Re: Man Drops Dead - After Getting Vaxxed

On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:03:23 -0400, Vincent Maycock
<[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 06:15:45 -0400, Attila <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 21:13:22 -0400, Vincent Maycock
>><[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 20:12:46 -0400, Attila <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 18:15:05 -0400, Vincent Maycock
>>>><[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 16:04:05 -0400, Attila <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 11:28:19 -0400, Vincent Maycock
>>>>>><[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>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. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Which is why science never addresses religion.  The two are
>>>>>>mutually exclusive.
>>>>>
>>>>>You're too kind.  The scientific method has disproved religion
>>>>>(although I doubt anyone would need science for that; everyday life
>>>>>disproves religion all on its own).
>>>>
>>>>Sorry.  Any decent religion has a supernatural component
>>>>where some magic man can do anything he likes including
>>>>ignoring the laws of science.
>>>
>>>"Can do anything" is not the same as "will do anything."  There's
>>>always a story of how things happened in religious stories, and
>>>comparing those stories with reality can be part of the scientific
>>>method. 
>>
>>No because the conditions involved can never be equally
>>evaluated.  In every religious story there is some type of
>>variable which cannot be projected as a part of some factual
>>basis.
>
>What do you mean by "projected as a part of some factual basis"?

You need some factual basis to apply science.  Yes, floods
occur but not a flood as the myth describes.

>
>>>For example, do you think a global Flood, à la young-earth
>>>creationism, has been disproven or not?
>>
>>Not if you consider a god that can create an earth with any
>>conditions at al and the can change those conditions to any
>>other that he likes.
>
>It could, but is there any reason to *think* it did, from a
>creationist perspective? 

A theologian can think anything at all  occurred without
consideration of any fact at all.

>
>>Such a god could create an earth that is covered in water
>>(or oil, cake batter, ice cream, fudge, poop, or anything
>>else) and at a later point changed the earth so that none of
>>this ever happened.
>
>The Bible doesn't record any of those things happening, so there's no
>reason for a YEC to try to take them into account.  

I have yet to see any unambiguous, unrelated, verifiable and
credible evidence to support that source beyond a few
historical figures and locations.

Gone With the Wind is a factual account of the Civil War
using the same basis.

>
>>How would you prove (or disprove) anything under those
>>conditions?
>
>No one is going to interested in gods that cover their tracks so
>completely.  It's just not part of human nature to do so.

Gods can do anything for their own reasons.  Throw a god in
and you throw all boundaries out.  Who knows why a god does
something?  They are gods, you know.


>
>>>>  Remember, anything science
>>>>cannot support is wide open to the supernatural.  That's why
>>>>they call it super natural.
>>>
>>>What are some examples of things science "can't support," in your
>>>view?
>>
>>See the above outline.  Just how would science even begin to
>>support any of it?
>
>Creationist arguments are supported by religion, not science,  though.

No, they attempt to validate their superstition by calling
it a science.

>>>>Science can never prove or disprove magic.
>>>
>>>What if the alleged magical events make predictions about what we can
>>>expect to find...if in fact the events really occurred?
>>>
>>
>>You cannot limit magic to any one result.  There is no
>>reason doing the same magical thing five times could not
>>result in five different results.
>
>Theists don't necessarily reason from cause to effect -- they only
>reach the one effect they've been told is appropriate to investigate.

Who told them and who decides what is appropriate?  In
science everything is available for anything.

>
>>In order to investigate or evaluate magic with any kind of
>>rational system requires the magic to be restricted in some
>>way,
>
>Theists are always shooting themselves in the foot, though, by
>including restrictions on their claims about the world. 

And in many other ways.

>
>> even if only to always produce the same results.  But
>>there is no reason to expect magic to be restricted in any
>>way.
>
>All fiction *can* be restricted, though. 

But those restrictions are constantly being knocked down.

>That's the only way you can
>make a story to create a religion around. 

Frequently that story is based in fear.

-- 


Every person in the US is here either  
legally or illegally. Those that are 
here illegally should be afraid.  
Be very afraid.  It does not matter 
how long you have been here.  It does 
not matter why you are here. It does not 
matter what you have done legally while you 
were here. It does not matter what any 
relative may have done while you were here. 
It only matters that you are here illegally. 
It may take a day, a week, a year, or longer 
but we will find you and we will deport you. 
Be prepared.

Deport them all.

Due process:
Q. Are you here legally?  If so, where is 
the documentation to establish that?

I support ending birthright citizenship

All politicians are trained to lie
and make those lies sound like 
the truth.  They start with the biggest 
lie of all: Politicians are public
servants.

Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting 
and abhorrent.
Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying.

I support:

A Constitional Amendment establishing
the Freedom of Choice.

The elimination of public expression, 
display or support of religion or 
religious positions.

AA 966