A beautiful listing of descriptive adjectives most of which are incorrectly
used.
Richard
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Mostafa <ebob824@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I must truly thank both Carl and Roger for variously entertaining me.
They both made me laugh so well. Roger attempted to depress my
disposal with his repeated derision of my religious tradition. He
surely won’t ever prosper. Islam has fortunately made me quite
confident and unflustered. His deficiency of competent faith though
made him critically forlorn, garbled and deplorable. Each and
everything must be empirically examined for him in order to genuinely
exist. Well, a question then, objective moral principles and duties
are scrupulously motivated, do they exist? How could you prove their
existence or the lack of physically? This guy is mentally perturbed.
He thence demands to be thoroughly treated. Now, regarding evolution
and its stiffly lineal affiliation to denotative incredulity, what are
the decreeing tenets of that theory? According to testable science,
fluid substances tend to freeze and boil at specific degrees. We knew
that for certain, because they have been trialed by many in numerously
evidenced circumstances. Therefore, no one could deny this fact
because it has been witnessed on plenty of occasions by sempiternal
mortals. Is evolution bore witness by any decisive evidence? Ah
Roger, instead of arbitrarily referring to an unknown belle with your
unfathomed response, go out and seek a date. You seem to be sensually
deprived, pity. I look forward to being entertained even farther. I
must admit, I spend pleasant time here in the list intemperately
snickering at the manner by which some of you folks react. As for
Richard, what a funny guy, where is he though? Please, keep
entertaining me, I enjoy it. My Jaws even laughs. You folks, what a
joke!
On 6/24/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nyah, Nyah, Nyah, Nyah, nyah. I lasted longer than you did, Carl. You
broke down and started reading Mostafa's messages before I did.
---
Carl Sagan
??? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. ???
??? Carl Sagan
On 6/24/2019 11:39 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
You are setting up Straw Men, Mostafa. I do not ridicule your
beliefs. I accept your statements that you believe that your beliefs
are the Truth, Everlasting. What I ridicule is the fact that you
cannot see that your stubborn protestations and accusations parrot
exactly those protestations and accusations uttered by intolerant
people of every other religion in today's world.
Furthermore, I understand and accept Roger's statement that he is an
Atheist. And it does not bother me to hear Roger question why I claim
to be an Agnostic, when it is obvious to him that I am an Atheist. I
accept that Roger believes this, and yet I remain Agnostic. I believe
that you believe that you have been given the Truth through your
Faith. I don't believe that is true, but I understand that you do
believe this. That, in and of itself does not bother me. What
troubles me is that you are not content to allow Roger or myself to
believe what our experiences lead us to believe, and you become so
insistent in proving that we are wrong, and you are right, that you
resort to hurling insults, and making snotty, contemptuous comments.
In my mind, you have gone from impressing me as a bright outspoken,
inquisitive young man, to being a petulant, quarrelsome narrow minded
and bitter man.
A man comes upon a cup filled halfway with cool water, which he
happily drinks. Another man comes upon a cup filled halfway with cool
water and he curses whoever came before him and drank half the cup,
which he kicks away from himself.
You, Mostafa, impress me as one whose cup is always half empty.
Cordially,
Carl Jarvis
On 6/23/19, Mostafa <ebob824@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I thought Roger wanted to bring Joe of conniptions back to the list. I
brought his contact earlier though. I bring him here again. I couldn???t
bear offending mr Roger. I joyously watch nonbelievers collide with
each other. They criticise us with being declinable to one another.
Nonetheless, an Atheist doesn???t accept what an Agnostic assumes. Would
it be rationally natural, if each and every dissenting community is
equally placid to me? That is indeed the practically proper definition
of hypocrisy, which is An expression of agreement that is not
supported by actual convictions. The reason why do they not firmly
clash, is that none of them has tautened fundamentals to take issue
and strenuously fend for. It is therefore quite easy for many of them
to alter their beliefs based on essentially temporal interest. So,
Carl doubts the belief in God. Nonetheless, he shares with Roger the
sanctioning temperament of vocally ridiculing my tenets of faith.
Each and everyone here knew I am the only different one. Intolerance
against me has somewhat nurtured here because I strongly oppose
receding to cultural manipulation and imperialism. My disposal is
staggeringly extravagant. To heighten our tense, I brought alongside
Roger and Carl other nonbelievers from Britain and the States. These
people greatly share mutual tenets of incredulity. This denying state
has mental rejection. This psychological development has significantly
deepened inwardly. They counterfeitly base their philosophical notion
on unjustifiedly privileged pseudoscience. They have wholly deceived
various generations with this forged assumption. So, what have they
deceived people with? Well, at its inception, they attempt to make the
subsequent proposition a rational premiss. So for instance, if
something isn???t potential of being empirically examined, it shall
chronologically be unsubstantialised. Because of this, concepts in the
west in general have been stiffly impounded to enormous philistinism.
Thence, even human perceptions such as emotional and other relevant
factors have been translated to broadly material conception. Westerns
have professed and gravely embraced physicalism and pragmatism. This
is indeed the longstanding prob with western materialism. To highlight
the crisis a bit clearer, it???s odd to many westerns to react genuinely
in emotional situations. Here in the Muslim world, we might have lots
of unsolved problems. We may have financial, technological,
educational and medicinal crises. Nonetheless, we still knew how to
laugh and even how to cry. A friend of mine resides in the United
Kingdom. He swears to me, that a typical English man would regularly
go to the pub and drink insanely to distract himself from the
relentless distress he is heavily subjected to. So, Atheists worship a
God which is materialism and lecherousness. A God is what you quickly
turn to in times of need and despair. So, disbelievers seek refuge
with what satisfies their desires. They ultimately repose their
conscience and falsely convince themselves, this is indeed the vital
stance of truth. This is absolutely the catastrophe. Atheists abruptly
tell us we???re retarded in intellectual emersion because we allegedly
believe in fairytale based presumptions. However, if we arguably state
it is the case, well, they too believe in mythically based
effronteries. Evolution has never been scientifically ratified.
Nonetheless, they firmly adhere it because it is the only theory that
disqualifies creation and hence, believing in a divine being. That???s
why evolution is emphatically sacred to them. They plainly do not have
decisive evidence that speaks up for evolution theory. It will remain
so, even if they claim otherwise. That???s what obviously disappoints mr
Roger though.
