Hitchens' Death Will be Closely Watched

My child...... what appetities I could teach you.

 

At least have the common decency to not lie about what I post. If you have difficulty understanding my post, please ask for a clarification, I will do my best to oblige.

This more of your blatant lying. If this is what you call open and honest discourse I wish no part of it. Kindly just ignore my posts.

It is quite clear that such thing is not among your goals or capacity.

You are ranting, but not making sense.

If my pointing out stupidity is being a jerk in your eyes, so be it. I have no problem with it.

On the other hand< I for the life of me can't figure out why you have to make assumption about what you clearly have no clue. Is accusing the other side or meanness and anger the substitute for intelligent rebuttal or is that just the best you can do?

 

I clarified your post. You lifted a hyperlinked portion out of context and made a section that is about the cosmological arguement into an arguement about evolution, by ignoring the hyperlink entirely.

There is nothing misunderstood.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_god_real.html

Is the main thrust of that article evolution or a cosmological arguement? Have you addressed the evidence - not the conclusion - presente din the article? No.

Is this section NOT hyperlinked in the conclusion?

"The design of the earth and solar system is also quite impressive. Likewise, chemistry and physics preclude the possibility that life evolved on earth.."

Yes. It is hyperlinked.

Is this the hyperlinked result? And is the result about abiogenesis rather than evolution? Yes and Yes.

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/chemlife.html

You have some nerve calling people liars, but then I have come to expect this rather than an actual discussion from atheists.

No, you are proveable making an ass out of yourself.

Yes, clearly there is no meaness in your accusation. There is no understanding in our side, and by redirecting you to the substance of the quoted article and showing the MISQUOTE of the conclsion and teh author's clear intent - well, that is not a rebuttal - it is a dishonest attack on your character?

Oh, yeah, you atheists LOVE rebuttal and welcome disagreement - right up to the point where you get it.

 

BS you did not such thing. You claimed I said something i did not. That is called a lie.

WTF are you babbling about?

You mean you are incapable of understanding anything?

I did not call "people" liars, I called YOU a liar because you lied. It is as simple as that.

What you expect from anyone or anything is irrelevant. If you wish to undertake intelligent debate, you should learn in the least, that integrity even if lacking knowledge is paramount.

I am not the on that lied or babbles incoherently.

 

BS - And I have backed it up several times. All you are doing is screaming, falsely I might add, LIAR! This is apparently what atheists consider respectful debate.

The website that apparently I don't understand.

Yep, that is clearly my intent. More HONEST discussion from a too proud atheist.

No, you continue to call me a liar despite several clarifications, and the citation of evidence to back up my claim repeatedly. You were wrong, and you, not I, are now clearly lying for the sake of pride.

I think you should take a good hard look in the mirror. Your initial post was an attempt to introduce evolution into a clearly cosmological arguement, the proof - again:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_god_real.html

And then lift a hyperlinked section out of context and presented it as evolution, when the link CLEARLY refers to abiogenesis:

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/chemlife.html

And when theis clarification was made, repeatedly, you scream maliciiously and falsely about lying and incoherence in others, and have the audacity to lecture others about the importance of integrity in debate?

Apparently, your idea of debate is false sanctimony and derisive lecture.

Yes, you are, are proveable so.

PROVE, not scream, otherwise. Good luck chump.

 

You are an ignorant little troll. I suggest you come to your senses and re-read what I posted, before continuing this moronic diatribe.

I made a total of 9 posts in this thread. Here they are in chronological order:

That is the sum total of my words in this thread. Point out where have I referred to any web site, what claim have you had to back up that I did not acknowledge or whatever you mean, where have I mentioned evolution or lifted a hyperlink out of context. Now if you are not lying about all that, you are delusional in the strictest sense of the world and the best you could do is seek help, professional help.

 

If Hitchens does suddenly have that last minute conversion, I don't picture that changing my mind from atheist to believer. Why would it?

 

I have backed up my claims with citations three times now. Nothing you have written even addresses the points that have been repeatedly pointed out WITH evidence to back them up. The fact that you wrote nine posts has nothing to do with anything, and the simple fact of the matter is that the hyperlinked portion you bolded and then commented on had absolutely nothing to do with abiogensis, you first post, about within 50,000 years, was also about evolution.

Here is you quote - without citation - and clearly referring to evolution.

THAT Is evolution.

THAT quote, is not on this cosmological arguement.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_god_real.html

And NO WHERE in you insult laden diatrobes do address abiogenesis as is CEARY inked on that same page.


Worse, and in fact, you do seem to enjoy insulting people.

Just another standard atheist internet bully. Any more accusations will simply be reported to the mod team for action. Enjoy.

 

I have made no comment or even reference to ANYTHING you posted other than the fact that you lied. I disputed nothing you said, I offered no rebuttal to anything you said, I have not addressed you or your post other than as I said, pointed out that you lied, multiple times.

It has everything to do with the fact that you misrepresented them and lied about what I said.

I did not such thing and you are again lying. Just how pathetic can you get?

Yet more of your lies.

That is not my quote, clearly besides lying you have no clue what you are talking about. Is this ignorance or you are simply not capable of following a thread?

I do not give a (*)(*)(*)(*) what it is about, I did not make it.

I did not address any of it because that was not the intent of my posting. I pointed out the stupidity of posts by another poster, but lo and behold the same became evident about your posts and the fact that you lied several times. Those are not insults but rather factual observations.

No, I enjoy the truth and you seem to prefer lying, a fine Christian attribute I might add.

Actually I am not an atheist, but unlike you I make no proclamations and do my best to live up to my faith. You on the other hand display everything that others find of contempt, dishonesty ignorance and and lack of any humbleness or recognition of error. All in all a fine example of Christianity that is talked about but not practiced. Others call it hypocrisy...

I made no accusations at all. I stated facts that clearly you are in no position to disprove.

Nothing to enjoy, it is rather sad actually...

 

You have been directly quoted four times now. You continue to deny saying what you clearly said or offering up an alternate explanation for the remarks while repeatedly calling me a liar .... for responding to the things I have now quoted four times.

You are overtly trolling and flamebaiting and nothing else. The previous post, and anything further will be reported to the mod team.

 

My posts are there for anyone to read and see how and when you misrepresented them. You attributed posts to me that are not mine, lied about what I said and accuse mo of not addressing your points when my intend was NEVER to engage you at all. In retrospect, I can say that was a good decision, because intellectual debate can only be conducted by and with honest participants, something you should aspire to be, it is also a true characteristic of Christians who actually live it not just boast about it, while accusing others of atheism.

 

You have been quoted four times.

You specifically addressed the arguementation - or claimed you did anyways - that I posted. It is cited and referrenced, but now you have yet another excuse ... because pride appears to be a problem for you.

There is a cosmological arguement and another about abiogensis linked in the same evidence that I have routinely provided.

There is nothing honest about anything you have done, and screaming loudly and launching counter accusations is neither debate nor is it a rebuttal to the evidence that has bee presented repeatedly.

if you think you have been wronged report it, but please spare the community anymore of your childish whining. Really, it is nothing more than the standard atheist internet bully routine.

Nice to see the silence of the atheist community in the face of misbehaving members once again. Hardly a shock at this point.

 

Now, in an attempt to turn this BACK to the intended message and away from flame baiting atheists, lets talk about Chris Hitchens.

If indeed he is going to die, the simple fact of the matter is that he will soon have his faith challenged. As he nears the end of his life, the ommission based accusations against religion and God, Mother Theresa speciifcally, must weighth heavily on him. He is intelligent, no doubt he has read a few of the rebuttals againt is historical accounting and is away that they fail the peer review processes to be considered academic history.

and his own mortality awaits.

The good news for Mr. Hitchens is that he may soon, as we all will, have the opportunity to meet God and deny him to his face. If he is right? Well, then he just fades away into another too angry atheist mouth piece. If he is wrong? Well, then he has some explaining to do ... and he has no way of undoing the damage his proselyting has done.

The decision looms, and like it or not, these issues must certainly be weighing on the man as he struggled with the reality of his mortality. The idea that he would be uneffected by this is ... nonsensical.

 

You are simply deluded.

I myself have been face to face with death three times. Once in a terrorist attack, once in a helicopter crash, and once before entering surgery after a near fatal skiing accident.

God never crossed my mind once.

 

Right, because you have published omission based books denouncing religion and God?

As a former atheist, I think you are lying BTW. The very fact that you are down here indicates that you are quite concerned with God - even if you refuse to admit it.

When people lash out at God, it is very hard to claim that they are uninfluenced by God.

Why don't we let Hitchens answer this rather than you?

Because quite frankly, from where I am sitting, you are the delusional one. And trading those kinds of barbs is - at best - unhelpful.

Is it REALLY so hard for atheists to discuss Hitchens? Apparently.

 

No. I haven't. What a dumb question, and completely unrelated to the comment you were responding to.

Weird.

Wrong again, Ranger.

Who's lashing out at anybody?

 

You have obviously led a very interesting life.

Did you ever face a situation where you thought that death was imminent?

 

Yep, clearly not relative to Chris Hitchens - are you stupid? Is that necssary?

Mor fallacies skiier.

Funny, when you do it - it respectful. Treated EXACTLY the same way in revsere, you are a victim of ill treatment.

Once again, notice how an atheist has difficulty actually discussion Hitchens. It's apparently impossible to have a discussion about Hitchens with atheists - as we see.

There is apparently also no Christ Hitchens because ... evetyone is dumb and delusional.

 

I have completely given up trying to make heads or tails of anything you are trying to say.

 

So you have an inability to comprehend English problem? They have classes for that.

The discussion is about Chris Hitchens, if you have nothing to offer - which appears to be the case - then shove off and be a jerk somewhere else.

Is there some kind of troll test you have to pass in order to become a died in the wool atheist?

Or is really that hard to discuss Hitchens for atheists?

 

Yes. I have made a point of it.

Three times.

May 11, 1979 when I was stationed in Turkey and was in a group of American servicemen targeted in a terrorist attack in front of the Yesilkoy Hotel in Istanbul waiting for the bus to take us to work.

June 1981 when an Army Huey Helicopter I was riding in crashed in Aberdeen, North Carolina while returning from a mission training National Guard troops in Charlotte. That was one where we had a lot of time to think about it between the main rotor bearing exploding and us hitting the ground. The chopper was totaled, we all walked awy.

And May 30, 2006 when I went in for surgery as the result of a ski accident two months earlier that had caused an undetected brain bleed that broke through as a series of epileptic seizures.

So yes... three times.

 

Not usually. But you present unique challenges for the reader.

Like I said, I have given up completely.

 

So now you declare in public forum that you are a QUITTER. Splendid.

 

And therefore, Chris Hitchens having written a series of books about Christians in particular that rely on omission based comparisons is in no way shape or thought thinking about his life or God as his own mortality ends.

And of course, W is totally uninterested in God - so uninterested that he must burst into a web forum to denounce God and all who follow them.

And block any meaningful discussion about Chris Hitchens .... because anyone who raises these issues is delusional.

Oh yeah, and there is no God because atheists are jerks.

About right?

Feel free to blow your stack again.

 

No, you are simply being an insulting jerk - plainly not discussing the topic at hand.

Any further childish retorts will simply be reported for the obvious trolling that it is.

The topic is Hitchens, not why wong is a raging ass and why he thinks its everyone's fault but his.

Unfortunately, and quite unlike you, I understand perfectly what you are saying, and I believe it is fairly self evident why you are saying it. Its you.