Donal wrote:

Why should non-believers be given more credence than believers?

Get a clue, Donal - you're out of your depth.

Does that mean that I shouldn't have an opinion - or that I shouldn't
express it?

What part of "get a clue" precludes the possession or expression of an
opinion?


Why then, have you made so many contributions to this thread?

I enjoy epistemological discourse. Why are you spending so much time
slavering in this thread?


Excellent dissertation, Wally!

I'm surprised you can recognise it as such.


I'm almost proud that my stupefying
pointlessness has prompted such eloquence - and such a large
percentage of your activity here over the past week!!!

If you're trying to imply that you've been trolling me with your drivel,
you'll have to do better than that - as I said, I enjoy discussing this
particular subject matter.


Let me see if I understand you. Are you saying that we know sod-all
about the Universe, and therefore we shouldn't try to understand it?
That strikes me as being a bit defeatist!

You're still lacking the clue, Donal. At no point have I said that we
shouldn't try to understand it - just that statements like "the universe is
cyclical", "the universe started with a big bang all by itself", "god
created the universe" are without adequate foundation. The notion that any
one of these can be classified as even approaching an "inescapable
conclusion" is a joke.


--
Wally
www.forthsailing.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Donal wrote:

Why should non-believers be given more credence than believers?

Get a clue, Donal - you're out of your depth.

Does that mean that I shouldn't have an opinion - or that I shouldn't
express it?

What part of "get a clue" precludes the possession or expression of an
opinion?


Am I allowed to express my opinion without incurring your disapproval?


Yes .... or.... No?


You seem to take a very strong exception to my opinion.




Why then, have you made so many contributions to this thread?

I enjoy epistemological discourse. Why are you spending so much time
slavering in this thread?


Excellent dissertation, Wally!

I'm surprised you can recognise it as such.

Why? I'm aware that we are ignorant!




I'm almost proud that my stupefying
pointlessness has prompted such eloquence - and such a large
percentage of your activity here over the past week!!!

If you're trying to imply that you've been trolling me with your drivel,
you'll have to do better than that - as I said, I enjoy discussing this
particular subject matter.

So why do you feel the need to resort to personal insults?




Let me see if I understand you. Are you saying that we know sod-all
about the Universe, and therefore we shouldn't try to understand it?
That strikes me as being a bit defeatist!

You're still lacking the clue, Donal.

Thanks for the personal insult! Ad Hominem attacks are not usually required
by people who are capable of reasoned debate.
This isn't the first post where you have had to resort to a personal insult
to buttress your point of view.


At no point have I said that we
shouldn't try to understand it - just that statements like "the universe
is
cyclical", "the universe started with a big bang all by itself", "god
created the universe" are without adequate foundation. The notion that any
one of these can be classified as even approaching an "inescapable
conclusion" is a joke.

Why are you still trying to engage me in a logical discussion? I was under
the impression that you and Jeff were sooooo pleased with your intellectual
superiority that you had consigned me to the "lunatic" bin!!!


Regards


Donal
--