Re: Solution to the energy shortage?

"Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:1r09ls.v0r.17.1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Irish Mike" <mjostar@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:%VbRj.11592$V14.11334@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> I've had this discussion with enough atheists to know it's pointless.
>
> Oh, but it isn't pointless. There is nothing pointless about showing the

> BAAWAAAAAAWAAAAH Knights of atheism that atheism is inconsistent and 
> illogical. I do it all the time, but they do so hate to admit it.
>
> There is much fun to be had in getting an alt.atheism atheist to define
a 
> level of evidence for a Metaphysical X that does not entail a logical 
> error on the part of the atheist. alt.atheism arheists are collectively 
> witless to the idea that it is illogical to demand physically
substantive 
> evidence of something that has no physical substance, and they will
avoid 
> that truth at all costs.
>
> The point being, atheism is prima facie illogical, whereas theism is 
> provably logical, therefore the burden is on the atheist to articulate a

> logical, consistent, coherent framework for their personal atheism, and 
> they all have different ideas of what atheism is.
>
> The funny part is, there is no logical, consistent, coherent framework
for 
> any kind of atheism. The boot is on the other foot. You just have to
know 
> where to aim it.

shhh, just breathe...