Re: Facts are facts in religioworld.

In article <[email protected]>, 
[email protected] says...
> 
> Scatboi AKA Ted AKA Alice wrote:
> > % wrote:
> > 
> >> Alic/eTed wrote:
> >>> Skeeter wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ted wrote:
> >>>>>> Michael Christ wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 5/04/2024 1:43 pm, Ted wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Michael Christ wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 5/04/2024 9:25 am, Skeeter wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>>>>>>>> Maximus wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ted wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Christ wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/04/2024 3:00 pm, Ted wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maximus wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 09:10:50 GMT,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Ted"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yet to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any soul
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exists.  >> >> >> >> > > > > > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMG,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kidding,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WTF do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >> >> holds >> you >>>>>> up, man??
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Muscle and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bone.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soul leaves
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your body,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> muscle >> and >> bone >>>> collapse to the ground
> >>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>>>they're >> no >> longer >> being >> supported
> >>>>> by >> the >>>> >>soul.  >>>>>>>>>That's obvious.  >> >> >> >> > > >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the muscle
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and bones are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still there but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the soul
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> isn't.  >> >> Good >> class, >>> well done.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The first time the question was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asked:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are assuming
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there was a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "soul" there in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the first place.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis for that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assumption?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the beatles
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently you are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unable to provide a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rational answer so
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you resort to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted deflection
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and redirection.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't claim the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beatles weren't real. I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember seeing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them >> on >> > Ed Sullivan. They were quite real.
> >>>>> Do you >>>>>>> think >>Ed >>>>>>Sullivan >> was a >> > myth too?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I remember seeing them on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack Parr, their first
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> American appearance, but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that has nothing to do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the existence or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-existence of a soul.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They even don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish a misdirection
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or attempted change of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject very well.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They do however strongly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emphasize a complete and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> total failure to address
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the actual issue as well
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a failure to even
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempt to answer the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question asked.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The "actual issue", as I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see it, is your implication
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Ed Sullivan was a myth!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The actual issue is the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question I asked above and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will repeat here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The second time the question was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asked:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " You are assuming there was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a "soul" there in the first
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> place.  What is your basis
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for that assumption?"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, what is your basis for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that assumption?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, the Ed Sullivan Show was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the first appearance by
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Beatles in the US?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Teenage music fans comprised
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a large part of The Beatles?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fan base. The news magazine
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> show The Huntley-Brinkley
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Report likely didn?t register
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with them. But anyone
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the show on Nov.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18, 1963, saw The Beatles?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first TV appearance in the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> U.S."
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Beatles showed up on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> American TV again a few weeks
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before their first live TV
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appearance in the U.S. On
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan.  3.  1964, talk show
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> host Jack Paar aired clips of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Fab Four performing live
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of ?From Me to You?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and ?She Loves You?  to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ever-present audiences of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screaming teenagers, per The
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trivia Book of The Beatles."
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I saw that show on TV.  They
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were greeted with hysterical
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> laughter.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ed Sullivan was on  Feb. 9,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1964.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> > https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/the-beatles-1st-tv-appearance-in-the-u-s-wasnt-the-ed-sullivan-show.html/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for straightening that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out, Attila. I was just a kid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then, so I don't remember.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Once again you ignored the basic
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question but I can repeat it -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again - for the third time:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    " You are assuming there was a "soul" there in
> >> the >>>>>first >>>>>>>>>>>>>  place.  What is your basis for that
> >>>>> assumption?" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I already told you. Your soul is what
> >>>>> holds >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you up.  That's obvious.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have made that assumption clear.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am asking for the basis you use for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that assumption.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or did you just make it up?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The basis is simple observation. When
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone's soul leaves their body, they
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fall down. Because there's no longer
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything holding them up. As I said,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's obvious. So obvious that I don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand why you're not getting it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because it's not a legitimate
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposition. the soul is not in evidence.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have to establish first that a soul
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exists before you can posit any arguments
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the soul doesn't exist then why are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there still monkeys?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I doubt it minimus dickus will answer that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> excellent question, Ted.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is not about truth, he is about lifestyle.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Christ
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And just as you predicted, he sidestepped the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> question instead of answering it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> no I did not liar. I requested clarification of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> it. and I or anyone is under no obligation to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> answer your questions anyway, liar.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What question? About the monkeys? I'd just like to
> >>>>>>>>>>> know what exactly it is you have against monkeys.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Makes no sense to me.
> >>>>>>>>>> There better not be anyone dissing monkeys. You know
> >>>>>>>>>> how I
> >>>>> live >>>>> monkeys.
> >>>>>>>>> Me too!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Christ
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So do I. Hell, who doesn't, apart from Maximus. He
> >>>>>>>> probably
> >>>>> hates >>> dogs too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is clear he is one very nasty fellow and has no respect
> >>>>>>> for animals.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is a first on alt.atheism, an animal hater!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Michael Christ
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In my memory, yes, but anybody who's that full of hatred is
> >>>>>> likely also a racist.
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> lol! do you two ever take a good look at yourselves? you've
> >>>>> formed a conclusion based on a suggestion and assumption. how
> >>>>> stupid are you.  where is there any evidence I hate animals?
> >>>>> but I think you two are just playing games with me. neither of
> >>>>> you should be taken seriously, that's for sure.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>> Then why are you here?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> He's just trolling for attention. That's why I'm not playing his
> >>> silly game any more.
> >>>
> >>>
> > 
> >> you mad, alice  lol
> > 
> > 
> > Ratboy jacks off over his fantasies of men in dresses. LOL.
> > 
>  >
> more projection from the squat to piss sissy
> that whined about using the ladies room -
> 
> http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=160968069700 <- ted comes out
> 
> please stop projecting your cross dressing fetish and your scat fetish

yet you're the only one talking about it