Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trance Channeler Contacts JTR Gets Messages

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • belinda
    replied
    Originally posted by Barnaby View Post
    Moreover, atheists make up about 10% of the population here in the U.S. and are very much underrepresented in prisons. I'd venture to say that Jack said his prayers, as most serial killers do.
    Amen

    Leave a comment:


  • Barnaby
    replied
    Originally posted by Ally View Post
    Lynn,

    You have a system of ethics or you don't. Believing in science and reason doesn't preclude HAVING a system of ethics, but that is not what's under discussion.
    Moreover, atheists make up about 10% of the population here in the U.S. and are very much underrepresented in prisons. I'd venture to say that Jack said his prayers, as most serial killers do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Barnaby
    replied
    Originally posted by Ally View Post
    If anyone on this thread, who is currently mocking this dimwit for her beliefs, happens to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, Hindu or any other religion currently plaguing the reason of humanity today, consider for a moment that you all believe in crap that is equally stupid and nonsensical.

    If you are an atheist who believes in science and reason, and that is all, you may carry on without being a great big ole hypocrite.
    Well said. Amen.

    May I suggest Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World or Michael Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello Ally. No, logical debates are not for here. And I'm not in the mood.

    I thought you were making an ontological remark on the order of:

    "Nothing exists except X and Y."

    There are no a priori difficulties with such a claim. Indeed, it conforms quite well to the Principle of Parsimony.

    On the other hand, however, it won't do later to adduce Z's--unless, of course, they are a necessary consequence of either X's or Y's.

    The best.
    LC
    The Principle of Parsimony? I hate that son of a bitch. Made me stay after school one time for throwing spitballs.

    c.d.

    P.S. Hate those damn Zs too. Bastards.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Good Michael
    replied
    Not wishing to add to Ally's post because... who could? I want to say that so many people believe in spirits and esp and those sorts of unscientific things, yet don't believe these claims. I find it comical that people within communities like that believe that some spiritual mediums are valid and others are frauds, and the same with fortune tellers. It's downright hilarious that there are considered to be ethical mediums and unethical ones. Religion I'll leave out of the equation, though you all can reason what I may think about that for yourselves.

    The only good thing about communicating with spirits is that they all seem to speak English. Krishna, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, all of them. Our past lives too. It's nice to know that English is the universal language in the afterlife too.

    Mike
    Last edited by The Good Michael; 11-29-2009, 04:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    ontology

    Hello Ally. No, logical debates are not for here. And I'm not in the mood.

    I thought you were making an ontological remark on the order of:

    "Nothing exists except X and Y."

    There are no a priori difficulties with such a claim. Indeed, it conforms quite well to the Principle of Parsimony.

    On the other hand, however, it won't do later to adduce Z's--unless, of course, they are a necessary consequence of either X's or Y's.

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Ally
    replied
    Lynn,

    If you are going to attempt to have a logical debate, or attempt to make a point of some kind, make sure you know what you are talking about.

    I am talking about a system of belief, what you believe in, you cannot "believe in' ethics. You have a system of ethics or you don't. Believing in science and reason doesn't preclude HAVING a system of ethics, but that is not what's under discussion.

    If you believe in a religion, and you are mocking this dimwit, you are a hypocrite.

    Don't bring a knife to a gunfight sweetie.
    Last edited by Ally; 11-29-2009, 04:25 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    categories

    Hello Ally. When you say:

    "If you are an atheist who believes in science and reason, and that is all . . ."

    you seem to preclude ethics as well. Very well.

    But why should someone who denies ethics be concerned with hypocrisy? Isn't that, at least putatively, part of a moral category?

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Ally
    replied
    If anyone on this thread, who is currently mocking this dimwit for her beliefs, happens to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, Hindu or any other religion currently plaguing the reason of humanity today, consider for a moment that you all believe in crap that is equally stupid and nonsensical.

    If you are an atheist who believes in science and reason, and that is all, you may carry on without being a great big ole hypocrite.
    Last edited by Ally; 11-29-2009, 04:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • belinda
    replied
    Originally posted by Mike Covell View Post
    And a packet of Cashous!
    Two Pints of lager and a packet of crisps

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    Originally posted by belinda View Post
    Still can't get over him taking a friend along.Do you think they went for a Pint after
    And a packet of Cashous!

    Leave a comment:


  • belinda
    replied
    Originally posted by Mike Covell View Post
    How come no one has ever found a diary saying "I got Jack's Back?"
    They will. Probably next week


    Still can't get over him taking a friend along.Do you think they went for a Pint after

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    Watch the man yourself!!

    See the man himself do his stunning work

    Moses, Ghandi, Jesus and Buddah


    Krishna and Ghandi discuss 2012 (not the film)


    Mary Magdeline, Jesus, and loads of other guff


    His very own page on youtube


    Personally I would like to see Ghandi discuss the Ghandi movie!

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Monty

    Hello Mike. Can't you leaf poor Monty alone? (Sorry, unable to resist.)

    The best.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • curious
    replied
    Another go?

    Perhaps, just for us all, Kevin Blackwell might have another go at Jacky and be armed with the right questions this time.

    Including the location of the removed body parts? as proof you know.

    I'm with you Belinda, the friend along explains the different knife, too. Being a good host, Jacky-boy perhaps allowed his friend first honors.

    "After you, chum."

    "No, after you, Jacky."

    "No, after you, I insist. You're my guest."

    well, a little levity here early on a Sunday morning is a good thing.

    curious

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X