Daily Archives: November 1, 2011

EMOTIOMAL TERRORISTS> Gaypracs are emotional terrorists for millions of Americans!

.@annihilist @robineccles Good back and forth! Later.

.@robineccles All fact, truth, knowledge, proof, etc. is “tainted” (note quotes) by the subjective of the thinker. @annihilist

.@robineccles The theory CANNOT escape the idea of “favorability.”

.@robineccles Consider that proof FOR A SINGLE PERSON does not have to be UNIVERSAL proof.

.@robineccles It is implicit in the theory your random chance has a “favorable outcome” for certain species; hence “favoring random chance.”

.@robineccles Are you at least WILLING to become a theist, assuming you could be persuaded?

.@robineccles New ways of thinking are often rejected as nonsense at first. @annihilist

.@robineccles See http://t.co/27Tf8o9N later for starters.

.@robineccles It only takes ONE INSTANCE to establish a possibility.

.@annihilist Likewise and thank you. @robineccles

RELIGION OF ATHEISM> Atheism like any religion has a BEING that is valued above all others and COMMANDMENT! # INSANE ATHEISTS> The INSANE, not sane, atheists want to see YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN ROT IN HELL FOREVER! # PROOF OF … Continue reading →

.@robineccles Approximately speaking, not if you factor in the “evolutionary loophole.”

.@robineccles The answer is yes. E.g., at one point in history, some physicists said “particles” and others said “waves.”

.@robineccles Please clarify. @annihilist

.@annihilist Well, I hope I’ve proven MYSELF not to be insufferable, dishonest, and hateful. @robineccles

.@robineccles “Can” means “is it possible.”

.@robineccles Got no quotes at my end.

.@annihilist I’m sorry to hear that. @robineccles

.@robineccles Can two people come to different conclusions and both be right?