoted me. I didn't write that.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

wrote in message
news On 1/17/2012 7:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:


As for lack of evidence you just stumbled on one of the big proofs
that Ye Flood never happened. Had it happened there are facts and
evidence that would have to exist but don't.



We finally agree on something



My bad.

Your post's position confused me and I accidentally trimmed your
contribution which made it look like you said what the other guy said.

On Jan 18, 2:22*pm, Steve Barker wrote:


The believers are not near as scared of science as you are of the truth.

--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email

Well said and concise!

Yes, he needed several wives, to repopulate the earth. Amazing, how now we
all look alike. Havn't you noticed how ML King looks just like Abe Lincoln,
who looks just like Mao Tse Tung, who looks just like William Shatner? we're
all descended from Noah.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Jack Hammer" wrote in message
...


We finally agree on something


Was Noah a Mormon?

After Noah loaded all those ****ing animals on the ark, did he still
have room for all his wives?