Re: Man Drops Dead - After Getting Vaxxed

On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 08:42:08 -0400, Attila <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 18:23:21 -0400, Vincent Maycock
><[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 11:13:37 -0700, "Andrew"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"Dawn Flood" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>> Andrew wrote:
>><snip>
>>>>> I consider most all atheists as friend, because they
>>>>>  have always helped strengthen my faith.
>>>>> 
>>>> Andrew,
>>>> 
>>>> If you truly believe, then continue!  
>>>
>>>I truly believe what is supported by 'rock solid science'. 
>>
>>If it's a fact, as you seem to imply here, is it best described as a
>>"belief"?
>
>He constantly asserts his beliefs as if they are fact.

He also refers to them as "beliefs" though (see the above quoted
text).  He wants the approval of science ("facts") as well as the
approval of God ("faith"), so he ends up just really confused. 

>>>If atheists believe otherwise, then I respect their right
>>>to do so. Nevertheless, I would kindly point out their
>>>foolishness.
>>
>>What do you expect to happen when you "kindly" do so? 
>>
>>>> As long as you respect the rights of others to disagree 
>>>> and even not to believe at all, then there are no issues!!
>>>
>>>I note that atheists will generally believe whatever the 
>>>consensus.says, even though what they believe may be
>>>different than 'rock solid science'.
>>
>>What separates the consensus from "rock solid science"?
>
>What is his "rock hard science"?

Nothing.  He just likes the way the phrase sounds. 

>>
>>> Nevertheless I will 
>>>certainly -respect their right- to believe their cherished
>>>fantasies.
>>
>>What makes these alleged fantasies supposedly cherished? 
>>
>>>> Dawn