Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:
John Smith wrote:
K0HB:

Yes, I have read a couple of books on the subject--most
of the authors
strike me as being rather weak in math and especially
in the area of
probability and statistics--quite possibly
lotus-blossom-eaters.

For some it is easier to attack the thinker than
to disprove the idea....

It certainly is a lot easier to say "God makes it so, so it is"

The hard part is defining what is meant by "God"...

Not for those who want the easy answer. There are plenty enough people
who are just slap happy to tell us that!

Mike, are you an atheist? Or are you just playing at one because
President Bush is a Christian?

wrote:
snip
From: on Aug 28, 8:18 am

In the end, if they cannot
lay waste to Len's comments with rational argument(s),
they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Actually the logic is quite different. It comes down to
asking why Len is so interested in amateur radio policy
even though Len is not a ham and has never been one. There
has been a nocodetest amateur radio license in the USA since
1991, yet Len never got one. The maximum code test required
for any US amateur radio license has been 5 wpm since 1990 (with
medical waiver) and since 2000 without a waiver.

Nor is Len a manufacturer of amateur radio equipment, nor does
he have anything to do with FCC.

More than 5-1/2 years ago, Len told us he was going for Extra,
but didn't say when, and it hasn't happened yet.

So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

It's just his way.

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hi, hi! You reply directly to my comment, then you act as if you are
speaking to Dave. Then you ask why anyone should reply to Len's posts
at all. More hi, hi's!

Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be
here.

wrote:
wrote:
snip


So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about

Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if
someone slips in to let them Know)

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

It's just his way.

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hi, hi! You reply directly to my comment, then you act as if you are
speaking to Dave. Then you ask why anyone should reply to Len's posts
at all. More hi, hi's!

Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be
here.

when we have a rational discussion it will likely merely be a front for
Procoder effort to assinate us, by shocking us into heart attacks

wrote


Mike, are you an atheist? Or are you just playing at one because
President Bush is a Christian?


There are thousands of gods available to believe in, and for each individual god
there are often several different versions of that religion. Take, for example,
President Bush's god --- dozens and dozens of different cults all claiming to be
the "proper" Christians.

The only difference between atheists and GWB is that the atheists believe in one
less god than George does. If I have it right, Georges god, in His cosmic
loneliness, felt a need to be worshipped, so He invented Us to worship him.
Those of Us who aren't so inclined, He will banish to spend eternity on 75-meter
phone.

Beep beep!
de Hans, K0HB
Most Reverend Keeper of the Codes of Q

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 15:50:11 GMT, "KØHB"
wrote:


There are thousands of gods available to believe in, and for each individual god
there are often several different versions of that religion. Take, for example,
President Bush's god --- dozens and dozens of different cults all claiming to be
the "proper" Christians.

The only difference between atheists and GWB is that the atheists believe in one
less god than George does. If I have it right, Georges god, in His cosmic
loneliness, felt a need to be worshipped, so He invented Us to worship him.
Those of Us who aren't so inclined, He will banish to spend eternity on 75-meter
phone.

Beep beep!
de Hans, K0HB
Most Reverend Keeper of the Codes of Q

Since this subject has been brought up, I'll admit it - I am an
atheist. Here are MY observations, however off-topic they may be...

With the catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina, we saw thousands of
survivors thanking god for their lives, even though they’ve lost
everything. I haven’t seen one survivor blaming god for the death of
innocents in this disaster, not to mention the thousands that have
been left homeless and displaced from their families, not yet knowing
whether they’re dead or alive. Yet, they still thank god for their
lives. If a madman forced you out of your house by gun point, and then
burned your house to the ground while you watched, would you thank him
for sparing your life? What good is life if your lifestyle, quality of
life, and means of sustanation are suddenly gone?

It makes no sense to me why people would appeal to god and praise god,
yet not scratch their heads in confusion when said god anally rapes
New Orleans, but say that it is "god’s will". Believers will say that
I must not question "god’s will", but I SHALL question the will of
such a god in the hopes that some right-wing bible thumpers will
re-think their god’s position in the wake of such disasters.

But I doubt that is going to happen. Today, there are people going to
prayer-fests in just about every church in the country. They’ll do
their praying, get back into their big, gas-sucking SUVs, and drive
back to their fancy homes with the smug satisfaction that they
actually did something to help the survivors of this disaster. Is all
of this praying supposed to cause some big hand to come down out of
the sky and supply those affected by this tragedy with food, water,
clothes, medicine and shelter until the government and volunteer
donations can be supplied. Somehow, I doubt it.

I am ashamed of my government, and I don’t care who is offended by my
comments. I’ll question and bash anyone and any god I damn well please
and make no apologies for it. I have had with the religious platitudes
from politicians and community leaders on all levels of government.
They invoke a non-existent supernatural deity so they can duck their
responsibilities. They dragged their asses when it came to getting the
job done and lives were lost as a result. It’s time to fire all of
them, starting with their murdering, cruel, vindictive god and working
the way down.

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote:
In article om
wrote:

Dave is smug.

He's an asshole.

Pretty much, but far be if for me to call people names on RRAP.

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
snip

So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about

Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if
someone slips in to let them Know)

There's something in there that they just won't come out an say. If
they do, it will likely be on Aaron Jones "Morse Myths" list. So they
get to the very edge of the ledge and peer over, afraid to make the
leap.

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

It's just his way.

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hi, hi! You reply directly to my comment, then you act as if you are
speaking to Dave. Then you ask why anyone should reply to Len's posts
at all. More hi, hi's!

Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be
here.

when we have a rational discussion it will likely merely be a front for
Procoder effort to assinate us, by shocking us into heart attacks

Jim probably sends secret morse code messages the other three Morsemen
begging them to reply to my or Len's comments or opinions, so that he
can then jump in without looking like he's actually addressing us.
Poor thing.

wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
snip

So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

Indeed it does get tiresome that they go on and on about

Could we keep to once a month or once a week (valid I suppose if
someone slips in to let them Know)

There's something in there that they just won't come out an say. If
they do, it will likely be on Aaron Jones "Morse Myths" list. So they
get to the very edge of the ledge and peer over, afraid to make the
leap.

Indeed they can't be honest to admit that what they want is the power
to censor and silence all oposition

Did you catch Dan flaming for daring to answer his direct question. Of
course I did commit the sin of not answering as he wished
cut

Mike Coslo wrote:
I think Jesus was one cool dude, and has a lot to
tell us about how to live.

Yup - and how *not* to live.

That being said, I think that many people who are proclaiming
themselves as "Christians" these days are not. The so-called
conservative Christians who loudly proclaim their ascendancy
these days
don't really seem to have much to do with Jesus at all.

Nothing new about that. Constantine, Cyril, the Crusades, and
of course the Spanish Inquisition.

"If Jesus came back, and saw what's going on in His name,
He'd never stop throwing up." --Frederick, in Woody Allen's "Hannah and
Her Sisters"

The closest thing that they are is a modern day version
of the Pharisees. Their trends are much more old
testament - therefore not sharing in the new
covenant proclaimed by Jesus. They push public prayer,
also proscribed
against by Jesus, they push religious domination of
government - same deal.

They've had plenty of company in the past 2000 years...

While demanding that the first books of *their* bible

Except it's not really "theirs" - particularly the first
five books...

(KJV) be taken as
absolutely literal, despite two different versions of creation, they
totally ignore the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus delivers direct
orders in as plain language as you will find in the bible.
What's up with that?

It's a mystery, Mike. You just have to take it on faith.

I find it interesting that the dietary and other laws of the "old"
testament are ignored when inconvenient - just like
the inconvenient teachings of Jesus.

Fun fact: Which states do you think have the highest and lowest
divorce rates - "conservative" red states or "liberal" blue states?

"what God has joined together, let no man put asunder"...

What is up with that is the modern
fundamentalist Christians are
falling for one of the oldest tricks
in the book - the false prophets.

That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that
the world was *not*
created in seven days starting on Sunday, the 23rd of October
in 4004 BC
as determined by Ussher - and put in print in one of my bibles at home.

Actually, Genesis says it took six days - because the Creator
rested on the seventh day.

Rush job, too. Left a lot of holes....

There is no doubt in my mind that the present
day universe *was*
created billions of years ago, probably in an
event we call "the Big
Bang.

There should always be doubt, Mike. The Big Bang
cosmology is simply the best explanation we
have now that fits all the scientific data. New
data might require a new cosmology.

That's one big difference between real and fake
science. Real science is always open to new
data and new explanations.

I highly doubt that it was created by
a supreme being.

Why? Couldn't the Supreme Being have set it all
in motion, and the Bang was just the method?

For what
happened before then, it becomes quite complex, and I enjoy
speculation on that.

You can explain anything by using the 'supernatural'. Which means the
'supernatural' explains nothing.

73 de Jim, N2EY