Reply-To: precent@yohoo.not Subject: Re: Facts are facts in religioworld. Newsgroups: alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.catholic,alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.atheism,soc.culture.israel References: <66087e5f$0$2422115$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <%_oON.746016$xHn7.39142@fx14.iad> <1d0p0jlb2dej8ud4qmv379m1n4rv0063em@4ax.com> <40hPN.619790$c3Ea.315793@fx10.iad> <660f28d9$0$3711190$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <66102dce$0$2909318$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> Followup-To: alt.idiots From: % Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 15:14:15 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 214 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.thecubenet.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 19:14:14 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 10503 Organization: theCubeNet - www.thecubenet.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@thecubenet.com Message-Id: <17c3783565708767$3281$2820980$e4ddee62@news.thecubenet.com> Bytes: 10888 Alic/eTed wrote: > Skeeter wrote: > >> In article , >> gladiator@colosseum.rome 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 , >>>>>>>> ted.street@gmail.com 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" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========