Theos-Talk Archives (February 2010 Message tt00219)

CNN lied.  But CNN does that a lot.
 
Chuck the Heretic
 
_www.charlescosimano.com  

 
In a message dated 2/15/2010 5:52:02 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
silva_cass@yahoo.com writes:

 
 
 


According to CNN there is no recorded evidence that this has  happened in 
the past.
>
>Cass
>
>From: "




_ (http://www.charlescosimano.com/) _Augoeides-222@Augoeides-2_ 
(mailto:Augoeides-222@comcast.net) _" <_ (http://www.charlescosimano.com/) 
_Augoeides-222@Augoeides-2_ (mailto:Augoeides-222@comcast.net) _>
>To: _ (http://www.charlescosimano.com/) _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ 
(mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) 
>Sent: Tue, 16 February, 2010  10:46:35 AM
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: [bad  text]
>
>  
>Chuck, 
>Yep, 26 beow zero icy  frozen everything, and that wonderful 50 mph breeze 
blowing acroos thge 1/2  mile of ice on the shore of Lake Michigan begin 
reaching any of us chicagoans  lol!!! Sbow was higher than I was when I was 
kid in Chicago. We used to grab a  ride and shoe surf on the ice by holding 
onto the back bumpers of the cars !  Wheee what fun!!! And the MONSTER summer 
electrical storms amde my mom  disappear because she was hiding in the 
closet. And it was estatic to wake up  drenched with wet sheets in the hot summer 
time of Chicago. I also said "Whats  the big deal?" we had snow like that 
every year back on the 40-50's!  
>
>John 
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From:  Drpsionic@aol. com 
>To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com 
>Sent:  Monday, February 15, 2010 8:14:59 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific  
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: [bad text] 
>
>LOL!  
>
>I can remember a number of years where 95% of the US was under  snow and 
>cold so bad it froze the oil in car engines. This year is  nothing. Oh the 
>East Coast had a snow storm and the southerners got to  make snowmen, but 
I'm 
>from Chicago, I live in Wisconsin and you ain't  gonna impress me with 
snow. 
>
>As far as the planets being  aligned with the Milky Way, the planets are 
>always aligned with  something. The Mayans were simply nuts, or is it the 
>folks who are  taking them seriously who are nuts? Sorry, I'm not 
impressed.  
>
>Chuck the Heretic 
>
>www.charlescosimanwww.charles
>
>In a message dated 2/14/2010 7:35:43 P.M. Central  Standard Time, 
>silva_cass@silva_cass@<WBR>yah
>
>Hi  Chuck 
>Seeing we have no recorded evidence of all the planets being in  alignment 
>with the Milky Way (which is all the Mayans predicted) we  have no way of 
>knowing what, or cannot predict, how or if this event  will impact the 
earth. 
>We have had pole shifts in the past and  survived them, we have had ice 
and 
>mini ice ages, so what I am saying,  is not that the earth will be 
>annihlated but what is causing these  climatic changes such as 95 percent 
of the USA 
>under snow?  
>
>We have evidence of islands sinking and evidence of mountains  reemerging, 
>and if a chamber was found in the sphinx foot it would  suggest that it 
was 
>constructed to hold something which could have  been removed. As Cayce was 
>a christian perhaps the Jesus thing was  more about the Christos thing.? 
>
>Are there no more clairvoyants  left in the TS? 
>
>Cass 
>
>In AgnosticsRefuge@  yahoogroups. com, "HumanCarol" <humanist@> wrote: 
>> >  
>> > Unable to correctly attribute material to the correct  author, 
>mangummurdock <no_reply@> alleged: 
>> >  
>> > > Richard Dawkins argues in Chap 3 of his book "The  Dawkins Delusion" 
>that>> 
>> > 
>> > It  is already know that that is a lie. 
>> > 
>> >  << "it is more parsimonious to conjure up, say, a `Big Bang  
>singularity' or some other physical concept as yet unknown" to account  
for the 
>existence of the universe. The word parsimonious is  meaningless in 
context: 
>Whatever it might denote, how could it be  measured? But conjure is the 
right 
>verb, suggesting as it does both  misdirection and inattention. 
Misdirection: 
>The Big Bang singularity  does not represent a physical concept, because 
it 
>cannot be  accommodated by a physical theory. It is a point at which 
physical  
>theories give way. Inattention: The physical concept in which Dawkins  has 
>placed his confidence is something that is either infinite and  
inscrutable, 
>or otherwise unknown. Men have come to faith on the basis  of far les_s. 
>This is, I suppose, not surprising. His atheism  notwithstanding, Dawkins 
>believes that he is a "deeply religious man."  He simply prefers an alien 
cult.>> 
>> > 
>> >  Why don't you correctly attribute that passage? 
>> > 
>>  > Here is the context and a correct citation: 
>> >  
>> > ---begin excerpt--- 
>> > 
>> > >  > 
>> 
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been  removed] 
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have _been removed]  
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been  removed]
>
>
>

__________________________________________________________
Yahoo!7:  Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, 
and for free at  PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.Yahoo!7:  

[Non-text portions of this  message have been removed]

_ (http://www.charlescosimano.com/) 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]