Turning around in neighbor's driveway
in [Drive]
|
Prev: Would Consumer Reports say this is a shady practice?
Next: Seat Belt: Will You Get Ticketed If You Show Medical Exemption?
From: Jeckyl on 4 May 2007 23:12 "Kent Wills" <compuelf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:80fn33htcpv4ar4e8nqpoa8397u3635qa3(a)4ax.com... > As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 10:37:06 +1000, "Jeckyl" > <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > >>"Kent Wills" <compuelf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:hatk331kpodcvs6mel0a1gmeklc6rq8qo8(a)4ax.com... >>> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 03:14:47 +1000, "Jeckyl" >>> <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ <theprof(a)jonez.net> wrote: >>>>>>> I will gladly show that your pig-ignorant grotesque >>>>>>> perverted superstition that you call christianity is >>>>>>> utterly false. >>>> >>>>Please present this proof. >>>> >>> >>> I've been asking for proof that atheism is correct for a very >>> long time. >> >>Easy .. >> >>The theist position is to know that god exists > > To claim to KNOW is to claim to have proof. No sane person > would claim to KNOW there is a god. I wasn't talking about sane people, I was talking about theists > I do believe, but freely admit I can't prove that God exists. >>The atheist position is to not know that god exists > That's an agnostic's position. Agnostics are atheists, not all atheits are agnostic though >>There is no proof that god exists > Exactly. It's a belief. Mor particularly, it is a belief without evidence / proof >>We cannot conclude that god exists or does not exist >>Gods existance is unknown >>The atheist position is correct > > That's not the atheist position. You've done a GREAT job of > explaining the agnostic position. Which is also the atheist position .. you are confusing atheist with the subset "strong-atheist", who not only have a lack of theism (ie no belief in gods) but also a belief that gods to not exists.
From: � Shanghai Lil � on 4 May 2007 23:30 Jeckyl wrote: > "Kent Wills" <compuelf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:80fn33htcpv4ar4e8nqpoa8397u3635qa3(a)4ax.com... >> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 10:37:06 +1000, "Jeckyl" >> <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >> >>> "Kent Wills" <compuelf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:hatk331kpodcvs6mel0a1gmeklc6rq8qo8(a)4ax.com... >>>> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 03:14:47 +1000, "Jeckyl" >>>> <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ <theprof(a)jonez.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> I will gladly show that your pig-ignorant grotesque >>>>>>>> perverted superstition that you call christianity is >>>>>>>> utterly false. >>>>> >>>>> Please present this proof. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've been asking for proof that atheism is correct for a very >>>> long time. >>> >>> Easy .. >>> >>> The theist position is to know that god exists >> >> To claim to KNOW is to claim to have proof. No sane person >> would claim to KNOW there is a god. > > I wasn't talking about sane people, I was talking about theists > >> I do believe, but freely admit I can't prove that God exists. >>> The atheist position is to not know that god exists >> That's an agnostic's position. > > Agnostics are atheists, not all atheits are agnostic though > >>> There is no proof that god exists >> Exactly. It's a belief. > > Mor particularly, it is a belief without evidence / proof > >>> We cannot conclude that god exists or does not exist >>> Gods existance is unknown >>> The atheist position is correct >> >> That's not the atheist position. You've done a GREAT job of >> explaining the agnostic position. > > Which is also the atheist position .. you are confusing atheist with > the subset "strong-atheist", who not only have a lack of theism (ie > no belief in gods) but also a belief that gods to not exists. A-theism = without theism Strong A-theism = strongly without theism Gods do not exist. Not a "belief", it's a fact. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Amos Dundee on 5 May 2007 01:04 � Shanghai Lil � wrote: Colorado Scooters 1207 E.11th Ave. Denver CO 80218 Open 24 Hours - Call in advance to make sure we are awake. Zanmai Trading Company is a North American trading company specializing in importing Motor Scooters, Parts and Accessories. Company Name : Zanmai Trading Co Company Address : PO Box 20231 Boulder CO ZIP/Postal code : 80308 Company Phone : 1-303-6694574 Company Fax : 1-303-8619681 Contact Person : Eric Ross (Owner) Contact Phone : 3036694574 Trade Message > Buy - Scooter Engines 70cc 90cc Engine Parts Last Active: 13 Nov, 2005 Environmental Consultants LLC 1207 E 11th Ave Denver CO 80218 303.669.4574 303.861.9681 fax info(a)EPAhelp.com China Office: Shanghai Solang Information Technology Co., Ltd. 2-13D XINGHAI MANSION LANE 1251 JIANGNING ROAD, SHANGHAI 200060 86-21-62271602 86-21-62278972 fax info(a)tuohe.com Company Name: Zanmai Trading Co. Country/Territory: United States Address: PO Box 20231, Boulder, Colorado, United States Products/Services We Offer: Motor scooters, motorcycles, scooter engines, scooter parts, scooter performance accessories Business Type: Trading Company Industry Focus: Scooter Parts & Accessories , Motorcycle Accessories , Motorcycle Parts , Electric Motorcycles , Geographic Markets: North America No. of Employees: 5 - 10 People Annual Sales Range (USD): Below US$1 Million Year Established: 1995 Legal Representative/CEO: Eric Ross This member does NOT have a TrustPass Profile. TrustPass� serves to provide transparency regarding the identity and legitimacy of your trading partners on Alibaba.com. Only companies who have completed an Authentication and Verification procedure conducted by a third-party credit-reporting agency have a TrustPass Profile. Contact Person: Mr. Eric Ross Job Title: Director/CEO/General Manager Address: PO Box 20231, Boulder, Colorado, United States Zip/Postal Code: 80308 Telephone: 303-669-4574 Fax: 303-861-9681
From: Martin Phipps on 5 May 2007 01:54 On May 5, 7:42 am, Kent Wills <compu...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Do TRY and be honest. This will be VERY difficult for you, > I'm sure. But try. With each occurrence of honesty, you'll find it > easier and easier. Soon it will be very natural. How would you know? Martin
From: Martin Phipps on 5 May 2007 01:56
On May 5, 7:36 am, Kent Wills <compu...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > As I understand it, on Thu, 3 May 2007 20:59:12 -0600, "¥ UltraMan ¥" > > <u...(a)man.jp> wrote: > >Kent doesn't quite comprehend the obvious, then again he believes > >that humans exhale Carbon Monoxide and that accusing someone > >of being pregnant who in fact isn't pregnant is *not* a false accusation. > > More proof that you are a pathological liar. > > For those unaware, and the fewer who will care: > I made a follow-up post pointing out that I confused CO and > CO2. Ulra, Vox, Jonez, and any other nym shifts he uses, is > psychologically UNABLE to admit that I saw the error and admitted to > it. To do so would require honesty on his part, and he simply is > unable. > I pointed out that if a woman had put on weight and was seen > shopping in a maternally section, accusing her of being pregnant would > be sound. It may turn out that she was not pregnant, but it wouldn't > be a false allegation as legally defined. And this discussion > occurred in misc.legal. > > So, Vox/Ultra/Jonez/whatever, why do you have such a > compelling NEED to be dishonest? Why can't you be honest about > anything, ever? The pathological liar and the honest man both claim to tell the truth. Kent, we know you aren't an honest man. So that makes you the pathological liar. Martin |