Olbermann :

So now we use URANIUM to CARBON date? And he thinks the senator makes herself look stupid!

RE: "Americans value science..."

I think everybody values "science". Most just don't know how it works, or even what is and what isn't science. People will happily think astrology or homeopathy is scientific. Hell, some catholic brothers I used to hang out with while doing a talk for preparation for confirmations, used the "science says from nothing, nothing comes", or (GASP!) even invoked the Second Law of thermodynamics to somehow prove a god (the actual "argument", I forgot, but even then as a 17-18 year old, I smelled the bullshit right away).

re: the pew research center thing:

i'd be more interested in the percentage of surfers or astronauts or deep sea divers who believe in god. but it's interesting that chemists, more than other scientists seem to be superstitious. tim, you're a chemistry person, aren't you? how do you feel about this? the "what the bloody flying fuck is this about, then?" factor must be pretty high in your line of work.

The God that sets it all in motion, "binds and sets boundaries for physical laws - once and for all and then just leaves or observes is fine.

are you ok with this, norm?

The thing about "god" or any other sort of supernatural being is that believers all have their own personal definition. There's no proof one way or the other and so it's an excercise in futility even discussing it really. Were it not for all the fundamentalist crazies and homeopathic crystal crazies out there, hell, I wouldn't even care to discuss this topic anymore.

As for an all-powerful god who limits his power... well, if that's the case, what an asshole he must be! He couldn't use his power to save innocent little children from being abused?

well, if that's the case, what an asshole he must be! He couldn't use his power to save innocent little children from being abused?

i ain't arguin' wit ya, sister. arguing for the existence of a god who isnt' an asshole would certainly be a waste of time.

maybe you can help me, oh wise one. but god being an asshole is not, for me, an argument against his existence.

Certainly not, If gods are anything like people I would say odds are very high that he would be a real dick. And when you figure we are more like ants than children to a being that can think universes into being, we would likely find our treatment rather lacking in bedside manner.

Evidence that god is an asshole simply weighs against certain theories on what good is like. Basicly makes Christians look like they are in denial.

Basicly makes Christians look like they are in denial.

oh, that's my favorite thing to do. it's the only reason i have any cred here at all. :)

this is what most "theology" sounds like to me. i'm much more interested in what the squid will do if i call it an asshole on teh interwebs. so far it made me spill a beer. i'll keep you posted. (if it's listening, my greatest fear is a well-paying job.)

And all this time I thought that you were some lover of deep and profound theology who looked down his nose at people such as Dawkins.

If it watches football games and answers the prayers of football players, it probably also reads teh interwebs. So watch your ass west banker.

And all this time I thought that you were some lover of deep and profound theology who looked down his nose at people such as Dawkins.

i am, actually. you had it right the first time. but to be clear i don't look down my nose at dawkins himself. he's a bright boy, got a good gig going. i look down my nose at, as you said, "people such as dawkins".

and i love "deep and profound theology" in the same way i love "the lord of the rings" or "catcher in the rye"- the beauty isn't in the origins, but in the realization. ahem.

can't someone else step up to the plate and be "the weird guy"? i'm afraid i might be a little too gung ho for the post.

for instance, the quote from robinson's post above. it's from "illusions"- one of the most mock-worthy books from one of the most mock-worthy authors ever to tread the charts. and yet, taken on it's own terms, completely out of context, it's a truly lovely idea. it could become the core of a really ass-kicking and positive worldview. the truth of it is immaterial, really.- see kurt vonnegut on folk societies and extended families.

i don't think many scientists would deny (i do know of a couple famous ones, and a few philosophers, too- determanists, etc.) that we create out own reality to a certain extent by our worldviews, which become kind of like the dna of ideas/mental reactions. the older we get, the more difficult, usually, it is to break with ingrained worldview "thought dna", although it certainly can be done. what the hell am i doing writing this i have a life. really. caio.

right, the topic of whether or not some mythical being is an asshole holds a lot of interest for me too.

The guys I live with don't care to discuss these kinds of things. They're not believers but they're bored with the topic of religion. Basically they could care less about religion, although really religious type of people annoy them.

so if you're not doing anything else, JoAnn, please debunk this for me (from my post above which no one seriously challanged):

see, all the jews know is that around 3500 years ago, 600,000 of our adult male ancestors along with their wives, children and servants- an estimated total of some 3,000,000 people- saw and heard SOMETHING at a place called mount sinai. we can't quite explain how such a gigantic lie could have been introduced all at once, or in stages either, to all of our ancestors, without exception, without one single jew standing up and saying "hey! i know for a fact my grandfather made this up while he was stoned one day!".

remember, the claim is not that so-and-so experienced prophesy, but that every single member of a particular generation of israelites numbering in the hundreds of thousands experienced prophecy at the same time, in the same place, and no one has convincingly argued that point "until this day". maybe there were hallucinogenic plants in that desert that the hebrews called "manna"?

and, if it could be a fake, how come no other religion ever tried to make a similar claim?

I didn't take any comparative religion

sorry. but fun to emphasize. :)

jonathan said

JoAnn, please debunk this for me .... we can't quite explain how such a gigantic lie could have been introduced all at once

Because they were all a bunch of gullible silly idiots who had a strong need to believe that they were very very special?

you know, i can't believe i'm offering norm and the entire 1gm readership the chance to debunk my religion and this is the best they can do. i've complained many times here that the horsemen, new atheist movement, whatever, doesn't even deal with judaism, even though it's the root of their 2 favorite targets (in order: christianity and islam). i understand that christianity is threatening separation of church and state, and islam is threatening to annhialate or convert the western world, and the threat from judaism is proportianately miniscule. to make up for this and i guess in their minds to be fair, they're very hard on the state of israel, supposing somehow that it represents judaism in the world. but it doesn't, and this is why anti-zionism is not considered to be anti-jewish, a cherished dogma here, and one i'm always willing to accept for the sake of argument. :)

anyway, i don't see many attacks on the jewish religious tradition itself, and i'm feeling left out. scoffing at literal or christian readings of bible stories or laws usually doesn't even come close to jewish interpretations of these matters, and yet it's the jews who have preserved and made a fetish out of the old testament for at least 2500 years. the tale of how we came to be in posession of this document, involving mass prophecy-every single member of a nation numbering in the millions- is unique among world religions. and if you can show how such a lie could be introduced to a large population that HAD'NT experienced it (on the assumption the event never occured, of course), the question remains, why didn't any other people try it?

come on, have at it people! i've been reading this blog for over 3 years, i'm telling you it hasn't been done. you could get written up in "atheism today" or something. just give me a plausible scenario that doesn't involve the story being true.

i would try to make this a forum post, but as i've mentioned the forum denies me access- or, i suppose, i could be doing something wrong.

i'll even get you started with a joke that makes a wicked point in your favor:

god says to moses "moses! don't boil a kid in it's mother's milk!

moses says "so you mean we shouldn't eat milk and meat together?"

god says "moses! don't boil a kid in it's mothers milk!"

moses says "so what, then, should we keep seperate dishes for meat and milk?"

god says "moses! DON'T BOIL A KID IN IT'S MOTHER'S MILK!"

moses says "i know. seperate refrigerators".

god says "moses, do whatever the fuck you want."

jonathan,

Are you really serious about this? I thought that you were just joking, but it seems not. I mean, how can anyone discuss the veracity of some folk tale that was passed down some 3500 years ago? How do you know that not one single jew stood up and said "hey! i know for a fact my grandfather made this up while he was stoned one day!" ?

humor me. disabuse me of my irrational credulity. just one plausible scenario will do. it's certainly easy enough with any other folk tale or religious narrative i know of. should be easy with this one too. i must just have a blind spot or something, probably out of a desperately twisted need to feel special.

Oh, I see. You think that i'm saying that Jews think they're special. I was saying that these ancient people thought that they were special, which is true of all ancient peoples which is why they have a need to invent stories about how this entire universe was created for them by some supernatural being and why they have to invent all of these fantastical stories and shit.

I have no idea whatsoever what you're attempting elicit with some kind of scenario. What kind of scenario?

Clearly life 3500 years ago is quite sketchy and there isn't a whole hell of a lot written down way back then.

see, all the jews know is that around 3500 years ago, 600,000 of our adult male ancestors along with their wives, children and servants- an estimated total of some 3,000,000 people- saw and heard SOMETHING at a place called mount sinai. we can't quite explain how such a gigantic lie could have been introduced all at once, or in stages either, to all of our ancestors, without exception, without one single jew standing up and saying "hey! i know for a fact my grandfather made this up while he was stoned one day!".

I mean, come on. Where's the proof of any of this being true? You don't know that every single person saw and heard this.

I guess the scenario you're looking for is that a lot of people said, "that's a bunck of bullshit", and for all you know a bunch of people did say that, but there is nothing written down on their behalf. It's no like a lot of people even knew how to write back then.

I guess the scenario you're looking for is that a lot of people said, "that's a bunck of bullshit"

nope, even one will do. remember, the torah is chock full of challenges to the authority of god/moses, the authority of the judges and prophets, and the authority of the cohanim- the jewish priestly caste.

the rabbinical traditions are full of challenges to the authority of the text itself (more or less along the lines of the later bible critics- conflicting passages, stylistic and timeline issues, etc.)

furthermore, from the time of the enlightement until now, something like 80% of the ashkenazi jews stood up and said the whole thing is bullshit and became more or less completely secular, as it is unto this day. :)

but through all this, no one that i know of has seriously challenged the sinai event itself. there's plenty of argument about what actually occured there and the meaning and significance of the text, and there has been pretty much since the alleged time of the event itself. but the accusation that the earlier generations were simply lying to the later ones about the core prophetic event itself never raised it's head. to the best of my knowledge. and believe me i've been looking.

i'll try to frame it again another way: imagine you are an, uh, italian, and so am i. now if i told you that my ancestors have a story going back time immemorial about such and such well, you may believe me or you may not. but if i tell YOU that YOUR ancestors also have this tradition,and in fact so does every italian well, you would know right away whether i was lying or not. and if not you then your brother, or your cousins, or someone in your extended family. so, how to introduce such a gigantic lie in the first place? capiche?

you'll be doing the atheists a big favour if you can come up with something, btw. not because anyone cares what the jews believe (i'm sure they don't) but because this event is the very bedrock on which both christianity and islam rest. the only reason jesus or mohammed could convince their followers is because none of their followers (the early christians, after all, were jews) questioned this singular event. ALL of the claimed religious "authority" of the "3 abrahamic faiths" (retch!gag!) rests on this one event, experienced by an entire people. this is why i'm always so dismissive of anti-religious polemicists who don't even deal with it at all. i've always wondered why they don't...

but maybe i'm wrong? i'd be pleased if someone could show me a passage in dawkins, etc., or even hume or spinoza that even attempts to debunk this narrative.

but maybe i'm wrong? i'd be pleased if someone could show me a passage in dawkins, etc., or even hume or spinoza that even attempts to debunk this narrative.

cuz ther's nothing in the jewish tradition, including spinoza, i can tell you that. nothing. nada. zilch.

But jonathan, you're assuming that this myth about the 600,000 people is true. Just because someone wrote it down doesn't make it true. There's no way to prove that 3,000,000 people saw and heard anything. It's a story written in a book with nothing to back it up. Anyway, 3 million people in the Sinai?! Wow. How many people is that per square mile!?

even thomas aquinas, and certainly mohammed, didn't try to claim that any of his ancestors actually saw jesus turn water into wine, let alone their entire ethnic groups.

ALL of the claimed religious "authority" of the "3 abrahamic faiths" (retch!gag!) rests on this one event, experienced by an entire people.'

All this proves is that the three faiths are all interconnected. It still does not prove than an entire people experienced a damned thing. These myths are built one upon the other over time until the point that it's so widespread that people think "oh, it must be true!".

You know as well as I do that even strictly historical writings are wrought with lies and errors.

The New Testament, Old Testament, Qu'ran, Book of Mormon and all of these so-called holy books are all related, but just different enough to have all of the different "faiths". But they're just something that people wrote about and desperately wanted to believe.

and before you start telling me about how "people didn't know how to write back then" and such, have a gander at the extensiveness, comprehensiveness and antiquity of the jewish written tradition.

What?! So it wasn't just Moses who was writing on stone tablets? The entire 3 million people were able to write? So if this tale were a lie, then any of the 3 million people could have debunked the lie? Or at least the 600,000 men? hmmmm...

again, the claim doesn't rest on the fact that it was written down, by moses or anyone else. it rests on three million eyewitnesses passing the story down orally from generation to generation.

but still, i wouldn't be so quick to assume these people couldn't write. :)

But jonathan, how do you know that there were 3 million eye witnesses?

And how do you know that most of these people knew how to write and that most of these people wrote on stone tablets?

I">http://www.neveh.org/winston/yfactor/y-intro.html">I found this on line. Sounds exactly like what you've been saying.

oops this

Over 3,300 years ago, an event occurred that was so unique, so spectacular that it defies the imagination of many modern-minded individuals.

Begins by assuming that this event occurred. There is no proof that this event occurred.

How do you sell all that to an entire nation?

As if entire nations of people aren't sold on all kinds of bullshit. Hell, practically an entire United States is sold on the idea that nudity is an awful thing that young children shouldn't be exposed to. Sex and nudity, two very natural things have been turned into something evil. How to sell entire nations of people on oppressive laws concerning their sexuality? And the U.S. is nothing compared to the Muslim countries.

Yet that is the story of the Jewish people (a nation known for its intelligence)

So the premise is that the Jewish people are too intelligent to be fooled? Oh come on now... So Moses wrote the Torah 3 million years ago and what is written there all of these intelligent people believe hook, line and sinker? wow...

It astounds me how the believers of every religion feel that they are God's pet and the chosen ones. The Mormons feel that only they will ascend to the highest kingdom. Ridiculous!

why the hell would anyone want to believe that some crazy god person decided 3500 years ago that we should stone our children to death for eating and drinking too much? or that we should wrap leather straps on our arms and head every morning? or that some ethnic sub-grouping (the jewish priests) or intellectually based sub-grouping (the rabbis of the sanhedrin) should have the power of life and death over us? or that we should "dwell as a people alone, despised", or that we should commit genocide and suffer the deprivations and hardships of war for a little strip of land, with no oil, which was anyway supposedly "given" to us by this same "god"? the list is endless. does this sound attractive to you?

None of what any of the religions force their believers into doing sounds attractive to me. Women being subservient to men doesn't sound attractive to me, and I can't imagine that it would sound attractive to any intelligent woman, and yet millions and millions of women buy into this crap.

I suppose that people buy into this crap because they really truly believe in some divine law and divine ruler of the universe.

People regularly do all kinds of irrational things that are not in their best interests.

the fact that there were no exceptions whatsoever, the ENTIRE generation was there

One more time. How do you know that there were no exceptions??!!!!!

you must be aware that the fact that people are in general suceptable to all kinds of mass idiocy is not an argument against this particular claim. i emphasize again-this claim is completely unique in world history. it is not a claim of "this or that just makes sense, follow me" but a claim of an eyewitness account.

Your premise, jonathan, is that what is written in the Torah is true and there is no way to prove that. Moses talked to God 3500 years ago and wrote this down and it became the Torah.. I guess this is the belief. Sounds perfectly goofy to me.

I suppose that people buy into this crap because they really truly believe in some divine law and divine ruler of the universe.

yes, and the reason they believe this is because of this one event. not because it's "attractive", which it obviously isn't.

Your premise, jonathan, is that what is written in the Torah is true

agggggghhhh!! no! again, i'm only talking about the "sinai event". it's true it's in the torah, but again, it's an oral tradition and this is what the claim is based on, not the torah itself.

So what it comes down to is all of this is based on oral tradition and/or the Torah, and how could so many people be convinced to follow difficult edicts. Well, that's not very convincing.

The holy book came from oral tradition? And all of this supposedly occured 3500 years ago? Please tell me how you know that this is a fact? I'm all ears.

So if it started from oral tradition, then the people knew what Moses was gonna write before he even wrote it? Damn, those Jews really were intelligent!

what do you mean you don't have any cheddar? it's the SINGLE MOST POPULAR CHEESE IN THE WORLD! ah, yr a bunch a wusses. except for JoAnn.

Hey guys, so what did I miss? :)

Jonathan, you are making your whole argument about the "event" based on two well-known fallacies, appeal to "authority" and appeal to popularity.

Even proper, evidence-based history is not very reliable, it is not rare to see different hypotheses for the same event, which with different degrees of confidence. Even when some physical evidence exists, no explanation is usually taken to be true just like that, no matter how many people believe it.

So, is there any evidence other than something written by someone, and believed just so by many people, for that event you allude to?

andyo, as usual everything you say is true. the use of logical fallacies are inadmissable in a logical argument. but as any lawyer or judge will tell you, appeal to authority is perfectly legitimate in a court of law, and i i've already admitted this has nothing to do with logic. that doesn't mean it has nothing to do with evidence, however. the use of any eyewitness account is essentially an appeal to authority. the more witnesses, the stronger the case. if i tell you i saw john lennon shoot john kennedy, this is evidence, although extremely weak and unverifiable. if i tell you that me and three million other people saw the shooting, this is an entirely different kettle of fish- although still technically a logical fallacy.

you may be interested to know that in a jewish court of law (not israeli-jewish) circumstantial evidence is inadmissable. in jewish law, murder gets you the death penalty. but to prove murder you must have at least 2 witnesses to the actual event. if you saw a guy with a knife run into a house chasing another guy, and run out again holding a bloody knife, and go into the house and see the second guy lying there dead in a pool of blood, all this circumstantial evidence is inadmissable and the first guy walks. crazy, maybe, but the point is your not dealing with a bunch of credulous people here dying for the "comfort" or "structure" of religion.

also, part of the evidence for this event is its very singularity- it is unlike any other appeal to authority or popularity you can think of. it is not, if this is what your thinking, a simple matter of "well, a lot of people believe it, including my local religious honcho, so it must be true."

further more, i've mentioned how strange it is to me that no jew has ever been recorded attempting to say that the "revelation at sinai" didn't happen. but i'm even more baffled that no one else has, either, except in the general context of "anything found in a huge pile of bullshit must also be bullshit"- an argument i hope you'll agree is also logically flawed.

i don't know how to do the research. can't anyone find me dawkins/hitchens et al on this subject? and if not, doesn't this strike you as strange? it is, after all, "the single most popular cheese in the (western) world."

jonathan,

I have discovered that what you're going on about is Kuzari principle. You of course knew that and I find it intellectually dishonest that you did not state this right up front.

http://jewishatheist.blogspot.com/

Kuzari proof: The common apologetic argument that the story of mass revelation at Sinai is so amazing and unusual that it must be true.

http://www.talkreason.org/articles/kuzari.cfm

One of the pioneers and an acknowledged champion of Jewish apologetics was the prominent poet Yehuda Halevi, who wrote the Kuzari tract in the 11th century. Halevi's apologetic technique relies on the standard Hellenistic scholastic system, perfected for centuries by Christian and Moslem philosophers, but Halevi undoubtedly made a valuable addition to this field. He was fully aware that Judaism, having lost its monopoly on monotheism, was in need of special apologetic arguments inapplicable to the powerful monotheistic religions – Islam and Christianity – which wielded not only a theology markedly similar to the Jews', but also powerful historical arguments in their favor. With this in mind he developed a series of interesting arguments in defense of Judaism, arguments which retain their popular appeal to this day.

modern Jewish apologetics has made the "Kuzari principle" into nothing short of a cult, declaring it the earliest and the sole authoritative proof of the truth of Judaism. We demonstrate that the principle – both in its origins and the nature of its arguments – is neither ancient nor actually Jewish. We determine which axioms were used by Halevi and other medieval Jewish thinkers to construct the Kuzari principle and similar apologetic arguments; in the process, we reveal the fundamental differences between ancient and modern Jewish apologists in approach to the Biblical narrative.

Turns out that this is debunked by many people once one knows what to search for.

(http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/shlomi_tal/sinai.html)

At this point the apologist for Orthodox Judaism will request that I should stop giving such seemingly fabulous examples as the Prometheus myth or the statewide decree of the Persian king Shahrayar and present a real example of a very public miracle which is reported to have happened but did not actually take place. I do not think any example could satisfy a person who has already subscribed to a doctrine, but no matter, I have an example from none other than the Hebrew Bible (the TaNaKh, which the Christians call the Old Testament) itself.

Indeed! No example would satisfy jonathan. Of that I am certain! :)

Indeed! No example would satisfy jonathan.

well, i haven't heard even one yet from anyone, including your sources. but you're right, i'm totally busted. i don't know if the kuzari is the first book to use this argument (it's 12th century, i think) but it's certainly the most famous. good research, JoAnn.

but i have not been disingenous in that i still haven't heard a good rebuttal. this doesn't mean i won't be satisfied with anything. all i want is one reasonable scenario, that takes into account the uniqueness of the claim (it's not about the numbers, it's about the lack of exceptions. ANY jew at the time should have been able to refute it) and doesn't involve it having actually happened.

and i'd still like to know why none of you or your gurus has even heard of it. took you 4 days, JoAnn, and you're no slouch on research.

The egyptians are not an example because no one in the whole wide world is as unique and intelligent as the Jews are, right jonathan? And no one else in the whole wide world has such a compelling apology for their mythical beliefs as compared to the Jews. And no other society in the whole wide world has an oral tradition like the Jews. And no other society in the whole wide world has a more educated population who knows how to write as compared to the Jews. In fact, even in ancient history, the slaves themselves knew how to write and wrote how they felt on stone tablets. Dontcha know?! lol

All of this is debunked in the excellent TalkOrigins website which, jonathan, you are too much of a coward to respond to.

Not only are Jews smarter than everyone else, but even the Jewish slaves were erudite. And the Jews back during the Sinai Revelation were able to gather 600,000 soldiers. Wow! That percentage of soldiers to overall population is unheard of, but the Jews are special, by gum.

http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=98052

Then you procede to debunk something from Wikipedia, which i never even referred to

please go up a few posts and see my conciliatory attempt to bow out of this while i chew on the talkreason article you linked to. but i just wanted to point out that the wiki quote was taken directly from that article. which you would know if you had read it. :) jk can't we be friends?

i think it's pretty funny that an atheist would take umbrage at a people claiming to be the "pets" (i wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy) of a nonexistent entity.

Yeah, we're still friends damn it (albeit virtual friends). When you're not busy getting a kick out of annoying people, your wit and sense of humor are fun.

And i'm not even gonna take the bate on the second comment.

And i'm not even gonna take the bate on the second comment.

cuz we is frends, rite? :)

rite, cuz we is best fwends.

Don't bother ripping apart point by point the mwiner article. I just threw that in to annoy you to get back at you for being so goddammned annoying.

I'd rather you do a point by point on the talkreason article.

Hardball doesn't bother me in the least. Being deceptive annoys the hell out of me. You do have a way of avoiding the more difficult questions and muddying the waters.

oh yeah, i read the talkreason article. I spents hours and hours reading it. Then I read the follow-up responses and replies. Quite interesting I must say. In the end, though, it's a lot like the arguments that the "intelligent design" people use. They're sophisiticated arguments, but they don't hold water once you pierce the veil and clear the smoke.

but they don't hold water once you pierce the veil and clear the smoke

Oooff.. what a sad display of mixed metaphors on my part!

They're sophisiticated arguments, but they don't hold water once you pierce the veil and clear the smoke.

so you came to the conclusion the article was "designed" (i use the term advisedly) to lead you to. well done.

i dunno, maybe i will too in the end. i don't know if i'm as smart as you, but i'm definitely not as fast as you with this kind of stuff. i haven't gotten there yet.

as you know, clearing smoke isn't my specialty. creating (i use the term advisedly) it is. :)

Speaking of this being fwends bit, it reminds of Derrick Carter's "Friends The One AM Dub"

i dunno, maybe i will too in the end.

Nah. You're bound and determined to believe that some magic voice in the sky spoke to 3 million jews. You're not even able to admit that there is no proof whatsoever that 3 million jews ever heard such a voice. This oral tradition argument is not proof.

Oh, here's the link to derrick carter. The song is on his pop out player.

Damn it. Me too. brain damage from too much weed.

(http://www.myspace.com/theoneoclockclub)

http://www.myspace.com/theoneoclockclub

Oh, there it is. I used to use parenthesis and brackets, but that method doesn't work anymore. Thanks!

Oh, I see. You don't need proof. Some evidence is good enough for you. I get it. No wonder this conversation is so confusing.

Oh, I see. You don't need proof. Some evidence is good enough for you.

come on, you know that even for gravity and evolution the "proof" is only the weight of the evidence. these are not sylogisms.

hmm. new t-shirt idea:

"the proof of the theory of gravity is in the weight of the evidence".

booya!

On the other hand no one is looking for and finding written records that verify the stories of miracles.

ah, but it's not the miracles that need to be verified in your analogy, there's no observable development in miracles- it's the prophesies. don't get me started on that one, or we'll find out just how long norm is willing to allow a thread from, what, 2 saturdays ago?- to continue. i'd be willing to bet i can debunk more of them than you can, but i could show you some real headscratchers too.

Here we go again. No direct answer. One has to dig and plead to know what is even being discussed.

Okay, jonathan, which records verify the prophesy 'prophesies"? And what exactly, precisely do you mean by the "prophesies"?

The reason that this thread is so long is because of all of the smoke and mirrors.

Red7 and I are gullible enough to continue with this little game.

jonathan,

Your socks don't match.

Yenta schemta. I was referring to the Friends One AM Dub song that you obviously didn't listen to yo!

i'm answering you down here, red7, because something really weird is happening to the "reply" micro-thread or whatever you call it above. happens alla time.

design or go to nursing school or something that won't lead to conflict and death

ah, these things are inevitable. best to go out doing something you like.

dey's ma peeblz, man. cut me a break.

i realized that was wrong as soon as i hit post. don't cut me a break, please.

who are against the very idea of settlers or, in fact, the existence of the state of israel itself

Being against the idea of settlers is not at all the same thing as being against the existence of Israel itself. What about being against the idea of Palestine itself?

Hi SemperFi!

SemperFi! Hello!

I'm not posting on the forum anymore, so it's a good thing that you posted this here.

I might just come to expect an annual message from one of my favorite sailors.

I have to say that your description of your race with the Tartan was too technical for me to understand. Luckily I had a sailor boy sitting next to me who explained what all of this meant. He did say something about a genoa being at least 125%..

Anyway, sounds you had a wonderful time out there, what with polishing off four bottles of Zinfandel and enjoying the benefits of your friends "flight pay". ;) Interesting thing is, I've been drinking White Zinfandel this summer. We seem to have the same taste in libations. :)

may God bless and keep you

And may the best be with you too. Yes, I'm doing quite well. I've just completed a painting for a saloon with a picture of.... two Anchor Steams! lol

Thanks again for thinking of me SemperFi. I have always enjoyed your prose and it was a delight to read your message.