Franko and Deism.org

[The Fool]

Ever wondered what Franko did on his vacation from JREF?

check out
http://deism.org/forum/index.php?sid=c821ffffa65c1acaec4b47a529962358

He decided to run his Ideas through this deism forum, The results are rather predictable, He got his backside spanked....Its quite interesting reading. He is "serpent" on this site. Yalel is there too, they make a nice couple, swapping compliments and patting each other on the back.

After months of trying to find out why his goddess is female, I discovered he has no problem sharing the answer with deists, even though he can't bring himself to post it here...

Allow me to oblige.

Posted by "serpent" on deism.org in a thread he called "logical deism.
He was asked....

What use is there in attributing any gender to god? God operates the same whether god is male, female, or beyond the concept of gender. Attributing a gender to god is, to me, simply a matter of of socio-sexual nonsense, another salvo in the absurd war of political correctness, and it has no place in a conversation of the real nature of god.


he replied with

I disagree. Our gender is fundamental to who we are as individuals. It is one of our intrinsic characteristics.

But to understand where I am coming from a little better on this you have to understand something of the LD notion of the Soul, or “Graviton”.

Now according to Logical Deism there is only one type of particle that exist in the metatrue reality (The Omniverse). This particle is called a Graviton. Each of us are such a particle. Now these particles have four intrinsic properties MASS, VELOCITY, SPIN, and CHARGE. All of these parameters are values, and all can be either positive, or negative.

SPIN corresponds to your gender. “Positive” Spin is male, and “Negative” Spin is Female (spin = zero is gender neutral)


so there you have it....It all depends on which way you spin. All you people that thought he was mad are wrong, he's just dizzy.

The rest of the thread is vintage franko...all the same stuff, He has dropped the "atoms obey, you are, you obey" thing. I think that got bashed too much for even someone like franko to persist with it.

The thread ends by being closed by the moderator with the following comment.

Thread moved and locked by moderator for excessive display of poor manners on the part of some participants.
Please keep the flames low and posts on the topic.
Thanks
_________________


Can you imagine that??? a franko thread displaying poor manners??

This site has given me much laughter, check it out....and a special thanks to that Internet sleuth James MGMDP for finding the site...

[Gregor]

Is there a mechanism the forum can use to place posts by Franko and responses thereto in a special font or text color?

I get tired of reading through a thread to see Franko post some nonsense, then see post after post of people discussing his mental infirmity.

As I haven't used "ignore" before, wouldn't it simply strike the Franko posts, but not deal with the replies?

[Upchurch]

Poor Franko. Nobody loves or respects him except Jedi Knight.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Gregor
As I haven't used "ignore" before, wouldn't it simply strike the Franko posts, but not deal with the replies?

Mea Culpa on that one Gregor. I have stopped replying to Franko more often than I have stopped smoking.

[Q-Source]

Deleted by me

[The Fool]

While I'm in a Frank belting mood I'd just like to go back to The second question I have been trying to get him to explain. It is about the "consequences" I will suffer after death (for being an A-theist). Franko's belief is that we cannot control our behaviour unless we fear the Goddess's retribution.

This is obviously a personality feature of Franko. He cannot self moderate his behavour. On this form where he has no "god" watching over his posts he is the ad-hom king. On Deist.org which appears to be strictly moderated....he does appear to control the potty mouth.....otherwise he gets his threads canned.

He obviously transfers this feature of his personality to atheists. Because he cannot control himself without external moderation he has decided everyone else must be the same....

It gets down to the issue Pirsig discusses in "Zen and the art of Motorcycle maintenance" (my sig). Frank obviously does need someone to tell him what is good, and what is not good. I'll make that decision myself thank you...No Godess required here.

[Tricky]

LOL!

Boy over there at Deist.org, they truly have some Logical Deists. :D

Interestingly, when Franko came back to JREF, he was welcomed. How does that fit in with his contention that atheists are evil?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Q-Source



EXCELENT!!

Congratulations Fool for this search.!!!

Franko was BANNED there!!!!

Read this (http://deism.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=272&highlight=serpent&sid=9b34b6bef061ade2f449e4043e10a8ae):

"If you want to see what the Deus Project is not about, we invite you to search this forum for posts by Serpent. They are vitriolic and rude...
The Deus Project's Forum exists to provide an atmosphere of communal intellectual inquiry and support. While vigorous debates carried out in language of mutual respect are welcome, Serpents posts are needlessly antagonistic and injure this unique community"


That's why he came back to the JREF Forum!!!!

Q-S

congratulate JamesMGMDP....I just went and did some look/cut/paste....

[Franko]

I have stopped replying to Franko more often than I have stopped smoking.

Show me a Man who smokes cigarettes when he should know better, and I will show you a Man who knows deep down in his heart ... that the Matter isn't really real.

[LillyThePink]

Originally posted by Franko


Show me a Man who smokes cigarettes when he should know better, and I will show you a Man who knows deep down in his heart ... that the Matter isn't really real.

Show me a man that's got a good woman (show me)
Show me a man that's got a good woman (show me)
Show me a man that's got a good woman

Show me a man that's got a good woman (show me)
I'll show you a man who goes to work humming
He knows he's got
some sweet lovin' coming
At the end of his working day..........yeah!

Sorry, F, you set me off :)

[Upchurch]

Poor Franko...

[Franko]

Franko was BANNED there!!!!

Ohhh, I have been banned from much classier places than that!

Hehehe …

Read this:

"If you want to see what the Deus Project is not about, we invite you to search this forum for posts by Serpent. They are vitriolic and rude...
The Deus Project's Forum exists to provide an atmosphere of communal intellectual inquiry and support. While vigorous debates carried out in language of mutual respect are welcome, Serpents posts are needlessly antagonistic and injure this unique community"

Actually what you don’t see on those boards (well some of it) is all of the back and fourth between me and the two site admins. Both of these guys are actually A-Theists, not Deists! … and whenever I post on a site run by A-Theists it is pretty much Fate that I am getting Banned … it is only a matter of When.

I found it hysterical, that the posts they actually claimed to have banned me for were just the posts of my opponents re-pasted with a few key terms changed. I figured how can they ban me for saying the same stuff that was just spouted at me? Check out the thread on the “pledge of allegiance” … I really cleaned their clocks there … ;)

[Franko]

Sorry, F, you set me off :)

Actually ... I'm in complete agreement with you on that point, Lilly. ;)

[Upchurch]

Poor delusional self-important Franko...

[Franko]

Fool,

Franko's belief is that we cannot control our behaviour unless we fear the Goddess's retribution.

Actually … that is Your belief. I don’t Fear Anything, but if I did, the LG is the last person I’d Fear.

You A-Theists fixate on Fear, because ultimately it is all the You understand.

He cannot self moderate his behavour. On this form where he has no "god" watching over his posts he is the ad-hom king. On Deist.org which appears to be strictly moderated....he does appear to control the potty mouth.....otherwise he gets his threads canned.

If they Ban me that is THEIR loss – not mine. There are plenty of fish (forums) in the sea (Internet). If they don’t like site-traffic, that is their problem.

It gets down to the issue Pirsig discusses in "Zen and the art of Motorcycle maintenance" (my sig). Frank obviously does need someone to tell him what is good, and what is not good. I'll make that decision myself thank you...No Godess required here.

hehehe … you really are a clueless ********** … Fool.

[Franko]

Upchuck pouted:
Poor delusional self-important Franko...

Shouldn't you be off kissing Loki's ass, Religious fanatic?

[Upchurch]

Awww... That's right, Franko. You're right and everyone in the whole wide world is wrong. You go tell 'em like a big boy!

(I think I've found the correct way to communicate with Franko, everyone!)
Incidently, any B5 fans out there? "Comes the Inquisitor" has Franko's name all over it.

Upchurch

[BeholdTheTruth]

Fool: "Yalel is there too, they make a nice couple, swapping compliments and patting each other on the back."

YaleL: Fool, why dost thou need to persecute me so, and to use my name in vain? Have I not sought to have you not just see the surface of words the way Fundies do, but rather to see below the surface of words such as mine, as JC himself sought to have his followers see his words, as per John 16:25 - 28...

More seriously, guys... 25. These things I have spoken to you figuratively; but the time cometh when I shall no longer speak to you in parables, but will tell you plainly about the Father. 26. In that day you shall ask in my name and I do not say that I will pray the Father for you; [note: the word "to" is left out of the above, and thus JC is speaking "elliptically" as in an elliptical orbit of the earth around the sun and Fundies around their Son]

27. For the Father himself loveth you, [note, that if you look beneath the surface of his words, you can see that he is tweeking his followers because he is still speaking figuratively and they just can't "get" it] because you have loved me, and have believed [even HE says "believed" as opposed to saying he did -- so maybe he is both A-theist AND a theist?] that I came out from God. 28. I came out from the Father, and am come into the world again, I leave the world, and go to the Father. [note the coming and going stuff. This guy was cool! For more, see the newly revised http://familycology.org for beyond the- overly-familar-memes that blind you and bind you. For less, look in the miirors of your memes]

Regards, Yale (as in Yah El)

Funny stuff!

"Thread moved and locked by moderator for excessive display of poor manners on the part of some participants."

I wouldn't say Franko has bad manners. He/she is hella boring though.

[Franko]

Whopeedonme,

… and speaking of Clueless …

"Thread moved and locked by moderator for excessive display of poor manners on the part of some participants."

… and you call yourself a Skeptic?!?!

You don’t find it the slightest bit odd that a Deist gets banned from Deism.org for arguing the existence of God too strongly?!!!

Did you actually read any of the threads? It is like my debates here … for a bunch a guys who supposedly believe in God (the “deists”) they sure seem to think like a bunch of A-theists. I mean … they all believe in the existence of “God”, but I am the only one that is arguing to keep the phrase “ONE NATION UNDER GOD” in the pledge? If you believe in “God” then why on Earth does that phrase need to be removed?

Your a priori way of thinking is what is truly hysterical Whodingy. I don’t think you would know Skepticism if it fell out of the sky, landed on your head, and started to wiggle.

I wouldn't say Franko has bad manners. He/she is hella boring though.

If I am so boring, then why is it you are always following me around so consistently? You seem to be awfully fascinated by my antics. Don’t you have anything more interesting to do then follow my posts around like a lovesick little puppy dog?

------------------

... An Upchuck ... if you can pry your lips away from Loki's ass for a second ... I am still wiating for you to explain how people who don't believe there are consequences for their actions are more moral then people who do believe their actions have consequences?

Why do you continue to evade and avoid backing up your ridiculous assertion?

Since you have already conceded that A-Theism is a Religion, is this just an example of your dogmatic belief system; and therefore to be taken simply on Faith?

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko

Actually what you don’t see on those boards (well some of it) is all of the back and fourth between me and the two site admins. Both of these guys are actually A-Theists, not Deists!

OK, so I'm not the only Deist that's been relabeled according to the Frankonian Dictionary. This sort of makes me feel better. :D

[Franko]

Actually the two admins all but conceded that they were actually Atheists to me.

You jkorski, as I mentioned the other day, first told me that you didn't know who Spinoza was, and then two days later claimed to worship Spinoza's God. That makes you at very least -- seem disingenuous.

Word and Deed both have to match. To be a Deist (or an Atheist) you have to be one by label, and by action. Not just one or the other.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Did you actually read any of the threads? It is like my debates here … for a bunch a guys who supposedly believe in God (the “deists”) they sure seem to think like a bunch of A-theists. I mean … they all believe in the existence of “God”, but I am the only one that is arguing to keep the phrase “ONE NATION UNDER GOD” in the pledge? If you believe in “God” then why on Earth does that phrase need to be removed?


Because some people who believe in "God" apparently also believe in the U.S. Constitution.

[Franko]

Because some people who believe in "God" apparently also believe in the U.S. Constitution.

Its pretty obvious that you didn't read the thread.

BTW ... Even though they banned me, the Wraith [materialized] there shortly after my departure. if (when) he gets banned another will take his place. The LG is NOT easily thwarted.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
... An Upchuck
Ah, that takes me back. Congradulations, Franko! You are now at the same level of wit as first graders. What's the difference between first graders and Franko, you might ask? First graders will eventually grow out of it.

I am still wiating for you to explain how people who don't believe there are consequences for their actions are more moral then people who do believe their actions have consequences?I have answered this, numerous times, in fact. But you aren't prepared and/or capable of understanding the answer, so why bother answering again?

Why do you continue to evade and avoid backing up your ridiculous assertion?Why do you continue to evade and avoid backing up that I actually said any such thing?

Since you have already conceded that A-Theism is a Religion, is this just an example of your dogmatic belief system; and therefore to be taken simply on Faith? Good misrepresentation, Franko! I said that atheism could be held religiously. I never claimed that I held it religiously. Furthermore, I never said anything of it being a dogmatic belief system nor that it was my dogmatic belief system. But I digress. You don't want to hear that. You only want to hear what you want to hear. Fortunately, you only will hear what you want to hear.

The difference between a child and adult is that an adult will admit when s/he has made a mistake. A child will rant and rave and blame other people for it's failures. If you want to behave like a child, I have no problem treating you like one. If you ever decided to behave like an adult, I have no problem treating you like one, either.

As for why we follow your plight on this and other boards, Franko, I enjoy following your antics the way I enjoy watching network TV. You are both shallow, oversimplistic, and one dimensional, but you're entertaining as hell. Plus, you don't have any commercials. So, go ahead and dance for our amusement, Franko. Entertain your fans!

Upchurch

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko
Actually the two admins all but conceded that they were actually Atheists to me.

You jkorski, as I mentioned the other day, first told me that you didn't know who Spinoza was, and then two days later claimed to worship Spinoza's God. That makes you at very least -- seem disingenuous.

Word and Deed both have to match. To be a Deist (or an Atheist) you have to be one by label, and by action. Not just one or the other.


I said I believed in Einstein's god. You said "Einstein believed in Spinoza's god" (though you never gave me a source)...put it together, Franko...If I believe in Einstein's god, and Einstein believed in Spinoza's god, then that means...?

[Franko]

Upchurch,

Franko asked (for about the 8th time …)
I am still wiating for you to explain how people who don't believe there are consequences for their actions are more moral then people who do believe their actions have consequences?
Upchurch non-responded:
I have answered this, numerous times, in fact. But you aren't prepared and/or capable of understanding the answer, so why bother answering again?

But if this is Really true, then why not simply cut & paste your answer again, and actually demonstrate what a fool I am – instead of merely asking that we take your word on Faith?

I certainly don’t recall you ever addressing this question. I have been asking you for days now, and all I get from you are fluff posts with insults. Your last posts is a case in point. Lots of verbiage where you deny that you are another lying A-Theists, but nothing to actually back up your dogmatic assertions.

So please explain to myself, and anyone else reading along, what is your evidence that people who DO NOT believe in consequences for their actions are MORE moral then people who do believe there are consequences for their actions?

It is a very simple question Upchurch. What are you running from? Why are you so willing to make this claim, but so afraid to back it up with more then insults to me? I am betting you are unable to back it up.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko


It is a very simple question Upchurch. What are you running from? Why are you so willing to make this claim, but so afraid to back it up with more then insults to me? I am betting you are unable to back it up.

Paging Dr. Kettle...there's a Mr. Pot on the line...

[Franko]

I've asked UC a very specific question on a point he directly raised. If you have a very specific question yourself ... feel free to ask.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
But if this is Really true, then why not simply cut & paste your answer again, and actually demonstrate what a fool I am ? instead of merely asking that we take your word on Faith?


Well golly, Franko. Is that all it takes to demonstrate what a fool you are? How's about this (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9082&perpage=40&pagenumber=3) then? It's where I answered you with:
Regardless, what I find hysterical is that you berate others for their reading comprehension when yours is so poor. Could you please point to where I said that there are no consequences to our actions? I said no such thing, did I Franko?

No, my position is that there are no consequences to our actions due to a supernatural power. I believe that there are all sorts of consequences to every one of our actions.

As a variation of what Blue Monk said, I don't hurt people, because I do not wish to be hurt. I do not steal from people because I do not want my things stolen. etc. There is no need for supernatural punishment to be a moral person, Franko.

Further, I never said that I thought atheists were more moral than theists, unless you can show where I did? I was just remarking at how weak your moral basis must be if it is only based on punishment after death. It's my opinion.
You may not have liked my answer or it may not have been the answer you were expecting, but there it was in black and white (or black and gray-blue depending on the line). Does this mean I've demonstrated you to be a fool?

Upchurch
edited to add:
if there are more ways that you know of that I can demonstrate you to be the fool you are, don't you hesitate to bring them up.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
I've asked UC a very specific question on a point he directly raised. If you have a very specific question yourself ... feel free to ask.

May I ask some very specific questions, Franko?

Do you feel that you are being open-minded and fair about your position and that of others on this board?

If not, why not?

If so, do you feel that it is possible that someone on this board might have a valid point of view, even though it may contradict your own?

If not, how do you justify a statement of open-mindedness and fairness when you are not open to the possibility of being wrong?

Upchurch

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by The Fool

Posted by "serpent" on deism.org in a thread he called "logical deism.
He was asked....

What use is there in attributing any gender to god? God operates the same whether god is male, female, or beyond the concept of gender. Attributing a gender to god is, to me, simply a matter of of socio-sexual nonsense, another salvo in the absurd war of political correctness, and it has no place in a conversation of the real nature of god.


he replied with

I disagree. Our gender is fundamental to who we are as individuals. It is one of our intrinsic characteristics.

But to understand where I am coming from a little better on this you have to understand something of the LD notion of the Soul, or “Graviton”.

Now according to Logical Deism there is only one type of particle that exist in the metatrue reality (The Omniverse). This particle is called a Graviton. Each of us are such a particle. Now these particles have four intrinsic properties MASS, VELOCITY, SPIN, and CHARGE. All of these parameters are values, and all can be either positive, or negative.

SPIN corresponds to your gender. “Positive” Spin is male, and “Negative” Spin is Female (spin = zero is gender neutral)


so there you have it....It all depends on which way you spin. All you people that thought he was mad are wrong, he's just dizzy.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...HAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA! Oh damn, that way overshot my expectations!

Spin = gender?

LMAO

I'm afraid to ask what the rest of them mean!


Good work there, Fool. I was skeptical there for a minute until the "Graviton" bit. That pretty much settled the issue for me.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko
I've asked UC a very specific question on a point he directly raised. If you have a very specific question yourself ... feel free to ask.

Interestingly, several others have asked you specific questions about specific claims you have made (CWL's questions (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=207509#post207509), The Fool's questions (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8942)). You have not answered them.

Is there some mystical privilege which entitles you to have all your questions answered, while relieving you of your obligation to answer questions posed to you?

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
I've asked UC a very specific question on a point he directly raised. If you have a very specific question yourself ... feel free to ask.

Oooo! Can I play too?

Franko, I have two very specific questions.

1) Do humans have free will? (and by "free will" I mean freedom to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention)

2) Are humans punished in the afterlife for things they did while living?

All I ask is a "yes" or "no" answer to these questions. Anything else will be considered evasion.

I'll respond in this post in Franko-style.


Frankfurter,

You your-silly-self say that agnosticism is the default position. So how then can you be a Logical Deist? That isn't too logical. How about Illogical Deist?

I don't find it odd that you, an Illogical Deist got banned from deism.org, because it has nothing to do with your beliefs. It has to do with your way of typing out your beliefs. For example, anyone who doesn't agree with Franko's Stupid Stuff is called an A-theist, a term which I have come to love! In fact, if you DON'T call me that I get sad, so please Wankoff, keep that up! I love it!

You can't even read apparently. Look at their cleary stated forum rules. You posts are homeopathic- no substance remains.

I read the threads. I clicked on your name, "Serpent" (rather fitting), and looked at ALL of your posts. Pure Illogical Deism! Even some deists over there think you spout drivel.

HEHEHE!!!

Here are some one-hit-wonders from you, Wanko:

"But let me ask you something, if “God” were really male (or gender neutral) then why is it that Males seem to be so incompatible with this universe in comparison to females? We have shorter life expectancy. We are killed by accident or violence at a much higher rate. Our rate of insanity and suicide is 5 to 10 times greater than women. Look at prison populations, crime, who starts all the wars? "


Who can argue with such illogic? A D-ontknowanything-ist at their best!


"Thomas Bayes also comes to play in this system, essentially Godel + Bayes = Evolution. "

hehehehe!!!! You probably read a couple popular books at Borders or Barnes and Noble (after getting an mocha-latte and scoping out girls in the psychic section) and now think you understand Godel and Bayes. Kind of like those who say E=mc^2 means that consciousness creates matter. You would agree with that probably.

Frankly stupid, you wouldn't know logic if Russel and Whitehead tag teamed and hit you with a double clothesline. Mofo.

Franky-skanky, you'll have to do better than "TLOP" and "figment of your imagination", and solipsism. heheheh!!!! I showed your posts to my little brother and he just laughed. Even he realizes that you are spouting BS, and just labelling God, Hell, Heaven, etc., with new terms, Graviton, Goddess, Void, etc. So much for "deism not being attached to any dogma". Pathetic!


"Tyler's right. Taoism, while similar to Christianity, is an atheistic belief system. Oh, man, what have gotten myself into?"


Bzzz! hehehe...!!!! There are many kids of Daoists; philosophical, and religious. In the philosophical strand, Dao is like the universe, or what makes the universe work. It is very synonymous to a god or a power, like a deist or a pantheist. In the religious strand, there are many gods: the Peach Goddess, Laozi, the Yellow Emperor, and even a trinity.

Shows what you know, Wanko! heheh!!!!!


"Exactly -- You and you’re a-theist friends are the rogues. The “Host” has sent me (and others) to fight back. Perceive me well Graviton … My kind brings extinction for yours. "


Oh no! heheheheh!!! This gravy-train from a lousy science fiction movie? Have you been reading L-Ron again?


"This “universe” is nothing more than the mental projection of a single right-spin Graviton. All the evidence indicates that She has been continuously projecting Her memes for over 12.7 billion years."

ahahah!!!! "All evidence", get real. Your evidence is non-existant Frankoooooooooppppssss!


"How many babies were aborted last year by the Priest of A-Theism? A couple million at least – right? Like a brand new holocaust every year."

What a nut! Nutty like fruitcake on Christmas.

hehehehehe..!!!!

Frank-oopsIcrappedmypants, you are boring. But you are also entertainment, and I'll keep putting quarters in you and in your Logical De-isn't-ism.

heheheh!!!!

[Franko]

Tricky,

1) Do humans have free will?

No

(and by "free will" I mean freedom to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention)

Still No.

2) Are humans punished in the afterlife for things they did while living?

Punished? I wouldn’t use that word.

When you deliberately smash your own hand with a hammer would you say you were punished? … or simply the victim of your own action?

[Franko]

Interestingly, several others have asked you specific questions about specific claims you have made (CWL's questions, The Fool's questions). You have not answered them.

yeah ... Cwl's list is rather lengthy, and i just haven't had time to get to it yet today ... but I will.

Fool on the other hand ... seems to think he can talk me into debating myself while he watches. Until he starts answering some questions himself (thus giving me a frame of reference) there is nothing to discuss (a discussion requires the input of at least 2).

Essentially he is claiming that 2 + 2 = 5 and without saying anythig else he wants me to PROVE why he is wrong. He's just ... a Fool!

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Does this mean I've demonstrated you to be a fool?

Don't forget this one, Franko! I'm very interested in your response.

Upchurch

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko

Punished? I wouldn’t use that word.

When you deliberately smash your own hand with a hammer would you say you were punished? … or simply the victim of your own action?

BZZZZT!!! You lose. Couldn't answer yes or no.

How can you "deliberately" do anything when you have no free will?

[Franko]

Plutard,

Spin = gender?

LMAO

I'm afraid to ask what the rest of them mean!

Good work there, Fool. I was skeptical there for a minute until the "Graviton" bit. That pretty much settled the issue for me.

You really are retarded (plutarded). Hehehe …

So … what … is this your feeble way of getting back at me for consistently woupping your ass? You are getting to be as bad as Upchurch and Whodini. But that’s okay, I love watching you A-Theists embarrass yourself. I couldn’t pay you guys to act like bigger religious fanatics.

BTW, the Fool is no great detective considering me and Yalel have been talking about what a farce deism.org is/was days before Fool posted this stuff.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko

Essentially he is claiming that 2 + 2 = 5 and without saying anythig else he wants me to PROVE why he is wrong. He's just ... a Fool!

From his questions, I was under the impression that he wanted you to PROVE why you are right.

However, before saying anything else, I will wait for your direct responses to CWL's direct questions. I am also preparing a list of my own very specific questions to ask you.

[Franko]

Trixy,

How can you "deliberately" do anything when you have no free will?

Well if you were Fated to do it, then how was it “free will”?

Just tell us all, are you claiming:

That Atoms DO NOT obey the laws of Physics?

… or …

That You ARE NOT made of atoms?

You have no evidence for “free will”, and what you are trying to claim as far as NO EVIDENCE for God is that when you drive your car, You (the thing controlling) is less conscious then your car (the thing controlled).

Are you going to explain that contradiction to us? Or are you and your pathetic little toadies gonna just go and cry to Randi about me again?

[Upchurch]

Did I NOT prove you to be the fool that you are?

Is it safe to assume that you are too embaressed to respond?

Poor foolish Franko

Upchurch

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
Trixy,



Well if you were Fated to do it, then how was it “free will”?

Just tell us all, are you claiming:

That Atoms DO NOT obey the laws of Physics?

… or …

That You ARE NOT made of atoms?

You have no evidence for “free will”, and what you are trying to claim as far as NO EVIDENCE for God is that when you drive your car, You (the thing controlling) is less conscious then your car (the thing controlled).

Are you going to explain that contradiction to us? Or are you and your pathetic little toadies gonna just go and cry to Randi about me again?
LOL. Cover your backside, little boy. You're obviously in retreat. Here is the essence of what you have claimed.

1) You cannot choose anything.
2) If you choose the wrong thing you will suffer.

You can repeat your nonsense until you die, but it will not disguise the fact that you have been caught in a logical contradiction. And you are the person who claims their religion is based on logic. You really are a hoot.

Now. Do you want to change either of your answers to my previous questions? (Still try to confine it to yes or no, please).

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
Well if you were Fated to do it, then how was it ?free will??
Oh, I see. Franko doesn't understand that without free will, punishement (even port mortum) for an action that someone had no control over is unjust.

It looks like Franko's Illogical Goddess (because of the negative spin, ya understand) is an unjust goddess who punishes us for things we have no control over. I guess that makes sense, her being an illogical goddess.

Upchurch

edited to add:
I take it back. Franko may very well understand that without free will punishment is unjust. He may just be perfectly fine with believing in a un unjust goddess who deals out punishment for no good reason.

[Franko]

Upchuck,

This is Upbelch’s response to why people who believe in no ultimate consequences (i.e. devout Atheists) are more moral then people who do believe in ultimate consequences (i.e. devout Theists) …

Regardless, what I find hysterical is that you berate others for their reading comprehension when yours is so poor. Could you please point to where I said that there are no consequences to our actions? I said no such thing, did I Franko?

Do you, or do you not claim that you (We) will cease to exist when we die?

Once you have ceased to exist what are the ramifications of your past actions?

Are you seriously this retarded?

No, my position is that there are no consequences to our actions due to a supernatural power. I believe that there are all sorts of consequences to every one of our actions.

So if you find out that you have only 6 months to live, and you charge up all of your credit cards to the max, and borrow money from all of your friends (anyone who will lend you a dime), then what are the consequences according to you if you die without repaying the money.

What logical reason have you given us to believe that you would NOT behave exactly like this in the scenario described above?

If you found out that you only had weeks to live, and there was someone (or more that one) that you wanted to kill, why wouldn’t you kill them? If you only have a few weeks left to live, how bad is “Life in Prison” gonna be? You probably wouldn’t even make it through the trial.

As a variation of what Blue Monk said, I don't hurt people, because I do not wish to be hurt. I do not steal from people because I do not want my things stolen. etc. There is no need for supernatural punishment to be a moral person, Franko.

I never mentioned supernatural punishment. If you want to argue a strawman, I suggest you find some other idiot A-Theist who will appreciate one. I am arguing that in your mind, if you can steal from me with the reasonable expectation o NOT being caught in your lifetime then I see no reason to believe that you would NOT do just that. In your mind you certainly won’t have to face any consequences for your action.

Further, I never said that I thought atheists were more moral than theists, unless you can show where I did? I was just remarking at how weak your moral basis must be if it is only based on punishment after death. It's my opinion.

Actually you and all of the other A-Theists have implied JUST that, but to be honest you aren’t worth my time to go digging through multiple threads, and many posts. If you don’t care about being honest with yourself, then that is YOUR problem far more than it is mine.

But I this entire post is just a rehash of questions I have asked you (and others here) Time and Time again. I have no doubt you will ignore this post, and resume with your typical modus operandi. … But that’s okay … you are doing exactly what I predict you will do, and you are doing exactly what I want you to do. You are an extremely easy entity to manipulate.

The fact remains all moral crime – all EVIL – is committed by entities which believe that there are NO ultimate consequences for their actions. You are living proof of this statement. You couldn’t be honest – to save your own existence!

if there are more ways that you know of that I can demonstrate you to be the fool you are, don't you hesitate to bring them up.

You are a wretched little beast. I’m done with you. I’ll actually enjoy watching you fry.

----
Spin = gender?

LMAO

I'm afraid to ask what the rest of them mean!

Good work there, Fool. I was skeptical there for a minute until the "Graviton" bit. That pretty much settled the issue for me.
----


heheehhe!!

Yeah, Fran, the Illogical Deist is substituting Christian terms with terms that he likes, but it is still the same ol' dogma. To try and provide a reason that his Illogical God is female, he says calls God "gravy-train" and then says that she is she because of spin!

heheheh!!

Wow! All those times when I played with a top, I was really making out and I didn't know it! hehehe!!! Such is Franko's logic.

I wonder what gender my washing machine or my fan are? "Hey record player, you are looking mighty fine today. Wanna go on a date?" Franko probably does this!

Hehehe...


Please don't "woupp" my ass Frank-O-I-guess-my-God-is-a-she! I wouldn't want you to break your press-on nails.

I love these religious fanatics, especially when they claim to be detached from dogma. A Logical Dogma-ist perhaps?

Hehehehe...

The Void will get us, ooooooohhh the Boogeyman too?

Heheheheheh...

[Franko]

It looks like Franko's Illogical Goddess (because of the negative spin, ya understand) is an unjust goddess who punishes us for things we have no control over. I guess that makes sense, her being an illogical goddess.

retard!!!

Some guy knocks on your door. You invite him in for a moment so you can talk. He sees your wife, and immediately starts punching him in the face.

Do you care what the reason is the guy is beating up your wife? Or are you just getting him outta there as fast as possible?

Are you gonna let him back in tomorrow?

What if its just that he had a really rotten childhood? Or maybe he just had a rough day at work, and your wife looked like his boss?

Do you really care? The ****ers just insane. What difference does the "why" really make?

Frank-0 for effort, scribbled:

----
You are a wretched little beast. I’m done with you. I’ll actually enjoy watching you fry.
----


This is a Illogical De-isn't-ist at their best!

Apparently nothing separates him from a fundamental hellfire (but now it is the Void you see, hehehehe...) Christian or a fundamental Muslim.

So much for his Goddess! Hehehe... I guess his gravy-train stopped spinning?

Stank, I'm off to ask my tires out for a date!

Hehehehe...

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
You are a wretched little beast. I?m done with you. I?ll actually enjoy watching you fry.

I'll take that to mean I won your little "Make me look like a fool" challenge, Franko. Pleasure doin' business with ya.

You may now continue to dance like a fool to entertain me and others, monkey boy.

Upchurch

[hal bidlack]

Originally posted by Franko
... I am arguing that in your mind, if you can steal from me with the reasonable expectation o NOT being caught in your lifetime then I see no reason to believe that you would NOT do just that. In your mind you certainly won’t have to face any consequences for your action.


Franko,

Let me make sure I understand exactly what you are saying. Is it your contention that without a supreme being, there is no reason to be moral? And no one would be? The only reason we don't live in a Hobbsean world is God?

thanks

[Franko]

Bidlack,

Let me make sure I understand exactly what you are saying. Is it your contention that without a supreme being, there is no reason to be moral? And no one would be? The only reason we don't live in a Hobbsean world is God?

No, no, not at all. I have mentioned in several of the other threads, God is just the ultimate judge and enforcer of Karma. But Karma itself (relativity) is the reason that people are moral. Essentially it is the idea (the notion) that all of your actions create feedback, and eventually that feedback returns to its source (magnified over time actually).

[Franko]

Okay folks ….

Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

(In addition to the three I mentioned, evildave, and Trixy, use to also be under my spell, but they seem to have broken its power for the moment)

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Okay folks ….

Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

Since they haven't done this so far, what makes you think they're going to start? :D

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
Plutard,

You really are retarded (plutarded). Hehehe …

So … what … is this your feeble way of getting back at me for consistently woupping your ass? You are getting to be as bad as Upchurch and Whodini. But that’s okay, I love watching you A-Theists embarrass yourself. I couldn’t pay you guys to act like bigger religious fanatics.

Holy ****, I actually thought Whodini was responding to me.

I propose that we elect Whodini the official Franko-O-Later 2002. That was an incredibly good impression, right down to the punctuation!


Ultimately, you really are dellusional if you think you've ever come close to winning an argument with me. You've never even managed to make a single point, precisely because the only debating tactics you are capable of for any reasonable period of time are misrepresentation, equivocation, and ignoring what people say with ad-hominem sprinkled throughout.

You do actually argue properly at times, but due to your silly beliefs and your insistance on telling other poeple what they believe you quickly run into a brick wall. So you ignore what people say and misrepresent their positions. When you're proven wrong you change the definition or words to whatever suits you at the moment, decide what people really believe, and attempt to insult them by misspelling their name (which bothers nearly no one).

How sad is it that Whodini is doing a better job of being you than you ever have?

You, Franko, are both irrelevant and rediculous. Your views, Franko, are both irrelevant and rediculous. We will now get back to laughing at the True Franko - Whodini. Maybe if we're feeling really generous, between yucks, we'll feel a little pitty for poor, sad, delusional Franko.

Of course, when we're done we'll go back to laughing at your expense, just like usual.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
Okay folks ….

Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

(In addition to the three I mentioned, evildave, and Trixy, use to also be under my spell, but they seem to have broken its power for the moment)
Oh don't worry, my little juvenile delinquent. I've been a bit busy in the Flame War (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&forumid=22&x=17&y=13) section. I'll have more time to ridicule you soon.

I suppose I should thank you. It was my practice in writing chapter one (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6993&highlight=gravitronics) and chapter two (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8091&highlight=shrub) of your life story that prepared me for the Flame War.

So be patient, buttercup. I'll have more time to spend with you soon.

[Franko]

Plutard,

You, Franko, are both irrelevant and rediculous. Your views, Franko, are both irrelevant and rediculous. We will now get back to laughing at the True Franko - Whodini. Maybe if we're feeling really generous, between yucks, we'll feel a little pitty for poor, sad, delusional Franko.

Hah!!!

If you really meant this you would demonstrate it by never speaking to me again. But like all A-Theists you are full of ******** at heart.

In my last post I should have said Upchurch, Whodini, Diogenes, or Plutarch ... pathetic losers ...

[Franko]

Since they haven't done this so far, what makes you think they're going to start?

slide back up this thread (or any other) and see for yourself ...

I post 2:55 pm
Upchurch posts 2:59 pm

I post 3:10 pm
whodidni 3:11 pm

I post 3:13 pm

Upchurch 3:16pm
Whodidni 3:16 pm

Thats within 5 minutes ... go back and check the first page of the thread as well ...

[BeholdTheTruth]

Hey, Franko. Check out my new Semantheism thread. Yale

[Upchurch]

What the hell, this might be fun.

Originally posted by Franko
Do you, or do you not claim that you (We) will cease to exist when we die?

I do not claim that we cease to exist when we die. I believe we exist still in the genetics of our children and in the memory of those who knew us when we were alive. I believe that or actions have reprocussions on those that follow us that I am responsible for. I do not, however, believe that I will personally continue to generate new thoughts or have new experiences once I am dead.

Once you have ceased to exist what are the ramifications of your past actions?The ramifications will be demonstrated in the beliefs, conditions and actions of those who follow me. If I have done less for them than I might have, I will be remembered poorly. If I have done everything for them that I possibly could have, I will be remembered as a good man (hopefully).

Are you seriously this retarded?I don't see anything retarded about my beliefs about consequences, Franko.

So if you find out that you have only 6 months to live, and you charge up all of your credit cards to the max, and borrow money from all of your friends (anyone who will lend you a dime), then what are the consequences according to you if you die without repaying the money.The consequences, as I stated above, is that of having failed those who follow after me. That of hurting my family and friends and of making their lives worse, not better, for having been here. I would be hated and mocked by those I had cared most for and I would not be remembered well.

What logical reason have you given us to believe that you would NOT behave exactly like this in the scenario described above?There is no logical reason, Franko. It is an emotional one. I want to be remembered well by my friends and family. I want to have systems in place where my children and their children work for fun and the challenge of it and don't have to work for a living. If you are looking for a logical reason, I suppose I can give you two. 1) I owe to those who came before me and 2) I owe to those who come after me.

If you found out that you only had weeks to live, and there was someone (or more that one) that you wanted to kill, why wouldn?t you kill them? If you only have a few weeks left to live, how bad is ?Life in Prison? gonna be? You probably wouldn?t even make it through the trial.How about to present a good example? To continualy strive to be the best person I can be, even in the face of death. Killing said person will not change my situation. It won't make life easier for those who follow me. If killing someone is the only solution I can come up with to fixing a problem, then there is more wrong with me than my eminent demise.

I never mentioned supernatural punishment.No? When you said you would enjoy watching me fry, what did you mean by that, exactly? When you talk about your goddess punishing/rewarding people, what did you mean?

I am arguing that in your mind, if you can steal from me with the reasonable expectation o NOT being caught in your lifetime then I see no reason to believe that you would NOT do just that.Then you obviously do not know me.
In your mind you certainly won?t have to face any consequences for your action.I think I've given you many examples of the kinds of consequences I feel my actions would have. Will I personally face them once I am dead? No, but those that follow me, my children, my family, my friends will. I will not be a burden like that to them.

But I this entire post is just a rehash of questions I have asked you (and others here) Time and Time again. I have no doubt you will ignore this post, and resume with your typical modus operandi. ? But that?s okay ? you are doing exactly what I predict you will do, and you are doing exactly what I want you to do. You are an extremely easy entity to manipulate.Is that so. Have I not just given you a very honest answer to each of your questions? Are you honest enough to respect and acknowledge that I have answered your questions?

The fact remains all moral crime ? all EVIL ? is committed by entities which believe that there are NO ultimate consequences for their actions. You are living proof of this statement. You couldn?t be honest ? to save your own existence!You don't know me, Franko. I feel that you know even less about the world around you. I am open-minded enough to challenge my own view point and honest enough to acknowledge when I'm wrong. When I can't, that is evil, Franko. When one cannot be sorry for when one has made a mistake, that is evil. Be careful about throwing the first stone.

Upchurch
edited because I wrote just too darn fast

Frankodd blabbered:

----
Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?
----


Silly Illogical Deist! Looks like it has been more than 5 minutes.

"Fluff" = stuff Frankass doesn't agree with.

Hehehehe....

Yes, you are controlling my mind. Oh yes Franko. You should apply for the 1 Million Dollar Challenge?

Hehehe...

Logical Dorkist.

----
I post 2:55 pm
Upchurch posts 2:59 pm

I post 3:10 pm
whodidni 3:11 pm

I post 3:13 pm

Upchurch 3:16pm
Whodidni 3:16 pm

Thats within 5 minutes ... go back and check the first page of the thread as well ...
----


Hi Stanko,

You've managed to read a non-digital, non-Mickeymouse watch! Nice!

hehehe....

Here is my prediction, you will respond to one of my posts sometime in the future. I am using my mind-reading A-theist Materialistic powers.

Hehehe...

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
Plutard,

Hah!!!

If you really meant this you would demonstrate it by never speaking to me again. But like all A-Theists you are full of ******** at heart.

In my last post I should have said Upchurch, Whodini, Diogenes, or Plutarch ... pathetic losers ...

I said you and your view were both irrelevant and rediculous, and they are. I did not, however, say that I did not receive pleasure by mocking you or making it obvious just how rediculous they are.

You are just entertainment for us, Franko. For many people on this forum there is a feeling of respect and admiration, even for those with different view and beliefs - regardless of your endless assertions to the countrary.

But not for you - just contempt, amusement, and pity. Not even good pity, like people might feel for a cripple. It's usually more...well, contempt really, with just a dash of good pity stirred in due to an inescapable sense of compassion which is a part of any respectable human being. But mostly just contempt and amusement.

Note how we continue to mock you, unabated.

[Darat]

Originally posted by Franko
Trixy,



Well if you were Fated to do it, then how was it “free will”?

Just tell us all, are you claiming:

That Atoms DO NOT obey the laws of Physics?

… or …

That You ARE NOT made of atoms?

You have no evidence for “free will”, and what you are trying to claim as far as NO EVIDENCE for God is that when you drive your car, You (the thing controlling) is less conscious then your car (the thing controlled).

Are you going to explain that contradiction to us? Or are you and your pathetic little toadies gonna just go and cry to Randi about me again?

Franko I am very confused now (not a too uncommon state for me I'll freely admit). I have three major questions (with comments) from what you have stated.

The first:

You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".

How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “choice" and in fact has/was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.

Before I was born/created your logical goddess "decided" that I would do certain actions that would have consequences for me after I die, some of which will be horrible, yet I have no choice what my actions should be.

The second:

Since my consciousness has no free will and is constrained to do whatever your logical goddess has decided I must do then how can any of my actions be considered "wrong", "bad" or "immoral"? They are all the "will" of the logical goddess.

If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be? Under your worldview the person I murdered is just as "responsible" for his death as I am i.e. not at all.

The third:

Why do you hold atheists responsible for their beliefs? It is the goddess decision and choice that atheists should believe as they do.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko


slide back up this thread (or any other) and see for yourself ...

I post 2:55 pm
Upchurch posts 2:59 pm

I post 3:10 pm
whodidni 3:11 pm

I post 3:13 pm

Upchurch 3:16pm
Whodidni 3:16 pm

Thats within 5 minutes ... go back and check the first page of the thread as well ...

I wasn't saying they weren't replying to you right after you posted. I was disagreeing with your "fluff" assessment of their posts.

[Upchurch]

Besides, most of those posts are replying to earlier ones, not the ones immediately preceeding. Franko only managed to show that we were all online at the same time.

Bravo, Franko. Now get back to dancing for our amusement, monkey boy.

Upchurch

[Jim_MDP]

Francine sez:

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?


Can I play too, peg-boy*?







----------
*Another nickel in royalties to Victor.

[Franko]

Ipecac,

I wasn't saying they weren't replying to you right after you posted. I was disagreeing with your "fluff" assessment of their posts.

Really? I have raised all kinds of points in my post, but I don’t see ONE single one of the A-Theists I mention actually making an attempt to respond to any of them (well Upchurch gave a half hearted attempt in one of his posts).

They are Religious fanatics plain and simple. I don’t mind them posting all their fluff mind you (it really drives home my point to anyone else reading along), but if you are claiming that there is some point I need to respond to in this drivel, then perhaps you can point it out for me?

Did I NOT prove you to be the fool that you are?

Poor foolish Franko

It looks like Franko's Illogical Goddess (because of the negative spin, ya understand) is an unjust goddess who punishes us for things we have no control over. I guess that makes sense, her being an illogical goddess.

LMAO

I'm afraid to ask what the rest of them mean! [I bet]

Yeah, Fran, the Illogical Deist is substituting Christian terms with terms that he likes, but it is still the same ol' dogma. To try and provide a reason that his Illogical God is female, he says calls God "gravy-train" and then says that she is she because of spin!

Wow! All those times when I played with a top, I was really making out and I didn't know it! hehehe!!! Such is Franko's logic.

The Void will get us, ooooooohhh the Boogeyman too?

This is a Illogical De-isn't-ist at their best!

So much for his Goddess! Hehehe... I guess his gravy-train stopped spinning?

Stank, I'm off to ask my tires out for a date!

I'll take that to mean I won your little "Make me look like a fool" challenge, Franko. Pleasure doin' business with ya.

You may now continue to dance like a fool to entertain me and others, monkey boy.

I propose that we elect Whodini the official Franko-O-Later 2002. That was an incredibly good impression, right down to the punctuation!

Oh don't worry, my little juvenile delinquent. I've been a bit busy in the Flame War section. I'll have more time to ridicule you soon.

I suppose I should thank you. It was my practice in writing chapter one and chapter two of your life story that prepared me for the Flame War.

So be patient, buttercup. I'll have more time to spend with you soon.

Silly Illogical Deist! Looks like it has been more than 5 minutes.

Logical Dorkist.

You've managed to read a non-digital, non-Mickeymouse watch! Nice!

Here is my prediction, you will respond to one of my posts sometime in the future. I am using my mind-reading A-theist Materialistic powers.

You are just entertainment for us, Franko. For many people on this forum there is a feeling of respect and admiration, even for those with different view and beliefs - regardless of your endless assertions to the countrary.

Note how we continue to mock you, unabated.

There’s A-Theism for you! I am not impressed, are you Ipecac?

[Franko]

BTW -- I have bumped Whopeni up to 15 minutes ... But he still won't actually address any points. I am making him unable to address any. He can only offer fluff. It is his Fate. just watch ....

[Ipecac]

One more thought, examining Franko's "Six months to live" scenario.

Even if someone would run up their debts, borrow money knowing they won't pay it back, or even kill someone, they have an incentive not to do so up until the moment they die. The debt collectors could come next month. The police could catch them. If you have only six months to live, you have a HUGE incentive not to do anything that would screw up those six months. What's more, you might not die in six months. Then where would you be?

It would be difficult to construct a scenario where a person would have absolute knowledge of an impending demise and lack all incentives to behave himself during those six months.

(BTW, Upchurch, I thought your reasons for the soon-to-be-departed to behave were dead on, so to speak.)

[Franko]

Trixy (He’s like … an old geezer, what is he doing here?)

Oh don't worry, my little juvenile delinquent. I've been a bit busy in the Flame War section. I'll have more time to ridicule you soon.

I care?

I suppose I should thank you. It was my practice in writing chapter one and chapter two of your life story that prepared me for the Flame War.

I am touched and amused that you devote so much of your precious existence to me.

So be patient, buttercup. I'll have more time to spend with you soon.

What makes you assume I want to spend another instant talking to you? I told you specifically the other day that if I never heard another word out of you it would be too soon. I know … you have that tired old man’s brain, and your memory is fading fast …

But remember what I said, whenever you feel the urge to speak to me, just recall that I believe all of the same stupid Religious Nonsense that your moronic Pagan wife believes in. So save us both the time and trouble, and go home are argue Religion and Philosophy with that idiot wife of yours. Leave me out of it.

… I’m just a figment of your imagination anyway …

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
There?s A-Theism for you! I am not impressed, are you Ipecac?

But Franko's insults aren't fluff, nosiree. Franko is putting them a-theistic bastards in their place, I'll tell you what.

Half-hearted attempt, my arse. You just can't handle a valid view point that differs from your own.

Upchurch

[Franko]

Ipecac,

Even if someone would run up their debts, borrow money knowing they won't pay it back, or even kill someone, they have an incentive not to do so up until the moment they die. The debt collectors could come next month. The police could catch them. If you have only six months to live, you have a HUGE incentive not to do anything that would screw up those six months. What's more, you might not die in six months. Then where would you be?

It would be difficult to construct a scenario where a person would have absolute knowledge of an impending demise and lack all incentives to behave himself during those six months.

It sounds to me like you are now trying to argue that A-Theists don’t actually believe they are going to cease to exist when they die?

Do they believe that is true or not?

[Franko]

I posted at 4:35 pm and right on Time …

Upchurch 4:37 pm:
But Franko's insults aren't fluff, nosiree. Franko is putting them a-theistic bastards in their place, I'll tell you what.

(that’s 2 minutes if you are an A-Theist and can’t do basic math)

Previously I prophesized:

Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

A-Theists … so f*cking easy …

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Ipecac
(BTW, Upchurch, I thought your reasons for the soon-to-be-departed to behave were dead on, so to speak.)

Thanks! What I like about my view of the afterlife is that it is demonstratable. Just pull out the ol' family album.

Along those lines, if John Edward wants to talk to the dead, he should speak with the departed's children.

Upchurch

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
A-Theists ? so f*cking easy ?
That's right Franko. Avoid the tough ones. Insults are just easier.

Upchurch

edited to add:
FYI, your post was only 4 minutes behind mine. Why, Franko! Are you in love with me? :rolleyes:

edited again:
Wait, this post was only 2 minutes after my last one. I must be in love with myself! (At least, I'm a better conversationalist than Franko):cool:

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

It sounds to me like you are now trying to argue that A-Theists don’t actually believe they are going to cease to exist when they die?

Do they believe that is true or not?

I believe that is true. Atheists believe they are going to cease to exist when they die.

What I don't buy is your continued assumption that atheists have NO incentives to behave themselves when they know they are going to die. As Upchurch has argued, there are personal, emotional incentives to behave yourself. As I have argued, in an uncertain situation, there are incentives to behave yourself. Do you have any evidence or argument that there isn't?

[Franko]

I posted at 4:41 pm and right on Time …

Upchurch 4:43 pm:
That's right Franko. Avoid the tough ones. Insults are just easier.
Fluff …
that’s 2 minutes (again) if you are an A-Theist and can’t do basic math

Previously I prophesized:

Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

Still doubt me, Ipecac?

[Franko]

Ipecac,

I believe that is true. Atheists believe they are going to cease to exist when they die.

What I don't buy is your continued assumption that atheists have NO incentives to behave themselves when they know they are going to die. As Upchurch has argued, there are personal, emotional incentives to behave yourself.

So you are claiming that personal emotional (subjective) experiences constitute logical evidence now? A-Theists are moral because they Claim they will be moral? Do you consider the A-Theists behavior on this thread as evidence of this?

As I have argued, in an uncertain situation, there are incentives to behave yourself. Do you have any evidence or argument that there isn't?

Yes, when a person knows that there are no consequences for their actions they behave as if there are no consequences for their actions. B.F. Skinner and the Behaviorist School have pretty much nailed this down as inescapable fact.

What you are trying to claim, is that if you give two random people credit cards, and you tell one they are responsible for paying the bill at the end of the month, and you tell the other that they are NOT responsible for the bill, (and maybe you run this experiment 100 times) that there will be no trend amongst the two groups spending patterns. It is an utterly absurd notion. Even children can understand this concept.

An A-Theists knows that is he can lie, cheat, steal, whatever, and get away (go undetected) until he ceases to exist, that he is off Scott-Free. He is like the guy who doesn’t have to pay the bill. But for a Theist, who firmly believes that he is answerable for all his actions, getting caught now is not the concern. On the timescale of Eternity, he knows his moral crime will eventually be discovered, and he will have to answer for it. It is that simple.

Upchuck, Plutard, Whopeedme, and Trixy want to pretend that the opposite is True – Fine! They certainly haven’t explained why they believe this is true. It is just Religious Dogma. They can’t justify it! Honestly, they sound completely insane just by asserting it. Yet they have asserted it over and over again.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
I posted at 4:41 pm and right on Time ?

Upchurch 4:43 pm:

Fluff ?
that?s 2 minutes (again) if you are an A-Theist and can?t do basic math
Pay close attention, Franko. There is an object lession here. Ahem:

I made a mistake, Franko. You are right and I am wrong. Thank you for pointing out my error.

There now. Wasn't that simple? Maybe you could give it a try. For example, atheists aren't really theists, now are they, Franko? How about this, my point of view about the afterlife is a valid one and would lead to moral behavior, even in the face of eminent death, isn't it?

As long as we're doing prophesies, how's about I try one:

Franko will never fully admit to having made a mistake about his position.

Upchurch

edited to add:
Hell, I'll sweeten the pot. I predict that Franko will never full admit to making a mistake. Much broader and much easier to defeat.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
Trixy (He’s like … an old geezer, what is he doing here?)

...

I care?

...

What makes you assume I want to spend another instant talking to you?

And then Franko, after such biting and intelligent remarks, proceeds to...

I told you specifically the other day that if I never heard another word out of you it would be too soon. I know … you have that tired old man’s brain, and your memory is fading fast …

But remember what I said, whenever you feel the urge to speak to me, just recall that I believe all of the same stupid Religious Nonsense that your moronic Pagan wife believes in. So save us both the time and trouble, and go home are argue Religion and Philosophy with that idiot wife of yours. Leave me out of it.

… I’m just a figment of your imagination anyway …

...talk too him for more than 3 whole paragraphs.


Anyone care to explain this one?

[Franko]

I posted 5:07 pm
plutard posted 5:11 pm

That is a 4 minute wait for the Fluff.

Right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted. So much for "free will"?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
I posted 5:07 pm
plutard posted 5:11 pm

That is a 4 minute wait for the Fluff.

Right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted. So much for "free will"?
huh. My prediction is still holding true. I may have to re-think my position on precognition.

Anyway, getting back on topic. Out of curiosity, does anyone know of a forum board or IRL group that would stand behind Franko's assertions? Obviously, Deist.org wasn't one of them, but might there be one? I guess what I'm asking is, are there any more Franko's out there?
Upchurch

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?

Originally posted by Franko
I posted 5:07 pm
plutard posted 5:11 pm

That is a 4 minute wait for the Fluff.

Right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted. So much for "free will"?

Now I've apparently changed my name to Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes.

And the contradictions continue to mount...

[Darat]

Hi Franko

Perhaps you missed my earlier posting of this?

_______________


Franko I am very confused now (not a too uncommon state for me I'll freely admit). I have three major questions (with comments) from what you have stated.

The first:

You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".

How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “”choice and in fact was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.

Before I was born/created your logical goddess "decided" that I would do certain actions that would have consequences for me after I die, some of which will be horrible, yet I have no choice what my actions should be.

The second:

Since my consciousness has no free will and is constrained to do whatever your logical goddess has decided I must do then how can any of my actions be considered "wrong", "bad" or "immoral"? They are all the "will" of the logical goddess.

If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be? Under your worldview the person I murdered is just as "responsible" for his death as I am i.e. not at all.

The third:

Why do you hold atheists responsible for their beliefs? It is the goddess decision and choice that atheists should believe as they do.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

So you are claiming that personal emotional (subjective) experiences constitute logical evidence now? A-Theists are moral because they Claim they will be moral? Do you consider the A-Theists behavior on this thread as evidence of this?

Yes, when a person knows that there are no consequences for their actions they behave as if there are no consequences for their actions. B.F. Skinner and the Behaviorist School have pretty much nailed this down as inescapable fact.

What you are trying to claim, is that if you give two random people credit cards, and you tell one they are responsible for paying the bill at the end of the month, and you tell the other that they are NOT responsible for the bill, (and maybe you run this experiment 100 times) that there will be no trend amongst the two groups spending patterns. It is an utterly absurd notion. Even children can understand this concept.

An A-Theists knows that is he can lie, cheat, steal, whatever, and get away (go undetected) until he ceases to exist, that he is off Scott-Free. He is like the guy who doesn’t have to pay the bill. But for a Theist, who firmly believes that he is answerable for all his actions, getting caught now is not the concern. On the timescale of Eternity, he knows his moral crime will eventually be discovered, and he will have to answer for it. It is that simple.


You still haven't addressed my point about possible disincentives that exist within the six month time period. Like getting caught.

If your theory is "inescapable fact" then it should be easy to prove. Atheists should go nuts when they know they are going to die. Does this happen?

(Please note, behavioral theories are not fact. The credit card analogy is not valid because there is a huge difference between getting a free credit card and running up the debt on YOUR OWN credit card, death or no death.)

And I'm not going to bite. You have been very polite to me and I appreciate it as I am almost unfailingly polite on these boards. But to most posters you are as ill-mannered as anyone in here if not more so.

[Franko]

Darat,

Sorry, with the little Upchuck and Plutard running so scarred they tend to crap the threads up with their fluff, burying actual posts. Impotent gestures are all that is really available to them.

You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".

How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “”choice and in fact was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.

It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.

Before I was born/created your logical goddess "decided" that I would do certain actions that would have consequences for me after I die, some of which will be horrible, yet I have no choice what my actions should be.

You have no choice, this is True. Some entities are inherently insane, but other entities are not. The Sane ones are trying to sort out and “capture” the other Sane entities from the rest (the insane). The insane entities get dumped, and after a long long time they fade into nonexistence. But a Sane entity can reach “escape velocity”, and travel through Time perpetually (Eternally).

Since my consciousness has no free will and is constrained to do whatever your logical goddess has decided I must do then how can any of my actions be considered "wrong", "bad" or "immoral"? They are all the "will" of the logical goddess.

If you were taking a test, the LG would be the person to copy an answer from. She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived. It is true that this is her universe, and while you are here you obey her rules, but that does not change your intrinsic nature (whether you are good or evil). The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).

Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”. While that is true, the LG didn’t get to be LG by accident. Gravity, consciousness, even Time itself (all manifestations of the same thing really) all conspired to make her “God”. It was her Fate.

If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be?

Now what she decided, just what she observed.

Under your worldview the person I murdered is just as "responsible" for his death as I am i.e. not at all.

Not at all. Just because your intrinsic characteristics are intrinsic, doesn’t make you NOT responsible for them. You are who you are, like it or not. If you don’t like it … alter your Fate.

Why do you hold atheists responsible for their beliefs? It is the goddess decision and choice that atheists should believe as they do.

Atheists are intrinsically evil. They would destroy EVERYTHING if they could (yeah, I know what you’ll say [think], but it is true in a metaphysical sense). But the game has been rigged from the start. The A-Theists are going down, and I am one of the hitmen sent for the job. My Fate ... but I am perfectly content with it.

[Upchurch]

so, if one does not have control over one's decision (free will), is it just for them to be punished for those decisions?

Upchurch

[Franko]

Ipecac,

You still haven't addressed my point about possible disincentives that exist within the six month time period. Like getting caught.

I’ve responded in every one of my posts on this subject. You are trying to skirt the issue, because I specifically said A Person who believes that there are no ultimate consequences for their actions. Getting “caught” is a consequence, but tell me Ipecac, what are you claiming the odds of getting caught for a crime are AFTER YOU HAVE CEASED TO EXIST?

To a Theist, they will NEVER CEASE TO EXIST. Do you see the difference? Is this that difficult for your A-Theist mind to comprehend?

If your theory is "inescapable fact" then it should be easy to prove. Atheists should go nuts when they know they are going to die. Does this happen?

Well, there are a few problems here, but let me address just one. You seem to be assuming that no Atheist is actually an Agnostic or Deist at heart, but just can’t call themselves that for whatever reason. it is very similar to a Christian who is really an Agnostic or Atheist, yet, for whatever reason, cannot bring himself to stop labeling himself as a Christian.

(Please note, behavioral theories are not fact. The credit card analogy is not valid because there is a huge difference between getting a free credit card and running up the debt on YOUR OWN credit card, death or no death.)

I disagree. Obviously you don’t like the analogy because it makes my point, and demonstrates exactly and simply why devout Theists are more likely to be moral then devout Atheists.

And I'm not going to bite. You have been very polite to me and I appreciate it as I am almost unfailingly polite on these boards. But to most posters you are as ill-mannered as anyone in here if not more so.

You are not a very objective observer. Between Upchurch, Whodini, Plutard, Tricky, and Diogenes alone they have posted 50 insults for every one I have posted. Plus they do not actually respond to any points, or raise any of their own. All they do is post ad hominem. After a while it gets old, but it does demonstrate their religious fanaticism. I remember you also telling me that they weren’t following everyone of my posts with the 5 minute fluff either? Are you STILL standing by that claim? Hehehe ….

[Franko]

Me at 5:43 pm

Upchruch 5:48 pm

Exactly 5 minutes.

so, if one does not have control over one's decision (free will), is it just for them to be punished for those decisions?

If you had "free will" then I wouldn't control your behavior so easily. Obviously you are not going to understand it though. I am not allowing you to understand it. I like you stupid.

[Upchurch]

so, no answer?

Don't want to answer or can't answer? It's a valid question with no "fluff" to it.

Upchurch

[Franko]

3 minutes!

[Fade]

Begs the question; Does Franko know what "Deist" Means?

Answer is of course no.

That forum seems to be frequented by genuinely intelligent people.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko

You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".

How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “”choice and in fact was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.
It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.

predetermine: To determine the future of. v.predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain

preordain: To determine the future of. v.
predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain.

---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Two words which are synonyms of one another, yet Franko says "It was ONLY preordained by HER..." as though they meant something different.

And the abuse of the english language continues...

You have no choice, this is True. Some entities are inherently insane, but other entities are not.

...

But a Sane entity can reach “escape velocity”, and travel through Time perpetually (Eternally).

...

She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived.

...

The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).

So let's see here:

Sanest or Most Sane = Omnipotent
Sanest or Most Sane = Omnibenevolent

Looking at these two sentances of Franko's:

She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived.

...

The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).

In the first, power decides goodness ("Might Makes Right"). In the second, goodness decides power ("Right Makes Might"). I shall leave the judging of the the logical coherancy of this as an excercise for the reader.


Now, one might wonder why - rather than "Sane" and "Insane" - Franko does not simply use the standard english words "Powerful" and "Weak". We have already demonstrated clearly, according to Franko's own statements, that the words have the same meanings.

And the butchering of the english language Continues...

Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”.

Quite literally then, "Might makes right".

If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be?
Now what she decided, just what she observed.


Here we clearly see that She did not "decide" what would happen, only that she observed it. But of course earlier Franko said:

It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.

Reconciling these views I shall leave as an excercise for the reader, with the reminder about the definition of preordain:

preordain: v tr
To appoint, decree, or ordain in advance; foreordain.

From the thesaurus:

preordain
To determine the future of. v.
predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain.

Not at all. Just because your intrinsic characteristics are intrinsic, doesn’t make you NOT responsible for them. You are who you are, like it or not. If you don’t like it … alter your Fate.

Yet earlier Franko said:

You have no choice, this is True.

So what we may conclude is that you have no free will, unless you change your Fate, at which point you presumably either gain free will or somehow excercise something seemingly very much like free will in the Fate altering process.

The discovery of how one is able to alter one's Fate when you have no free will is left as an excercise for the reader.

Atheists are intrinsically evil. They would destroy EVERYTHING if they could (yeah, I know what you’ll say [think], but it is true in a metaphysical sense). But the game has been rigged from the start. The A-Theists are going down, and I am one of the hitmen sent for the job. My Fate ... but I am perfectly content with it.

And now we have this mystery quote. Can you guess who said it?

You know, if they had the option, I'd bet that every believer and church goer would blow the entire planet up, if they could do it and not get caught. There'd be rioting in the streets.

Hint: It's a trick question.


If Franko is the best hitman She sent to take down the A-Theists, then all A-Theists can certainly sleep comfortably at night.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
And I'm not going to bite. You have been very polite to me and I appreciate it as I am almost unfailingly polite on these boards. But to most posters you are as ill-mannered as anyone in here if not more so.
You are not a very objective observer. Between Upchurch, Whodini, Plutard, Tricky, and Diogenes alone they have posted 50 insults for every one I have posted. Plus they do not actually respond to any points, or raise any of their own. All they do is post ad hominem. After a while it gets old, but it does demonstrate their religious fanaticism.

So Ipecac isn't a very objective observer, but of course Franko somehow is. One can safely assume that eventually we will discover that Franko's definition of "objective" in no way correlates with any english definition of "objective".


But before one quickly goes on to another post, let us first bask in the radiance of clear hypocrisy as Franko complains about other people insulting him and other people not responding to any points or bringing up any of their own.

Yes, you did read that right. I shall leave the reader to attempt to fully grasp one of the most truly hypocritical things ever said.

[Tricky]

Damn, Plutarch, all this excercise is gonna kill old readers like me. How about if you just leave it as a "puzzle" for the reader. :)

[Franko]

So Plutard ... I didn't waste the time reading your rant ...

but I did sense that you might have buried a question in there "some where" ...?

So if you got a question ... ask it ... I told up you fanatics I am not going to pretend along with your delusions, and I'm done wasting time with your nonsense.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
So Plutard ... I didn't waste the time reading your rant ...

but I did sense that you might have buried a question in there "some where" ...?

So if you got a question ... ask it ... I told up you fanatics I am not going to pretend along with your delusions, and I'm done wasting time with your nonsense.
Translation guide:
When Franko says "I'm done wasting time with your nonsense" it means "You have posted questions I cannot answer".

Congratulations, Plutarck. You have been put on Frankos "waste of time" list. I am proud to say I have been on it a few times myself. The other greatest compliment Franko can pay you is to make an obscene pun on you name. I think I am up to about twenty of those (I defy anyone to do better).

However, do not fear that Franko really will ignore you in the future. Franko and The Truth are not even casual acquaintances.
------
Hey Franko, my little man-child. How about a direct answer to this question.

Which of these statements is inconsistant with Logical Deism?
1) You have no choice.
2) If you make the wrong choice you will suffer.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Franko
So Plutard ... I didn't waste the time reading your rant ...

but I did sense that you might have buried a question in there "some where" ...?

So if you got a question ... ask it ... I told up you fanatics I am not going to pretend along with your delusions, and I'm done wasting time with your nonsense.

Prediction:

Franko will continue to waste time with "our nonsense", regardless of any threats (I like to think of them as promises) to the contrary.


But hey, I could use a good laugh. Here are some "shouldn't be hard to answer" questions for you:

1) How does someone with no free will alter their fate? If someone can alter their fate, in what way do they not have free will?

2) In Frankonese, are the words "preordain" and "predestine" synonyms like they are in English, or do they mean different things? If they do mean different things, what is the Frankonesian definition of each?

3) Regarding this statement of yours:

It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.

And what creates "You" (Ipecac, in this instance)?

4) Regarding this statement of yours:

Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”.

Is this not, in fact, "Might makes right" in that right and wrong, good and bad, are based solely upon the dictates of whatever entity happens to be the most powerful entity at any given time?

5) Regarding this exchange:

If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be?Now what she decided, just what she observed.


If She preordains/predestines the universe, and the universe decided the actions of Ipecac in the above situation, how did She not decide the actions of Ipecac above?

In simplified syllogistic form:

She controls the universe
The universe controls Ipecac
She controls Ipecac

How is this not so?

6) Given these:

Originally posted by Franko
Check this out for prophesy … lets see how I do when I telegraph my moves …

I predict, that every single time I make a post that Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes will post some fluff (or an insult) within 5 minutes. Actually I am controlling their minds, and making them do it. Lets see if they can resist my power?
Originally posted by Franko
I posted 5:07 pm
plutard posted 5:11 pm

That is a 4 minute wait for the Fluff.

Right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted. So much for "free will"?

In what way were you not lying about what your prediction was?

Hey Franko,

You have my invitation to come to Paltalk, in the Social Issues room, and find your way to the atheist chat room.

It will probably be titled something like "Is God Real or a Fantasy?", etc.. Something to that tune.

Make sure to bring up your Logical Deism ideas there. There are a number of intelligent people there who enjoy debates and learning new things.

I look forward to seeing you there. My nick will either be "Daoist" or "Atheist".

As you know, a chat in real-time voice is quite a bit different than in a forum ...

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

I’ve responded in every one of my posts on this subject. You are trying to skirt the issue, because I specifically said A Person who believes that there are no ultimate consequences for their actions. Getting “caught” is a consequence, but tell me Ipecac, what are you claiming the odds of getting caught for a crime are AFTER YOU HAVE CEASED TO EXIST?

To a Theist, they will NEVER CEASE TO EXIST. Do you see the difference? Is this that difficult for your A-Theist mind to comprehend?

Well, there are a few problems here, but let me address just one. You seem to be assuming that no Atheist is actually an Agnostic or Deist at heart, but just can’t call themselves that for whatever reason. it is very similar to a Christian who is really an Agnostic or Atheist, yet, for whatever reason, cannot bring himself to stop labeling himself as a Christian.

I disagree. Obviously you don’t like the analogy because it makes my point, and demonstrates exactly and simply why devout Theists are more likely to be moral then devout Atheists.

You are not a very objective observer. Between Upchurch, Whodini, Plutard, Tricky, and Diogenes alone they have posted 50 insults for every one I have posted. Plus they do not actually respond to any points, or raise any of their own. All they do is post ad hominem. After a while it gets old, but it does demonstrate their religious fanaticism. I remember you also telling me that they weren’t following everyone of my posts with the 5 minute fluff either? Are you STILL standing by that claim? Hehehe ….

You've responded in every one of your posts? Have you read your posts? Here it is again: Since even an evil atheist would potentially get caught WHILE HE IS STILL ALIVE and spend his last days in jail, what would be the incentive for him to risk it? And what if he lives a year, not six months? I have not heard you answer these questions. (BTW, if you define "getting caught" as a consequence, then you've made my point. Because even atheists could get caught.)

I'm not assuming anything about anyone's self-proclaimed beliefs. You do seem to assume that no one is telling the truth about their beliefs but you. You label everyone and claim to understand what they believe but you haven't demonstrated that.

Yes. I don't like the analogy because it makes your point. Absolutely. There is nothing wrong with your analogy. It's perfect. Just ignore all the objections I've made and that you haven't answered. :rolleyes:

I will grant you this. You have been assaulted by a large group of people. However, since you constantly dish it out, you can hardly claim to be the victim. If you were unfailingly polite, people would jump to your defense. But since you are so rude, no one feels the need to.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Plutarck

In simplified syllogistic form:

She controls the universe
The universe controls Ipecac
She controls Ipecac



How odd. I was pretty sure this was going to end up with the conclusion that Ipecac controls the universe. Rats.

[Franko]

well good Ipecac ... then you can be done talking to me as well. Have fun with your "buddies".

Trixy -- Go tell your stupid pagan wife -- I just believe what she believes.

[Ipecac]

Franko,

Let me make one last attempt to get through to you my objections with your "Atheists gone wild" theory.

Let's look at a Christian who is given six months to live. Now this Christian knows the dogma and knows that he can accept Jesus at any time and be instantly forgiven and allowed into heaven. So, this Christian is absolutely free to steal, rob, rape, pillage, and murder for the full six months, so long as he recants on his death bed. He literally has until the last moment of his life to ask forgiveness. So of course, he'll run amuck.

Now, under your theory, isn't this the way things should fall out?

My answer is of course not. Why? Because people act according to their nature. If you spend your life being a good person who doesn't hurt other people, you're not going to suddenly change because your life is coming to an end. The same goes for atheists. They won't suddenly change their nature because of impending death. Like all people, they want their families cared for. They want to be remembered well. This is a very human need.

So, let's get down to it. Are atheists less than human?

[The Fool]

Franko.

Take some advice son. Have a good hard look at the way you behave. If it is not already the case, this forum will become the last place you can post. Not many people here have much patience left for your obnoxious antics. Soon you will be reduced to wandering the streets with a placard trying to engave vagrants in debate...... I'm a little bit sad. I thought you had something to offer but recent events have just confirmed that you are just another loonie on the world wide web.

a spinning goddess?.....Franko, what have you been doing with your life? How about trying something more useful with the rest of it?

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko


A-Theists … so f*cking easy …

Back to profanity again. The pathological behaviour continues........

I was wrong about the time frame. I thought it would only take 48 hours.

How long till he has another melt down and leaves again?

On the plus side, I am sure he will leave for good after the 5th or 6th time. (Two and counting. Three if you include not using the Wraith ID again.)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
Trixy -- Go tell your stupid pagan wife -- I just believe what she believes.
Very good, Franko. You have just called yourself stupid in only twelve words. This may be a new record for you.

Now, do you want to answer the very direct question I asked you are you going to turn your yellow belly skyward again?
Tricky asked
Which of these statements is inconsistant with Logical Deism?
1) You have no choice.
2) If you make the wrong choice you will suffer.

[Franko]

Ipecac,

Let's look at a Christian who is given six months to live. Now this Christian knows the dogma and knows that he can accept Jesus at any time and be instantly forgiven and allowed into heaven. So, this Christian is absolutely free to steal, rob, rape, pillage, and murder for the full six months, so long as he recants on his death bed. He literally has until the last moment of his life to ask forgiveness. So of course, he'll run amuck

Wasn’t it you that I explained this very point too already? I know I have mentioned this (nearly) exact scenario in relationship to the notion of Karma. Just because you decided to be sane at the last minute doesn’t mean that all of the debts you accrued don’t have to be paid. The deathbed conversion is just you acknowledging “I WILL PAY MY DEBTS”.

Now, under your theory, isn't this the way things should fall out?

My answer is of course not. Why? Because people act according to their nature. If you spend your life being a good person who doesn't hurt other people, you're not going to suddenly change because your life is coming to an end.

Actually I remember reading several articles a few years back about how homosexuals with AIDS were going on crime sprees. The reasons, were some of them figured they’d get better health care in prison, but many found or figured out that they weren’t being prosecuted for the same reason – the government didn’t want the cost of taking care of terminally ill convicts who might spread the disease through the prison system.

I can’t even believe that you are arguing this point, it is so completely absurd in my mind!! Haven’t you ever heard of the concept of Rewards and Punishments? (I am guessing you DO NOT have children?)Are you really telling me that positive an negative reinforcement have no effect on behavior? Because unless you have been actually arguing that devout A-Theists are actually less moral people, it sounds like you are arguing that 50+ years of behavioral research are DEAD WRONG. What is your evidence for this belief? I don’t expect anything out of those retards – Trixy, Plutard, Whodidi, UpBlurch, or Diogenes (did I miss any consistent idiots [Fool, Doubt]) – they sure as hell aren’t going to actually defend their nonsense, but they don’t seem to have totally degraded your algorithm down to nothing yet. You still have a chance.

The same goes for atheists. They won't suddenly change their nature because of impending death. Like all people, they want their families cared for. They want to be remembered well. This is a very human need.

So, let's get down to it. Are atheists less than human?

A-Theists are Evil humans. But like Christians, simply calling yourself an A-Theist alone is not the sum of it. You also have to be an A-Theist in Deed – in Action. In other words, not all A-Theists are devout, they pay the Faith Lip-service, but little more. These A-Theists aren’t quite as evil. But they sure as Hell ain’t helping themselves either.

You believe that there is evidence for “free will”, and no evidence for “god”.

I believe that there is evidence for “God”, and no evidence for “free will”.

Your universe is inside out, and backwards.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Franko
Wasn?t it you that I explained this very point too already? I know I have mentioned this (nearly) exact scenario in relationship to the notion of Karma. Just because you decided to be sane at the last minute doesn?t mean that all of the debts you accrued don?t have to be paid. The deathbed conversion is just you acknowledging ?I WILL PAY MY DEBTS?.
Actually, Franko. I don't believe Ipecac was refering to your religion where deathbed conversions don't aleviate sin, but of a religion where it does, for instance, catholosim or any number fundamentalist christian religions.
Graphic example. (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0010/0010_01.asp)

Now, if a follower of this religion learned he had only a few days to live, under your logic, they could go hog wild. As long as they recanted before they died, all is forgiven under his belief system. Right?

(You can make the distinction between someone working under their own religious system and someone working under your own, right? The only reason I ask is you seem to be unable to make a judgment based from an atheist point of view, which as we all know is a religious system in your point of view.)

Still waiting patiently for your answers to many many unanswered questions.

Upchurch

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Trixy, Plutard, Whodidi, UpBlurch, or Diogenes (did I miss any consistent idiots [Fool, Doubt]) – they sure as hell aren’t going to actually defend their nonsense, but they don’t seem to have totally degraded your algorithm down to nothing yet. You still have a chance.




Nice to see I made it back on Franko’s list-o-the damned.

To bad I am still an agnostic, instead of the atheist he wants me to be.

I think that Franko’s need to tell us we believe things that we don’t has a lot to do with his hang-up on solipsism. Franko has transposed his fear that he is alone to the rest of us. He wants us to do two things for him:

1.) Disagree with him. That way Franko gets the reassurance that he needs that he is not all alone.

2.) Prove solipsism false for him. He has not been able to do it. If we can, his fear will subside. To bad we cannot. Since we don’t share is hang-up, we just don’t care.

That said, I can think of three purely emotional reasons to behave in a generally moral way even if you don’t believe in god.

1.) Compassion. People generally don’t like to see bad things happen to each other. This can be over-ridden if people deny each other’s humanity. Personally, I think it takes more mental gymnastics to de-humanize other people than to care about them.

2.) Empathy. Not much different than compassion. All you have to do is see something bad happen and ask “What if that were me?” This can also be over-ridden by de-humanizing others, but it does take work to do that.

3.) Love. Pretty much self explanatory. Fits in well with respect and wanting to be treated well. We all need to be loved and most of us are capable of giving it, unless we are truly mentally ill.

All people with fully functioning adult minds experience all three of these. Unless someone can prove that atheists don’t feel these things, then I would have to assume that most of them want to be moral.

If the only reason to behave in a moral manner is fear of god, then we are nothing but a race of cowards.

(edited to fix speeling.)

[Franko]

Doubt ...?

... are you feeling marginalized? :(

Hehehehe!!!

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt ...?

... are you feeling marginalized? :(

Hehehehe!!!

Ahhhhh, no. Why would I?

Have you had a talk with a shrink lately? It might get you over that solipsism thing.

Either that or get laid.
:cool:

Edited to remove an over-the-top insult.

[Upchurch]

I'm fairly certain that I would hear crickets chirping around the unanswered questions that Franko is ignoring (too difficult for him, perhaps? Busy making up new definitions for the words so they work in your favor?), but I just can't tell over Franko's yapping about nothing at all....

Poor Franko. He ain't gots no friends at all... :(

Upchurch

edited to add:
FYI, Franko, this post would count as fluff. I know you have a hard time distinguishing.

Originally posted by Franko

----
Trixy -- Go tell your stupid pagan wife -- I just believe what she believes.
----


Posted by Tricky

----
Very good, Franko. You have just called yourself stupid in only twelve words. This may be a new record for you.
----


HAHA!! I love it. :-)

[CWL]

... and we are apparently back to the insults and the flaming.

Oh, well...

Franko, honestly my friend. You are unique on this forum in that you seriously content to know the "Truth" (where "know" is qualified as being 100 % certain, or as having "no margin of error" as I believe you have put it yourself). Yet you fail to explain HOW you can know the truth (at least so that I may comprehend).

Can you not see why this may be regarded as being rather contentious?

[MRC_Hans]

I think perhaps there might be a key in this (snipped from another thread)

Somebody asks
Sure, people can get upset when playing a game. What does that have to do with life?
And Franko answers:
How is life different?

The only inference I can make from this is that Franko mistakes life for some sort of game. Something like a big game of DD with himself as the dungeon master's helper (or something, my knowlege of DD is sketchy). This would explain the disregard for the feelings and opinions of others, and also much of the weird logic.

Much as I would like to keep playing (this is really challenging -- or is it challenged? -Oh well), I cannot keep exploiting a sick mind for my personal fun. I kept thinking that there was sense behind it, but I see I'm mistaken.

Game over.

Hans

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
The only inference I can make from this is that Franko mistakes life for some sort of game. Something like a big game of DD with himself as the dungeon master's helper (or something, my knowlege of DD is sketchy). This would explain the disregard for the feelings and opinions of others, and also much of the weird logic.

Interesting observation, Hans.

I've been known to play a little D&D in my time. There was no such thing as a DM's master helper in any of the games that I played, but the rules can very from group to group. I've known many, many gamers and there is a tendency among the more hard core players to confuse the game with real life. The problem is, things are much easier in the game than they are in real life. All the rules are spelled out and are self-consistent enough for "daily life" that it's easy to want adopt a similar system IRL. However, when put against real world problems or that of deeper philisophical questions, it breaks down.

This might, and this is pure speculation, shed some light on the origin of the female nature of Franko's Logical Goddess. Perhaps his character (the one he identifies himself with), followed a female god in the game or, perhaps, he had the ever-rare female DM. Gaming might also explain why Franko's definitions are askew and his arguments repetitive. D&D does the same thing to keep it's game logic internally consistant. (Although obviously, Franko would have had to mis-apply this technique to arrive at the inconsistant philosophy he currently proports.)

Poor Franko....

Upchurch

[Checkmite]

I've played AD&D in high school, although I didn't get as caught up in it as others did (i.e., to the point of being confused as to when the game stops and reality starts), so I am familiar with the concepts. But that is beside the point.

My problem with the D&D analogy is that it begs the question. In D&D, you know there is a DM...you directly communicate with this person throughout the entire game. You can see the DM's face - although not whatever they're working on, due to the screen. The DM is as much a player in the game as anyone, albeit with a more involved role. He does a lot more than just "subtly and mysteriously direct the course of the game"...he's not like the mysterious voice in the Gauntlet video games that does nothing but say "Red Warrior needs food, badly" every once in awhile.

But the D&D analogy, while it describes the God hypothesis in a sense, cannot be used to prove the truth of the God hypothesis. Franko asked "how is reality different from a game of D&D?" I say that it's different because in D&D, everyone knows there's a DM...but in reality, the existence of the "DM" is very much in question.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by jkorosi
In D&D, you know there is a DM...you directly communicate with this person throughout the entire game.
Well, that's kinda my point. Franko has said that he KNOWS his goddess is there, which lend credence to the idea.

Upchurch

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Upchurch

Well, that's kinda my point. Franko has said that he KNOWS his goddess is there, which lend credence to the idea.

Upchurch

Right, so all we need to do to understand Franko's mindset is understand what convinced him that the Goddess is there. I'm attempting to do this in my direct questions thread.

BTW, thanks to you and Tricky for deleting your posts. I'd rather have just Franko and I conversing in that thread (though it's not like I can stop anyone else from posting). This isn't because I don't agree with your's or Tricky's arguments, it's just because I don't want Franko using them as an excuse to "forget" about my questions and go off on a tangent. Meanwhile, I'm trying to figure out who this Yalel is, and what the hell he's raving about (apologies to Randi :D). But on second thought, I'll just ignore him and hope he goes away.

[Plutarck]

jkorosi:

Prediction: Franko will use the same tactics he always uses unless you sufficiently corner him, in which case you are just posting nonsense and he won't waste his time with you anymore - basically, what he does with everyone else.


Oh, and about Yalel. I can't actually figure out if he's kidding. Sometimes it seems like it's a parody, but other times it's hard to believe his not just faking it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by jkorosi
I've played AD&D in high school, although I didn't get as caught up in it as others did (i.e., to the point of being confused as to when the game stops and reality starts), so I am familiar with the concepts. But that is beside the point.

My problem with the D&D analogy is that it begs the question. In D&D, you know there is a DM...you directly communicate with this person throughout the entire game. You can see the DM's face - although not whatever they're working on, due to the screen. The DM is as much a player in the game as anyone, albeit with a more involved role. He does a lot more than just "subtly and mysteriously direct the course of the game"...he's not like the mysterious voice in the Gauntlet video games that does nothing but say "Red Warrior needs food, badly" every once in awhile.

But the D&D analogy, while it describes the God hypothesis in a sense, cannot be used to prove the truth of the God hypothesis. Franko asked "how is reality different from a game of D&D?" I say that it's different because in D&D, everyone knows there's a DM...but in reality, the existence of the "DM" is very much in question.
Good points, jkorosi, but there are more holes in the D&D analogy that it takes to fill the Albert Hall. For example:

The DM cannot control the players decisions. He can determinge the outcome of those decisions, but if the DM knew in advance what would happen, there would be no point in playing.
The DM cannot decide what people/creatures populate it's "world". Players bring their own characters to the game.
Players can decide not to be in the DM's world. When presented with a tyrannical, intransigent DM, they will simply move to another game with a better DM.

There are many others, but the simple fact is that D&D is a game. It is not reality, nor is it a good model of reality. If you want a better model of reality, try The Game Of Life (http://www.toys2wish4.com/gamoflif40an.html) (the board game, not the flipping-disk game.)

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Tricky

Good points, jkorosi, but there are more holes in the D&D analogy that it takes to fill the Albert Hall. For example:

The DM cannot control the players decisions. He can determinge the outcome of those decisions, but if the DM knew in advance what would happen, there would be no point in playing.
The DM cannot decide what people/creatures populate it's "world". Players bring their own characters to the game.
Players can decide not to be in the DM's world. When presented with a tyrannical, intransigent DM, they will simply move to another game with a better DM.

There are many others, but the simple fact is that D&D is a game. It is not reality, nor is it a good model of reality. If you want a better model of reality, try The Game Of Life (http://www.toys2wish4.com/gamoflif40an.html) (the board game, not the flipping-disk game.)

I dimly remember that game (Life)...from a long, long time ago. Loved it.

You've also raised good points regarding Franko's D&D analogy. I say on the ten-die, under 60 Franko responds with a defense of the D&D analogy - and Tricky's charisma is +2 for capturing Franko in his "gravity". Over 60, Franko responds with an insulting "fluff" post (possibly involving a complaint about ass-kissing) and Franko's charisma is -3.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

Wasn’t it you that I explained this very point too already? I know I have mentioned this (nearly) exact scenario in relationship to the notion of Karma. Just because you decided to be sane at the last minute doesn’t mean that all of the debts you accrued don’t have to be paid. The deathbed conversion is just you acknowledging “I WILL PAY MY DEBTS”.

Actually I remember reading several articles a few years back about how homosexuals with AIDS were going on crime sprees. The reasons, were some of them figured they’d get better health care in prison, but many found or figured out that they weren’t being prosecuted for the same reason – the government didn’t want the cost of taking care of terminally ill convicts who might spread the disease through the prison system.

I can’t even believe that you are arguing this point, it is so completely absurd in my mind!! Haven’t you ever heard of the concept of Rewards and Punishments? (I am guessing you DO NOT have children?)Are you really telling me that positive an negative reinforcement have no effect on behavior? Because unless you have been actually arguing that devout A-Theists are actually less moral people, it sounds like you are arguing that 50+ years of behavioral research are DEAD WRONG. What is your evidence for this belief? I don’t expect anything out of those retards – Trixy, Plutard, Whodidi, UpBlurch, or Diogenes (did I miss any consistent idiots [Fool, Doubt]) – they sure as hell aren’t going to actually defend their nonsense, but they don’t seem to have totally degraded your algorithm down to nothing yet. You still have a chance.

A-Theists are Evil humans. But like Christians, simply calling yourself an A-Theist alone is not the sum of it. You also have to be an A-Theist in Deed – in Action. In other words, not all A-Theists are devout, they pay the Faith Lip-service, but little more. These A-Theists aren’t quite as evil. But they sure as Hell ain’t helping themselves either.

You believe that there is evidence for “free will”, and no evidence for “god”.

I believe that there is evidence for “God”, and no evidence for “free will”.

Your universe is inside out, and backwards.

Franko,

I was talking about certain sects of Christianity (none of whom buy the concept of karma). People who believe with all of their heart that they can accept Jesus on their death bed and all is forgiven. Using your logic, shouldn't these people feel free to run amuck? (And not just for six months. These people could run amuck their entire lives and be saved, so long as they accept Jesus and ask forgiveness on their death bed.) I don't think you answered my point here. Why wouldn't they behave as you suggest?

While I will accept (without any evidence, I might add) the idea that some people with AIDs may have committed crimes to receive care, I don't think it proves your point. These people weren't committing crimes because there were no consequences, they were committing crimes to enhance their comfort and possible survival. Better to survive in prison than die in the street.

You would be wrong in your assumption that I don't have children. You would also be wrong in assuming that because something doesn't make sense in your mind, it shouldn't make sense in someone else's.

Of course positive and negative reinforcement can affect behavior. Therefore, when an atheist is given six months to live, having learned the positive/negative reinforcement lesson, he will still behave himself as he has been taught his whole life. He won't suddenly be free from the morality he has learned. You seem to be arguing that given six months to live, people (I'm sorry, atheists) will change their basic nature. So much so that they will feel free to commit any crime. Do you have any evidence for this belief other than your own opinions?

My universe is inside out and backwards? How many adherents are there to your logical deism? I would respectfully suggest that any time you are the only person in the world who believes something, you might want to consider that you're wrong.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Tricky


The DM cannot control the players decisions. He can determinge the outcome of those decisions, but if the DM knew in advance what would happen, there would be no point in playing.
The DM cannot decide what people/creatures populate it's "world". Players bring their own characters to the game.
Players can decide not to be in the DM's world. When presented with a tyrannical, intransigent DM, they will simply move to another game with a better DM.


One small correction to your second point. A DM can decide what people/creatures to let into the world. Many groups roll up characters specifically for a new game. That way the players can't come in with super-human characters and easily defeat the scenario designed by the DM.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Tricky
[list]
The DM cannot control the players decisions. He can determinge the outcome of those decisions, but if the DM knew in advance what would happen, there would be no point in playing.

Oh. Good point. Forgot that Franko doesn't include free will in his world view. Is it possible he added it in later as he developed the idea?

Upchurch

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Ipecac


One small correction to your second point. A DM can decide what people/creatures to let into the world. Many groups roll up characters specifically for a new game. That way the players can't come in with super-human characters and easily defeat the scenario designed by the DM.
I concede this point. Don't the players get to choose the character class they are rolling for though? The DM still couldn't know in advance if he was going to face ten warriors or ten wizards.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Tricky

I concede this point. Don't the players get to choose the character class they are rolling for though? The DM still couldn't know in advance if he was going to face ten warriors or ten wizards.

Practices vary and it depends on the game being played. In our campaigns, the DM asks people what class they want to play and the players agree who will play what. That way we have a balanced group.

I imagine most regular groups work as we do, as a collaboration between the players and DM to design and play a balanced game that's a challenge to the players and fun for the DM.

[Upchurch]

Regardless, it seems to me that there are enough inconsistancies to assume that Franko didn't pull all, if any, of his religious beliefs from playing to much D&D. It was just an idea. Of course, Franko has never been known for his overly logical mind. It could just be a preversion of the game rules.

Regardless, I've not been following Franko's posts forever. Does anyone know or remember where this weird corruption of physics principles came from? The whole gravitons with spin thing?

Upchurch

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Regardless, it seems to me that there are enough inconsistancies to assume that Franko didn't pull all, if any, of his religious beliefs from playing to much D&D. It was just an idea. Of course, Franko has never been known for his overly logical mind. It could just be a preversion of the game rules.

Regardless, I've not been following Franko's posts forever. Does anyone know or remember where this weird corruption of physics principles came from? The whole gravitons with spin thing?

Upchurch

Absolutely. Life may be like a box of chocolates, but it's not much like a game of D&D.

Your question is one I've been wondering, not having participated in the R&P board for very long.

Franko, I'd be pleased to hear the origins of your belief. They are, at the very least, unique. How did you come about them?

[Franko]

Ipecac,

[Karma …]I was talking about certain sects of Christianity (none of whom buy the concept of karma). People who believe with all of their heart that they can accept Jesus on their death bed and all is forgiven. Using your logic, shouldn't these people feel free to run amuck? (And not just for six months. These people could run amuck their entire lives and be saved, so long as they accept Jesus and ask forgiveness on their death bed.) I don't think you answered my point here. Why wouldn't they behave as you suggest?

They wouldn’t (according to how you have defined this sect). They might likely get cast back to the abyss the same as anyone else who is not compatible. Does the fact that a lot of brand-name theists go to Hell, make the Atheists feel better about going there themselves?

While I will accept (without any evidence, I might add) the idea that some people with AIDs may have committed crimes to receive care, I don't think it proves your point. These people weren't committing crimes because there were no consequences, they were committing crimes to enhance their comfort and possible survival. Better to survive in prison than die in the street.

Ipecac, the fact of the matter is that the notion of Rewards and punishments – positive and negative reinforcement is a well known and established fact. If you want to argue that people occasionally and randomly run “red” lights, or that the Behaviorists are Dead Wrong, then you are talking to the wrong guy. I have no interest in explaining the basics of human nature to you.

Of course positive and negative reinforcement can affect behavior.

“Can”, or do you mean “Always Does, and is the only thing that does”?

… Therefore, when an atheist is given six months to live, having learned the positive/negative reinforcement lesson, he will still behave himself as he has been taught his whole life.

His whole life he has been taught that when he is about to die there is the same punishment (ceasing to exist) regardless of what he does.

… He won't suddenly be free from the morality he has learned.

What morality did he learn? Other than doing what benefited him, what other morality does he have?

… You seem to be arguing that given six months to live, people (I'm sorry, atheists) will change their basic nature.

No … they are pretty much evil their whole entire lives. I’m not saying they change.

… So much so that they will feel free to commit any crime.

All crimes are committed by A-Theists (Atheists at heart). Anyone who Truly believed in Karma wouldn’t commit a crime. They’d only be committing a crime against themselves.

Do you have any evidence for this belief other than your own opinions?

I was going to ask you the same question. B.F. Skinner and the Laws of Physics agree with me. Other than the A-Theistic Religious fanatics on this site, what evidence do you have?

My universe is inside out and backwards? How many adherents are there to your logical deism? I would respectfully suggest that any time you are the only person in the world who believes something, you might want to consider that you're wrong.

Even if that were True, are you claiming that the Truth of Reality is decided by Majority Vote? If that is the case, then guess what – Atheism is False.

[Franko]

Dungeons and dragons …

The DM cannot control the players decisions. He can determinge the outcome of those decisions, but if the DM knew in advance what would happen, there would be no point in playing.

The Dm can do whatever he wants. Its his world. He wants your character to have a heart attack … and you have a heart attack. If that is not controlling your destiny … then what is it?

The DM cannot decide what people/creatures populate it's "world". Players bring their own characters to the game.

That’s not true, and even if it were in D&D its not true here.

Players can decide not to be in the DM's world. When presented with a tyrannical, intransigent DM, they will simply move to another game with a better DM.

The nearest exit from this game (if you are tired of playing) can be found at the top of the closest tall bridge or High Building. Thanks for playing!!!

Franko, I'd be pleased to hear the origins of your belief. They are, at the very least, unique. How did you come about them?

I was working on a computer program … and one day I ran it.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko

Ipecac,

They wouldn’t (according to how you have defined this sect). They might likely get cast back to the abyss the same as anyone else who is not compatible. Does the fact that a lot of brand-name theists go to Hell, make the Atheists feel better about going there themselves?

Why wouldn't they behave as you've outlined? They wouldn't because they're Christians? Atheists automatically would because they're atheists? That sole belief is the basis of their behaviour? Nothing else matters? (And your crack about atheists feeling better is silly. We don't believe people go to hell so we can hardly take comfort in it.)

“Can”, or do you mean “Always Does, and is the only thing that does”?

I said what I meant. Can. Not always.


What morality did he learn? Other than doing what benefited him, what other morality does he have?
....
No … they are pretty much evil their whole entire lives. I’m not saying they change.
....
All crimes are committed by A-Theists (Atheists at heart). Anyone who Truly believed in Karma wouldn’t commit a crime. They’d only be committing a crime against themselves.

Ah. Thank you. I think I've finally gotten to the heart of your beef with atheists. It doesn't matter what they actually believe. It doesn't matter how they live their lives. "Atheists are evil," is your whole argument.


Even if that were True, are you claiming that the Truth of Reality is decided by Majority Vote? If that is the case, then guess what – Atheism is False.

Please note what I said, ". . . you might want to consider that you were wrong." I did not say that the majority determines truth. I was suggesting that you should reexamine your beliefs when you're the only one who holds them. That's always good advice.

[Franko]

Ipecac,

Why wouldn't they behave as you've outlined? They wouldn't because they're Christians? Atheists automatically would because they're atheists? That sole belief is the basis of their behaviour? Nothing else matters?

Read what I wrote again, my friend. I agreed that they would behave exactly the same, and that they would end up in Hell for it right alongside the devout Atheists.

I think I've finally gotten to the heart of your beef with atheists. It doesn't matter what they actually believe. It doesn't matter how they live their lives. "Atheists are evil," is your whole argument.

You sound like you are being turned by the dark side, in order to be able to twist what I said so far off what I said.

I have asserted that people who do not believe there are consequences for their actions behave like there are no consequences for their actions. You disagree, but you explanation is a bit hard to follow.

Please note what I said, ". . . you might want to consider that you were wrong."

Obviously you are incapable of taking your own advice.

I guess it isn’t possible that You are wrong – is it Ipecac?

I did not say that the majority determines truth. I was suggesting that you should reexamine your beliefs when you're the only one who holds them.

Why do I need to re-examine them? They work far better then what you believe, and not one of the bright little A-Theist minds on this forum has managed to so much as put a scratch in them.

Besides … I constantly re-examine them.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
I have asserted that people who do not believe there are consequences for their actions behave like there are no consequences for their actions. You disagree, but you explanation is a bit hard to follow.
According to Logical Deism, people have no "actions". (No free will, remember?) All actions are actions of The Goddess. So only The Goddess suffers consequences.

You sure you don't want to think about this some more?

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

Read what I wrote again, my friend. I agreed that they would behave exactly the same, and that they would end up in Hell for it right alongside the devout Atheists.

You sound like you are being turned by the dark side, in order to be able to twist what I said so far off what I said.

I have asserted that people who do not believe there are consequences for their actions behave like there are no consequences for their actions. You disagree, but you explanation is a bit hard to follow.

Obviously you are incapable of taking your own advice.

I guess it isn’t possible that You are wrong – is it Ipecac?

Why do I need to re-examine them? They work far better then what you believe, and not one of the bright little A-Theist minds on this forum has managed to so much as put a scratch in them.

Besides … I constantly re-examine them.

I don't think it was very clear from what you wrote, but if you are saying that the Christians would behave as you have said the atheists would, then okay. I don't agree that people would or do behave this way but at least you're being consistent.

Here's my take on your consequences argument. Your scenario might be accurate but only in the case where a person believed there were *absolutely* no consequences. But that's not remotely a realistic scenario and therefore useless in this analysis. People just don't behave that way.

EVERYONE would believe there are consequences. Atheist, Christian, whatever, everyone would see consequences to running up their credit cards, raping, pillaging, and killing. Most people don't want to hurt others, regardless of the situation. Most people would not want to hurt or burden their friends and family. Most people like to think that when they die people will think kindly of them. If NOTHING ELSE, there is the consequence of getting caught and spending your last few months in jail. These consequences will tend to make people behave in your scenario.

Seeing as how I completely reevaluated my beliefs about a year ago and came to the conclusion that a lifetime of believing in Christianity was wrong, I can say quite confidently that I have examined my beliefs and changed them when necessary. Can you say the same thing?

[Franko]

Ipecac,

I don't think it was very clear from what you wrote, but if you are saying that the Christians would behave as you have said the atheists would, then okay. I don't agree that people would or do behave this way but at least you're being consistent.

People are responsible for their actions no matter what they call themselves; however, evidence suggests, that people typically label themselves consistently with what they believe.

Bad things happen to bad people; good things happen to good people. I don’t knohow else to explain it to you?

Here's my take on your consequences argument. Your scenario might be accurate but only in the case where a person believed there were *absolutely* no consequences.

Are you once again claiming that A-Theists DO NOT believe that eventually they will cease to exist? Are you claiming that once you have ceased to exist there are still consequences for your actions? Okay, if you answered NO to both those questions they you are agreeing that A-Theists DO NOT believe in ultimate consequences for their actions.

But that's not remotely a realistic scenario and therefore useless in this analysis. People just don't behave that way.

So you are claiming that A-Theists don’t believe they will cease to exist when they die?

Are you trying to be confusing, or are you just confused yourself?

EVERYONE would believe there are consequences. Atheist, Christian, whatever …

No … this is clearly NOT TRUE. Christians believe there are consequences – here and now, AND after they die. A-Theists ONLY believe there are consequences here and now. Once they have ceased to exist there are NO consequences.

… everyone would see consequences to running up their credit cards, raping, pillaging, and killing. Most people don't want to hurt others, regardless of the situation. Most people would not want to hurt or burden their friends and family. Most people like to think that when they die people will think kindly of them. If NOTHING ELSE, there is the consequence of getting caught and spending your last few months in jail. These consequences will tend to make people behave in your scenario.

So what? The Christian is concerned with going to jail, AND being made to suffer in the afterlife. The A-Theists is ONLY concerned about jail. You are claiming that this makes the A-Theist more, or at least equally moral to the believer in Karma? How so? By what logic? Sounds more like a wishful thinking A-Theist bias to me.

Seeing as how I completely reevaluated my beliefs about a year ago and came to the conclusion that a lifetime of believing in Christianity was wrong, I can say quite confidently that I have examined my beliefs and changed them when necessary. Can you say the same thing?

From the time that I first found out about death (around age 4 – 30+ years ago) until only a few years ago I was either Agnostic or Atheistic (more the latter) in regard to belief in an afterlife. I am happy to concede that I was foolish and shortsighted. I am glad that I was wrong.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Ipecac


EVERYONE would believe there are consequences. Atheist, Christian, whatever, everyone would see consequences to running up their credit cards, raping, pillaging, and killing. Most people don't want to hurt others, regardless of the situation. Most people would not want to hurt or burden their friends and family. Most people like to think that when they die people will think kindly of them. If NOTHING ELSE, there is the consequence of getting caught and spending your last few months in jail. These consequences will tend to make people behave in your scenario.


You might also note that not everyone wants to or would enjoy raping, pillaging, killing, or even running up their credit cards.

Call me a die-hard Capitalist, but the idea of not paying back something I rightfully owe - even if I know very well I can get away with it - sickens me. Why should someone have to pay my bills, especially if I can pay them?

Or to put it simply: If you knew there were no consequences, would you put your hand in a blender?

Of course there is a consequence - the sensation of having your hand in a blender!

[Darat]

Franko – thanks for the response. Unfortunately I still remain confused… please see below…

Originally posted by Franko
Darat,

…snip…

It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.



If I understand you right this is the “deist” part of your belief system i.e. the creator of the universe (and the rules it runs by) who then leaves it to unfold. But if the universe is “run” by the rules she decided upon she did create me – I am direct consequence of her choice or will. Which is the position many of my Christian friends maintain i.e. their God created me.


Originally posted by Franko

You have no choice, this is True. Some entities are inherently insane, but other entities are not. The Sane ones are trying to sort out and “capture” the other Sane entities from the rest (the insane). The insane entities get dumped, and after a long long time they fade into nonexistence. But a Sane entity can reach “escape velocity”, and travel through Time perpetually (Eternally).


So you seem to be saying that your Goddess decided to create a universe where at least a certain percentage of people are insane is this a fair summary of your belief ( and do you have an idea of what percentage)?

Originally posted by Franko

If you were taking a test, the LG would be the person to copy an answer from. She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived. It is true that this is her universe, and while you are here you obey her rules, but that does not change your intrinsic nature (whether you are good or evil). The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).


OK – so your Goddess again shares a trait with my Christian friends God i.e. the most perfect being. But you do limit the “powers” of your Goddess unlike the Christians.

(As an aside I think you should be careful about using the “omni” words in talking about your Goddess; you have confused not just me before with using words like “omnipotent” when in fact you mean “most”. The “omni” words tend to mean “all/everything” not “most”. As in the difference between the Christians God and your Goddess. The Christians believe their God is “omnipotent” i.e. all-powerful whilst you state your Goddess is just the most-powerful, a subtle but important distinction.)

I also understand (but please correct me if I am wrong) that there is a link between “beneficial” and “power”.

However isn’t this linked to what is beneficial for the Goddess and not for me? The logical outcome of this belief would seem to be it doesn’t matter if any act is beneficial to you, I or anyone else but is only important if it is beneficial to the Goddess?

Originally posted by Franko


Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”. While that is true, the LG didn’t get to be LG by accident. Gravity, consciousness, even Time itself (all manifestations of the same thing really) all conspired to make her “God”. It was her Fate.



So the Goddess didn’t always exist? Aren’t you saying here that there is a greater force then the Goddess and that “force/entity” decided to make her the Goddess? Shouldn’t we therefore be more concerned about doing what this “greater force then the Goddess” wants us to do? The Goddess is only another “entity” like you and I that is constrained by another level of rules and wishes.

Originally posted by Franko

Not at all. Just because your intrinsic characteristics are intrinsic, doesn’t make you NOT responsible for them. You are who you are, like it or not. If you don’t like it … alter your Fate.


But I don’t have free-will so I can’t change or even control my intrinsic nature because the Goddess has decided what that will be.

I can’t see how your belief explains the apparent paradox –which is exactly like the paradox the Christians face. I.e. if the “ultimate power” is the only being with free-will everything I do is not a consequence of “my” choice but the “ultimate power’s” – they are totally responsible for any action “I” make.

Originally posted by Franko


Atheists are intrinsically evil. They would destroy EVERYTHING if they could (yeah, I know what you’ll say [think], but it is true in a metaphysical sense). But the game has been rigged from the start. The A-Theists are going down, and I am one of the hitmen sent for the job. My Fate ... but I am perfectly content with it.

By using the information you have supplied I have to disagree. The logic of your beliefs means that the only entity in the universe that can be good or evil is the entity with free will i.e. your Goddess.

Another way of putting it is that atheists are not evil; they are simply the way the Goddess wants them to be. If you consider them evil then you consider your Goddess evil.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by Franko
Ipecac,

Are you once again claiming that A-Theists DO NOT believe that eventually they will cease to exist? Are you claiming that once you have ceased to exist there are still consequences for your actions? Okay, if you answered NO to both those questions they you are agreeing that A-Theists DO NOT believe in ultimate consequences for their actions.



Atheists believe that eventually they will cease to exist. On this we agree. No one said otherwise.

However, you are the one making the claim that atheists believe that once we die there are no consequences. Every atheist in this thread has told you that they would not behave differently if they knew they were going to die because of the consequences. There may be no further consequences to the person who dies, but there are very likely consequences to the individual's family and friends. Since atheists care about their family and friends just like other people and will tend not do anything to bring bad consequences to their family, they will behave. (Not to mention the other reasons people have mentioned, including that they just don't want to do the things you assume they'll do.)

Your only response to this is that atheists are evil and incapable of not committing horrible crimes given the chance. Basically, you're telling everyone here how they'll behave, despite their objections. Pardon me if I don't find your reasoning compelling.

[Franko]

Ipecac,

Every atheist in this thread has told you that they would not behave differently if they knew they were going to die…

Yeah every Christian and Hindu and Muslim tells be self-serving subjective crap all the time. I don’t consider it evidence from them, and I don’t consider it evidence for the religion of A-Theism either, especially when it directly contradicts common-sense logic. For an Atheist there are NO consequences after he ceases to exist. A Christian/Hindu/Muslim doesn’t believe he is going to cease to exist, so he has to worry about consequences even beyond this life. I grow weary of repeating myself, and obviously you do not understand the concept of positive and negative reinforcement, or rewards and punishments.

--------------------------

Darat … I’ll get to yours a little later on …

[Ipecac]

So if I shoot a bullet into the air, I'm absolved. As long as there's no further consequence to me, why should I care where the bullet goes?

I tried. Since I'm obviously tiring Franko by asking him to explain his claims and to make some "common sense", I'll stop playing now.

A year ago, I was a deist who had rejected most of organized religion because I couldn't imagine a god who would sanction the things religion said he sanctioned. Then I realized that the god I believed in pretty much behaved the way I wanted him to because it made sense to me. It was at that point that I realized that a god I had pretty much invented to be what I wanted it to be probably wasn't real. So I let it go.

Franko somehow had the opposite experience. He didn't believe in god but then invented one whole cloth to be the god he wanted to worship. The odd part is that now he expects the rest of us to acknowledge and believe in this invented god.

In all sincerity, thank you for the (more or less) flame-free discussion, Franko. It's been enlightening.

Originally posted by Franko


----
.... they would end up in Hell for it right alongside the devout Atheists.
----


Such intimidation doesn't work from fundamentalist Christians, and it doesn't work from Logical Deists.


----
....not one of the bright little A-Theist minds on this forum has managed to so much as put a scratch in [my beliefs and claims].
----


Yeah.

So where was your proof of the Graviton's existence again pal?

[Franko]

Darat,

[The Logical Goddess …] If I understand you right this is the “deist” part of your belief system i.e. the creator of the universe (and the rules it runs by) who then leaves it to unfold.

No! She didn’t leave it, she is still here. She is generating it. What is there to create it with? It is only consciousnesses and the ideas that they express. That is all that exist in reality. “Matter” in the sense you imagine it is superfluous.

But if the universe is “run” by the rules she decided upon she did create me – I am direct consequence of her choice or will. Which is the position many of my Christian friends maintain i.e. their God created me.

She created you in the sense that She has been a huge influence on you. More than ANY other entity she has shaped what you have become, but she did NOT create your essence – your Soul. That was intrinsic to You from long ago. When you were captured by Her gravity, Your intrinsic parameters were used by Her algorithm to generate your physical body.

Let me put it another way … You have this unique set of characteristics … nobody else, ever, has had the same exact set as you do. Now you go to play D&D, but instead of creating your D&D character by rolling dice, the DM has a computer program, and you enter in your unique -- lets call it a sequence number – into the program, and based on its algorithm it determines everything about your character – race, sex, height, weight, strength, speed, cunning, etc. And there you go, you are off and running.

Your “physical body” is an elaboration of the real You – the intrinsic you – your Soul, or your Graviton (the Graviton is the true Matter part, the Soul is more of the Algorithm inside). But what you are in reality, is not what you are here. In reality you are a particle. You are a disembodied conscious. But a consciousness … it can be a very clever thing. Given enough time, it can figure out all kinds of cool things. It can solve all kinds of problems, it can even generate Energy … Gravity … Information. Given an Eternity, perhaps nothing is impossible to it?

[Good & Evil …] So you seem to be saying that your Goddess decided to create a universe where at least a certain percentage of people are insane is this a fair summary of your belief ( and do you have an idea of what percentage)?

Darat, no matter Who created the Universe there were going to be a certain percentage who didn’t make it. That is the nature of the beast. We can Solve all problems, but it takes Time. No matter who created the Universe there were always gonna be whack-job Gravitons that were determined to do nothing else but annihilate other Gravitons. What are you gonna do with an insane entity like that? You have a Solution for this problem? You want to say reconditioning? Behavior modification? Believe me, My Goddess has been perfecting that for quite a while now. She is getting better and better at it. Very soon, I suspect the percentage who do not make it will be very low.

OK – so your Goddess again shares a trait with my Christian friends God i.e. the most perfect being. But you do limit the “powers” of your Goddess unlike the Christians.

She is Omniscient, which means Best Perceiver. If you wanted the best advice you could possibly get, She’d be the person to ask for it.

Or you could think of it as, imagine you have this gorgeous woman who follows you around all day, and whenever you want to know the best thing to do (that is within your physical ability to do) you can ask her and She will ALWAYS give you the right answer.

You are running late for work. She is in the car next to you. You say, “can I run that red light?” She responds, “Sure, there is nothing coming”. And She is ALWAYS correct (True). Your in the grocery store, She says, “That next scratch off (lottery) is a winner – buy it” … and Whoa!! There’s 100 bucks!!! That’s the LG. Her information is the Most Perfect.

(As an aside I think you should be careful about using the “omni” words in talking about your Goddess; you have confused not just me before with using words like “omnipotent” when in fact you mean “most”. The “omni” words tend to mean “all/everything” not “most”. As in the difference between the Christians God and your Goddess. The Christians believe their God is “omnipotent” i.e. all-powerful whilst you state your Goddess is just the most-powerful, a subtle but important distinction.)

I think I’ve defined these here once or twice before, but:

Omni = The Maximum in a Sequence = the Best = the Most
Meta = Higher in a Sequence = Better = Improved = Greater
Omnipotent = Most Potent = Most Powerful = Most Massive = Transmitting Most Information
Omniscient = Best Perception = Carrying the Most True Information (best True Mass)

I also understand (but please correct me if I am wrong) that there is a link between “beneficial” and “power”.

However isn’t this linked to what is beneficial for the Goddess and not for me? The logical outcome of this belief would seem to be it doesn’t matter if any act is beneficial to you, I or anyone else but is only important if it is beneficial to the Goddess?

What makes you assume that those are different things? If The Goddess, Yourself, and Me are the only 3 entities to exist, and the Goddess somehow forces you and me not to kill anyone (and remem there’s only 3 of us), how is that non-beneficial to you and me (assuming we are both sane)?

Lets say that by “magic” you were prohibited from raping women, is this bad or good? Its good in that in ensures your wife/mother/sister/daughter/friend would never get raped. That’s beneficial to the Goddess, them, and you and me – right? Do you see where I am going with this?

The thing to remember, is that Objective morality still leaves loads of room for individuality. In other words, it isn’t an absolute moral system that is forcing you into some “Big Brother”/Borg Collective Society – quite the opposite actually. Remember they are most beneficial, because the smartest, strongest, sanest consciousnesses came up with the ideas long ago.

So the Goddess didn’t always exist?

Yes. And Theoretically it is even possible that you or I might be “older” than her as well.

Aren’t you saying here that there is a greater force then the Goddess and that “force/entity” decided to make her the Goddess?

That is True and False. There is another force … the original primordial consciousness – The Progenitor Solipsist – the original ancestor of us all. Without getting into it (another time), when this entity split, he created individuality/relativity, and gender in the same instant (Spin & Charge). He also created competitive evolution which in a way is the source of Good & Evil (another complex-simple subject). Evil basically imparts motion into the system. The Logical Goddess is the end result. At this Time She is the most evolved entity within our perception. She has more Mass (Information) then any other graviton you perceive.

Shouldn’t we therefore be more concerned about doing what this “greater force then the Goddess” wants us to do? The Goddess is only another “entity” like you and I that is constrained by another level of rules and wishes.

In a way that is sort of True. But you are in Her Universe right now, and if She determines that you are an incompatible entity, then She is gonna dump you right back where She found you. Any way you slice it … that wouldn’t be good.

[Souls …] But I don’t have free-will so I can’t change or even control my intrinsic nature because the Goddess has decided what that will be.

Exactly! … but how do you know that you do not have a Great Destiny in store for you? How would you know if you did?

I can’t see how your belief explains the apparent paradox –which is exactly like the paradox the Christians face. I.e. if the “ultimate power” is the only being with free-will everything I do is not a consequence of “my” choice but the “ultimate power’s” – they are totally responsible for any action “I” make.

Actually you can only have Free Will if Solipsism is True. As soon as you introduce Individuality, you also get Relativity/Fate. Fate is the result of entanglement between Individuals (Gravitons). These entanglements create points in Spacetime.

By using the information you have supplied I have to disagree. The logic of your beliefs means that the only entity in the universe that can be good or evil is the entity with free will i.e. your Goddess.

… Lets just say that She tends to control me far more then I tend to control Her.

Another way of putting it is that atheists are not evil; they are simply the way the Goddess wants them to be. If you consider them evil then you consider your Goddess evil.

If you want to quietly go off and cease to exist, then I think you are crazy, but you are NOT evil – go in peace, my friend.

… But if you want Me to cease to exist, then you have a serious problem on your hands. …

FOLLOW THE EVOLUTION OF FRANKO


From a normal first post!

To people responding logically to him!

To him getting flustered!

To the end of his posts!

http://deism.org/forum/search.php?search_author=Serpent&sid=fa66d27e173d6da0e49fb164891fd1c9

it lists from most recent post to least recent.


Here are some entertaining excerpts:




About atheists:

-------
That they are insane, and pure evil at heart – I agree they are nothing to laugh about.
-------


----
Did you see my response to Paws? What is the evidence that Matter makes consciousness?

The Logical Deists possess such a proof.

But there is a lot to it, and before I could explain it we would need a common foundation between us. But I am not going any where, there will be plenty of time.
----




----
Now according to Logical Deism there is only one type of particle
that exist in the metatrue reality (The Omniverse). This particle is
called a Graviton. Each of us are such a particle. Now these particles
have four intrinsic properties MASS, VELOCITY, SPIN, and CHARGE. All of
these parameters are values, and all can be either positive, or negative.

SPIN corresponds to your gender. “Positive” Spin is male, and “Negative”
Spin is Female (spin = zero is gender neutral)
----



----
Essentially Logical deism is a unified theory of physics
----



----
Potentially yes, but that is why we call it “Logical Deism”.
The emphasis is on Logic. There is no dogma in LD. A thing is
only claimed to be true or false, if the logical evidence indicates
that it is true or false. Otherwise we just say – “not enough information”.
----



I'm personally wondering what "Logical evidence" is...



----
Someone else posted...

####
There's always the Eye in the Pyramid, representing Illumination and Enlightenment. Of course, in the U.S. anyway, it's become a neon billboard for "Masonic Conspiracies Within!" Shame, because it's such a *cool* symbol.
####

I'm with you there, Bud!

That is exactly what the LD uses.
----


----
“God” is made out of time, so are you and I, so is everything else.
Time, is all you need – “Self-Aware Time”, that is.
----


ENJOY!

[Checkmite]

Franko, have you blown off my direct questions thread?

[Darat]

Originally posted by Franko
Darat,

No! She didn’t leave it, she is still here. She is generating it. What is there to create it with? It is only consciousnesses and the ideas that they express. That is all that exist in reality. “Matter” in the sense you imagine it is superfluous.



Thanks for the correction.

(As an aside why do you use the term “deism” as a label for your beliefs? (The definition of which is a God that created the universe and then abandoned it.) Shouldn’t you label your belief “Logical Theism”?)


Originally posted by Franko

She created you in the sense that She has been a huge influence on you. More than ANY other entity she has shaped what you have become, but she did NOT create your essence – your Soul. That was intrinsic to You from long ago. When you were captured by Her gravity, Your intrinsic parameters were used by Her algorithm to generate your physical body.



Ah & thanks - this does help clear up a major confusion I had.

(Another aside - who/what created “me”? Do you cover this in your belief system?)

Originally posted by Franko


Let me put it another way … You have this unique set of characteristics … nobody else, ever, has had the same exact set as you do. Now you go to play D&D, but instead of creating your D&D character by rolling dice, the DM has a computer program, and you enter in your unique -- lets call it a sequence number – into the program, and based on its algorithm it determines everything about your character – race, sex, height, weight, strength, speed, cunning, etc. And there you go, you are off and running.

Your “physical body” is an elaboration of the real You – the intrinsic you – your Soul, or your Graviton (the Graviton is the true Matter part, the Soul is more of the Algorithm inside). But what you are in reality, is not what you are here. In reality you are a particle. You are a disembodied conscious. But a consciousness … it can be a very clever thing. Given enough time, it can figure out all kinds of cool things. It can solve all kinds of problems, it can even generate Energy … Gravity … Information. Given an Eternity, perhaps nothing is impossible to it?



Thanks for this expansion.

At the moment I am trying hard to just understand your belief system :) But I would at some other time like to discuss how you “know” this.

Originally posted by Franko


Darat, no matter Who created the Universe there were going to be a certain percentage who didn’t make it. That is the nature of the beast. We can Solve all problems, but it takes Time. No matter who created the Universe there were always gonna be whack-job Gravitons that were determined to do nothing else but annihilate other Gravitons. What are you gonna do with an insane entity like that? You have a Solution for this problem? You want to say reconditioning? Behavior modification? Believe me, My Goddess has been perfecting that for quite a while now. She is getting better and better at it. Very soon, I suspect the percentage who do not make it will be very low.



Again thanks for the expansion.

From this I am I right in saying your Goddess isn’t the creator of the “underlying” reality that she uses to influence our behavior (and the “system” she uses to algorithmically generate “extensions” of our intrinsic nature/particle)?

It seems (and I accept I may be reading too much into this) that your belief rests on a assumption that there is a “reality” beyond that that your Goddess consciousness (and ours?) creates? Otherwise isn’t the Goddess creating herself?

Originally posted by Franko



She is Omniscient, which means Best Perceiver. If you wanted the best advice you could possibly get, She’d be the person to ask for it.

….snip….

I think I’ve defined these here once or twice before, but:

Omni = The Maximum in a Sequence = the Best = the Most
Meta = Higher in a Sequence = Better = Improved = Greater
Omnipotent = Most Potent = Most Powerful = Most Massive = Transmitting Most Information
Omniscient = Best Perception = Carrying the Most True Information (best True Mass)




We do disagree here as the words omnipotent, omnipresent, omnipresence have well defined meanings that are the accepted common usage of the words. And these are not limited by just being the “most” but I think we are just debating a semantic point – the key for my understanding of your belief system is that you say Goddess is not all-powerful or all-knowing.


Originally posted by Franko



What makes you assume that those are different things? If The Goddess, Yourself, and Me are the only 3 entities to exist, and the Goddess somehow forces you and me not to kill anyone (and remem there’s only 3 of us), how is that non-beneficial to you and me (assuming we are both sane)?

Lets say that by “magic” you were prohibited from raping women, is this bad or good? Its good in that in ensures your wife/mother/sister/daughter/friend would never get raped. That’s beneficial to the Goddess, them, and you and me – right? Do you see where I am going with this?



I agree that it seems in your belief system that I can “benefit” from mine and other people actions but what I was trying to express was that if I have no “free-will” and the Goddess is the ultimate “benefactor” of this universe any benefit I do derive is irrelevant to her – she is only interested in what is beneficial to her.

It’s a matter of perspective – an example of this is that if I keep a pet dog and keep that dog happy and healthy I do that, ultimately, for my benefit. I don’t want my dog to have fleas because that affects me.

Originally posted by Franko


The thing to remember, is that Objective morality still leaves loads of room for individuality. In other words, it isn’t an absolute moral system that is forcing you into some “Big Brother”/Borg Collective Society – quite the opposite actually. Remember they are most beneficial, because the smartest, strongest, sanest consciousnesses came up with the ideas long ago.


But this goes back to one of the things you stated earlier – we don’t have freewill. If you or I don’t have free-will I cannot make any moral judgment or choice since I don’t have the ability to make a choice. And it doesn’t matter about what consequences there may be for my actions it cannot influence my actions since even knowing the consequences my choices have been pre-ordained.

In your belief system the only person who can make a moral choice is your Goddess since she is the only one with free will.

Originally posted by Franko


That is True and False. There is another force … the original primordial consciousness – The Progenitor Solipsist – the original ancestor of us all. Without getting into it (another time), when this entity split, he created individuality/relativity, and gender in the same instant (Spin & Charge). He also created competitive evolution which in a way is the source of Good & Evil (another complex-simple subject). Evil basically imparts motion into the system. The Logical Goddess is the end result. At this Time She is the most evolved entity within our perception. She has more Mass (Information) then any other graviton you perceive.



There is certainly a lot more to your belief system then I originally thought. I would certainly like, at another time to discuss this aspect of it.


Originally posted by Franko


In a way that is sort of True. But you are in Her Universe right now, and if She determines that you are an incompatible entity, then She is gonna dump you right back where She found you. Any way you slice it … that wouldn’t be good.


But is it “Her universe” ? Perhaps there are other “deeper” levels to this universe that in turn control/influence Her?

Originally posted by Franko


Exactly! … but how do you know that you do not have a Great Destiny in store for you? How would you know if you did?


If I have no free-will then I don’t have any “great” or “not-so” great destiny – I simple have a destiny that is nothing to do with me. It’s purely arbitrary and from my view, random.

Originally posted by Franko


Actually you can only have Free Will if Solipsism is True. As soon as you introduce Individuality, you also get Relativity/Fate. Fate is the result of entanglement between Individuals (Gravitons). These entanglements create points in Spacetime.


But your belief system rejects solipsism as an explanation for “reality” doesn’t it?

Originally posted by Franko



… Lets just say that She tends to control me far more then I tend to control Her.



I’m not quite so sure how this squares with your statement that we have no “free-will” are you saying we have some “free-will”?


Originally posted by Franko


If you want to quietly go off and cease to exist, then I think you are crazy, but you are NOT evil – go in peace, my friend.

… But if you want Me to cease to exist, then you have a serious problem on your hands. …

I am enjoying this exchange and I hope you’ll have the patience to continue to explain and expound on your belief system to help me understand it.

At the moment I have to say I am “agnostic” about your belief system because I don’t understand it (hopefully that should just be “understand it yet”) and also because we haven’t started to discuss how you “know” the premises you base it on are “true”.

But at the moment I would rather not divert our discussion to discuss the “how do you know this is all true” until I believe (pun intended) I’ve grasped the basic structure and ramifications of your beliefs.

I hope you’ll continue this discussion.

[Franko]

jkorrosi

Franko, have you blown off my direct questions thread?

Jk***si a "discussion" actually requires two people talking back and fourth. But have fun agreeing with your A-Theists friends.

[Franko]

Darat,

(As an aside why do you use the term “deism” as a label for your beliefs? (The definition of which is a God that created the universe and then abandoned it.) Shouldn’t you label your belief “Logical Theism”?)

I call myself a Logical Deist, and I have explained my reasons for using that term in detail more than once here. Essentially Deism means “NonDogmatic”; not based on tradition or hearsay. You can’t really have “logical-hearsay”. But I have no problem if other people refer to me as a “Logical Theist”. For most people there is a pretty fine line between Deism and Theism.

Another aside - who/what created “me”? Do you cover this in your belief system?

Well, there you go … now you have at least one purpose in Life – where did you come from? To be honest, the best I could tell you is that you sprang from the void, in some way intrinsically You.

[Good & Evil …]From this I am I right in saying your Goddess isn’t the creator of the “underlying” reality that she uses to influence our behavior (and the “system” she uses to algorithmically generate “extensions” of our intrinsic nature/particle)?

Right, that is Gravity. The fact is that, eventually … Matter does make consciousness, just not in the way Stimpson imagines. In other words, consciousness is made out of something, and the fact that we are, binds us to the rules which govern that stuff. Including the LG herself.

But from your point of view it is probably easiest to imagine that, that “stuff” is LOGIC.

She’s improving Her own program, but She is also helping you to improve YOUR program.

It seems (and I accept I may be reading too much into this) that your belief rests on a assumption that there is a “reality” beyond that that your Goddess consciousness (and ours?) creates? Otherwise isn’t the Goddess creating herself?

No, you got it right. The LG is only bound by the Laws of Gravity. The other 3 laws of physics are entirely her creation. She has complete control over them.

We do disagree here as the words omnipotent, omnipresent, omnipresence have well defined meanings that are the accepted common usage of the words.

Those definitions you refer to are all logically flawed. I have mentioned this several times her and been quite specific about it.

And these are not limited by just being the “most” but I think we are just debating a semantic point – the key for my understanding of your belief system is that you say Goddess is not all-powerful or all-knowing.

Exactly. What does All-Powerful even mean? Power is Relative to another Power. If you are “Most” powerful, than that is Logically similar to “All” powerful, because who is around that is more powerful than you?

I agree that it seems in your belief system that I can “benefit” from mine and other people actions but what I was trying to express was that if I have no “free-will” and the Goddess is the ultimate “benefactor” of this universe any benefit I do derive is irrelevant to her – she is only interested in what is beneficial to her.

Do you ever benefit by making your wife or children or Mother happy? What makes you so certain that She (the LG) does not find making You happy personally beneficial to Her?

It’s a matter of perspective – an example of this is that if I keep a pet dog and keep that dog happy and healthy I do that, ultimately, for my benefit. I don’t want my dog to have fleas because that affects me.

That’s actually a good analogy. The Christians use the good Sheppard and his flock of Sheep.

[Objective Morality …]But this goes back to one of the things you stated earlier – we don’t have freewill. If you or I don’t have free-will I cannot make any moral judgment or choice since I don’t have the ability to make a choice. And it doesn’t matter about what consequences there may be for my actions it cannot influence my actions since even knowing the consequences my choices have been pre-ordained.

In your belief system the only person who can make a moral choice is your Goddess since she is the only one with free will.

Actually, She doesn’t have “free will” either. Only Solipsist can have Free Will. But think about it this way Darat, is “free will” your goal, or is “free will” simply the mechanism to gain your Individuality? Which is really more important to you? If you could obtain individuality without “free will”, then would you really care if you didn’t have “free will”?

But is it “Her universe” ? Perhaps there are other “deeper” levels to this universe that in turn control/influence Her?

It’s possible that the LG worships a God or Goddess of Her own, but that is irrelevant to me at this moment in Time. For now, She is my Lord. She is the most powerful entity that I can perceive. Any hypothetical entity above her is unobservable, and therefore unparsimonious.

If I have no free-will then I don’t have any “great” or “not-so” great destiny – I simple have a destiny that is nothing to do with me. It’s purely arbitrary and from my view, random.

Really? How can you say this???

So you mean that it makes no difference to you whether you get run over by a bus later today, or have sex with 5 hot babes all at once?

If you find the Destiny a good one (beneficial), then it is a good destiny. If you find it a bad one, consistently unpleasant, miserable, unlucky, then it is a bad Destiny. These matter are always decided relative to the individual in question.

But your belief system rejects solipsism as an explanation for “reality” doesn’t it?

Not entirely. We all had our origins in Solipsism. Furthermore, just because you are not a Solipsist now, doesn’t mean you won’t be one in the future.

I am enjoying this exchange and I hope you’ll have the patience to continue to explain and expound on your belief system to help me understand it.

By all means, my Friend. I am enjoying it as well.

Originally posted by Franko

----
Jk***si a "discussion" actually requires two people talking back and fourth. But have fun agreeing with your A-Theists friends.
----


Now Franko is so mysterious that in addition to inserting dashes, he is inserting asterisks.

Franko, that makes you more mystical and smart, really.

Also, you may want to Randomly Capitalize words too, especially for things you can't prove or even define.

That makes intelligence.

Yessiiirrrr.


So now why are you dodging "Jk***si"'s questions again?

Why don't you show up all of us "A-theist friends" once and for all?


Prediction: Franko dodges as usual.


I should probably add this to every one of my posts on a Franko thread. Whaddya say Franko?:D


Misc info:

####
Interested in seeing Franko's history on bulletin boards?
Go to http://www.deism.org/forum/search.php?search_author=Serpent

("Serpent" is Franko's name over there)

See the evolution(?) from:
1. a normal first couple of posts...
2. to people asking him questions about his beliefs and claims...
3. to him getting flustered
4. to the last of his posts
####

[Franko]

Whodidi you are such a good and reliable sock-puppet. It is almost too bad you have to cease to exist.

Prediction: Franko will dodge as usual

Evidence:
Originally posted by Franko

----
Whodidi you are such a good and reliable sock-puppet. It is almost too bad you have to cease to exist.
----


Analysis:
Correct prediction.


It is good to see that you are riled up Franko.

As far as ceasing to exist, yeah, so? We live in a natural world and things come and go. It is the ultimate recycle.

Cheers.


####
Interested in seeing FRANKO's history on bulletin boards?

Go to http://www.deism.org/forum/search.p..._author=Serpent

("Serpent" is Franko's name over there)

See the evolution(?) from:
1. a normal first couple of posts...
2. to people asking him questions about his beliefs and claims...
3. to him getting flustered
4. to the last of his posts
####

[Franko]

I already dodge reading your posts as much as possible. I only wish I could dodge seeing them at all. I get so embarrassed for you every time I see one. I don’t want to compound your humiliation further by actually responding to your infantile queries (and really they are more insults [Whodid temper tantrums] then actual questions). Besides Whodidi, you have already demonstrated that even amongst A-Theists you have extremely poor comprehension.

You are a fanatics- Religious fanatic, no doubt about it.

[Darat]

Thanks Franko – here’s my next set of comments of questions.

Originally posted by Franko

I call myself a Logical Deist, and I have explained my reasons for using that term in detail more than once here. Essentially Deism means “NonDogmatic”; not based on tradition or hearsay. You can’t really have “logical-hearsay”. But I have no problem if other people refer to me as a “Logical Theist”. For most people there is a pretty fine line between Deism and Theism.


OK – I’ll continue to use your preferred label “Logical Deism” it was just a curious “aside” point.

By the way I should mention that I did read a lot of your posts a few months ago but to be honest haven’t been paying very much attention for a while so I’m sorry if I am asking you about things you may be a bit tired or even exasperated about answering repeatedly.

Originally posted by Franko

Darat:
Another aside - who/what created “me”? Do you cover this in your belief system?



Well, there you go … now you have at least one purpose in Life – where did you come from? To be honest, the best I could tell you is that you sprang from the void, in some way intrinsically You.


Two comments – the first one about your answer to my question – I admire the honesty of anyone who isn’t afraid to say “I don’t know”.

Your first point however increases my confusion - in what why does it relate to my question or your belief system? (I’m asking about the “now you have at least one purpose in Life – where did you come from”.)

Originally posted by Franko

Darat:
From this I am I right in saying your Goddess isn’t the creator of the “underlying” reality that she uses to influence our behavior (and the “system” she uses to algorithmically generate “extensions” of our intrinsic nature/particle)?




Right, that is Gravity. The fact is that, eventually … Matter does make consciousness, just not in the way Stimpson imagines. In other words, consciousness is made out of something, and the fact that we are, binds us to the rules which govern that stuff. Including the LG herself.



I think I understand this bit but I’m failing to understand this next bit….

Originally posted by Franko


But from your point of view it is probably easiest to imagine that, that “stuff” is LOGIC.


What do you mean by “LOGIC” in this sentence – I want to be clear because we’ve both seen that we do at times hold slightly different definitions for some words.

Originally posted by Franko

She’s improving Her own program, but She is also helping you to improve YOUR program.


But isn’t the improvement to my program simply because she needs it to improve to improve her program?


Originally posted by Franko


Darat:
It seems (and I accept I may be reading too much into this) that your belief rests on a assumption that there is a “reality” beyond that that your Goddess consciousness (and ours?) creates? Otherwise isn’t the Goddess creating herself?




No, you got it right. The LG is only bound by the Laws of Gravity. The other 3 laws of physics are entirely her creation. She has complete control over them.



That was clear enough even for me – thanks.


Originally posted by Franko


Darat:
We do disagree here as the words omnipotent, omnipresent, omnipresence have well defined meanings that are the accepted common usage of the words.



Those definitions you refer to are all logically flawed. I have mentioned this several times her and been quite specific about it.


Darat
And these are not limited by just being the “most” but I think we are just debating a semantic point – the key for my understanding of your belief system is that you say Goddess is not all-powerful or all-knowing.



Exactly. What does All-Powerful even mean? Power is Relative to another Power. If you are “Most” powerful, than that is Logically similar to “All” powerful, because who is around that is more powerful than you?



Glad we cleared up that problem of communication. (I do feel as if I am making some progress in understanding your belief system.)


Originally posted by Franko

Do you ever benefit by making your wife or children or Mother happy? What makes you so certain that She (the LG) does not find making You happy personally beneficial to Her?



Again I seem to be making progress. This is exactly what I meant i.e. anything that happens to you or I in this universe is only a “by-product” of something being beneficial for your Goddess. It’s just unlucky if something “unbeneficial” happens to me because of the something beneficial happening for your Goddess.

Originally posted by Franko


…snip…


Actually, She doesn’t have “free will” either. Only Solipsist can have Free Will. But think about it this way Darat, is “free will” your goal, or is “free will” simply the mechanism to gain your Individuality? Which is really more important to you? If you could obtain individuality without “free will”, then would you really care if you didn’t have “free will”?



And I though I was doing really well…. :) You’ve just thrown me with this statement.

I thought that your Goddess had freewill?

I reached this apparent misunderstanding because of a couple of statements you made earlier in our discussion, for example you said “Goddess somehow forces you”, “She is gonna dump you right back where She found you” and “Lets just say that She tends to control me far more then I tend to control Her.”

Wouldn’t it be the case that if she didn’t have freewill then your belief system is fatalism? (I.e. the philosophy that holds that everything is predetermined to happen and therefore human beings cannot change their destinies.) Your Goddess is therefore like everything else that explains “causality” in a fatalistic belief system is just of illusionary importance.

Or is this just you and I not quite managing to communicate to one another?

(I’d really appreciate you expanding on this even to the point of seeming to belabour the explanation as I suspect this is a very important point that I must understand before I grasp fully the implications of your belief system.)


Originally posted by Franko


It’s possible that the LG worships a God or Goddess of Her own, but that is irrelevant to me at this moment in Time. For now, She is my Lord. She is the most powerful entity that I can perceive. Any hypothetical entity above her is unobservable, and therefore unparsimonious.



Understood.


Originally posted by Franko


Darat
If I have no free-will then I don’t have any “great” or “not-so” great destiny – I simple have a destiny that is nothing to do with me. It’s purely arbitrary and from my view, random.


Really? How can you say this???

So you mean that it makes no difference to you whether you get run over by a bus later today, or have sex with 5 hot babes all at once?

If you find the Destiny a good one (beneficial), then it is a good destiny. If you find it a bad one, consistently unpleasant, miserable, unlucky, then it is a bad Destiny. These matter are always decided relative to the individual in question.



But if you and I don’t have freewill to alter our destiny whether we have a good or bad destiny is to all extents random to us since it does not stem from our actions.

I know you say that our destiny is influenced by our “intrinsic” nature that was “us” when we were created however since your belief system doesn’t cover the “how” of our “intrinsic nature” and we have no “freewill” any apparent linkage of our action to our destiny is illusionary in your belief system.

However I feel we should leave this part of our discussion to one side until I’ve understood the part about the Goddess not having freewill as I think it is linked to that lack of understanding. (?)


Originally posted by Franko


…snip…

Not entirely. We all had our origins in Solipsism. Furthermore, just because you are not a Solipsist now, doesn’t mean you won’t be one in the future.


How does this fit into with your Goddess not being the ultimate creator and not being able to manipulate everything in our reality (i.e. gravity existing outside her control)? Or are you saying that somehow we are all imagined into being by some other “ultimate creator”?

Originally posted by Franko

By all means, my Friend. I am enjoying it as well.



I’m glad we are both benefiting from it :D

Originally posted by Franko

----
I already dodge reading your posts as much as possible.
----


Yeah, right.

I guess "reply" = "dodge".


----
I only wish I could dodge seeing them at all.
----


Um, you can.


----
I don’t want to compound your humiliation further by actually responding to your infantile queries ....
----


Please, humiliate me. We're all waiting.

I'm still waiting for you to tell us Whodini's password...


----
You are a fanatics- Religious fanatic, no doubt about it.
----


I'm a "fanatics" but YOU are the one throwing tantrums on other boards?

I'm a "fanatics" but YOU can't even answer jkorsi's questions directly?


Get real chump! :D



####
Interested in seeing FRANKO's history on bulletin boards?

Go to http://www.deism.org/forum/search.p..._author=Serpent

("Serpent" is Franko's name over there)

See the evolution(?) from:
1. a normal first couple of posts...
2. to people asking him questions about his beliefs and claims...
3. to him getting flustered
4. to the last of his posts
####

[Franko]

Darat,

By the way I should mention that I did read a lot of your posts a few months ago but to be honest haven’t been paying very much attention for a while so I’m sorry if I am asking you about things you may be a bit tired or even exasperated about answering repeatedly.

I don’t mind a certain amount of reiteration. Especially when I sense it is not a deliberate diversion. Inconsistencies are magnified over Time (Parsimony). By re-stating things I am forced to refine my metaphors (memes). They become more consistent, they become more parsimonious. Their velocity, and thus their force, is increased.

Two comments – the first one about your answer to my question – I admire the honesty of anyone who isn’t afraid to say “I don’t know”.

Ohh … don’t ever think that I am claiming to know everything. I am just claiming that Logical deism can explain many more things than Materialism can. I’m not claiming that everything I say is always 100% accurate either. When it comes right down to it, I freely confess to being a Nitwit at heart.

Your first point however increases my confusion - in what why does it relate to my question or your belief system? (I’m asking about the “now you have at least one purpose in Life – where did you come from”.)

I can explain where the Universe came from, and in a way, I can explain why consciousness would have arisen in the first place. But Why, when, and how your unique consciousness arrived on the scene, and why and how you are what you are is a mystery to me. Self-awareness is the key to your evolution. The more self-aware you become, the more perceptive you become, the more powerful you become, the more benevolent you become.

[You are made of LOGIC …] What do you mean by “LOGIC” in this sentence – I want to be clear because we’ve both seen that we do at times hold slightly different definitions for some words.

Well … generally Logic simply means Same in your mind as in mine. If you and I both have logically equivalent definitions of the terms (2, 4, +, =) and neither of us is being deceitful, then 2 + 2 always equals 4. That’s logic.

Logic is the same for all of us, and the reason that it is, is because in a sense we are made of it. We are algorithms and data. The algorithm is made of Logic, and the data is stored experiences which are basically logical sequences of events (Logical Information).

More accurately Gravitons are made out of Time – but it is Time which has become “Self-Aware”, and I really don’t want to get into that here and now.

But isn’t the improvement to my program simply because she needs it to improve to improve her program?

Yes, but so what? That is like saying that Your Elementary school teacher helping you learn to read didn’t really benefit you because She (your teacher) was benefiting by being paid a salary to teach you.

Think of the Shepard again … The Sheep gain the benefit of being cared for by the Sheppard. The Sheppard feeds the sheep, cares for them when they are ill, keeps predators away from them, but the Sheppard also benefits from the sheep by shearing their wool to make clothing or to sell or trade for other items. In fact, if it were not for the Sheppard, that entire flock of sheep may not even exist.

Do you think there would be so many chickens in the world, if no one ever ate chicken?

[Omnibenevolence …] Again I seem to be making progress. This is exactly what I meant i.e. anything that happens to you or I in this universe is only a “by-product” of something being beneficial for your Goddess. It’s just unlucky if something “unbeneficial” happens to me because of the something beneficial happening for your Goddess.

I’m not exactly sure what you are asking, but let me say, that if anything bad ever happens to you it is extremely unlikely (and that is putting it mildly) that the Goddess was the cause of it. The LG is an almost pure source of True information, and the Truth is always ultimately beneficial. The source of all misery, suffering, unhappiness, unpleasantness, harm, and Evil, is False information (False Memes/False Ideas). Essentially – Negative Energy.

You’ve just thrown me with this statement.

I thought that your Goddess had freewill?

No … She is bound by Gravity just as we are, therefore She is also bound by Fate.

I reached this apparent misunderstanding because of a couple of statements you made earlier in our discussion, for example you said “Goddess somehow forces you”, “She is gonna dump you right back where She found you” and “Lets just say that She tends to control me far more then I tend to control Her.”

Control is different than “free will”. Control is what you get when you have individuals interacting (entangling their states), i.e. Relativity. Superior entities (entities with Truer information) tend to control Inferior entities. But Control is confined by the laws of Gravity (The laws of Fate/Time/Logic)

Wouldn’t it be the case that if she didn’t have freewill then your belief system is fatalism? (I.e. the philosophy that holds that everything is predetermined to happen and therefore human beings cannot change their destinies.)

That is essentially True, but like I said, perhaps you have a Great Destiny in store for you?

Your Goddess is therefore like everything else that explains “causality” in a fatalistic belief system is just of illusionary importance.

Or is this just you and I not quite managing to communicate to one another?

I think so. You have to remember that regardless of the Algorithmic nature of consciousness, the algorithm which drives everything is MPB (Maximum perceived benefit). Let me ask you a question Darat … if I told you it was your destiny to win a million dollars in the lottery, and then have sex with two gorgeous playboy playmates at the same time, and to live a rich, comfortable, long happy life, are you going to be resisting my attempts to control your Fate to ensure that destiny is realized?

People only fight being controlled, when they sense that being controlled is NOT benefiting them. So long as an entity benefits by being controlled, he does not fight being controlled.

[Good & Bad destinies …] But if you and I don’t have freewill to alter our destiny whether we have a good or bad destiny is to all extents random to us since it does not stem from our actions.

That is true … unless it stems from your perceptions. In which case, self-awareness becomes key.

I know you say that our destiny is influenced by our “intrinsic” nature that was “us” when we were created however since your belief system doesn’t cover the “how” of our “intrinsic nature” and we have no “freewill” any apparent linkage of our action to our destiny is illusionary in your belief system.

However I feel we should leave this part of our discussion to one side until I’ve understood the part about the Goddess not having freewill as I think it is linked to that lack of understanding. (?)

It kind of is.

But perhaps this will help. Some entities are intrinsically compatible with Eternal existence, others are not. Those entities which are not compatible MUST be destroyed. If they are not destroyed, the it is only a matter of Time until they destroy us … One by One, until only they are left, then they will destroy themselves … and nothing will remain. On the timescale of Eternity, this is actually a real problem. Fortunately, the game has been rigged.

… but then again … one never really knows?

Origins of consciousness in Solipsism …] How does this fit into with your Goddess not being the ultimate creator and not being able to manipulate everything in our reality (i.e. gravity existing outside her control)? Or are you saying that somehow we are all imagined into being by some other “ultimate creator”?

That’s actually possible in another way, but I’d be speculating.

Originally there was one consciousness – the Progenitor Solipsist. After an Eternity he discovered how to escape Solipsism by splitting himself into two fundamentally different entities. This act initiated evolution essentially as we know it today, but in a very different type of universe.

In Logical Deism the set of all universe (everything there is) is called the Omniverse. You can imagine a set of those Russian nesting dolls. The entire set is the Omniverse. Each nested doll is a Universe. The deeper inside you go, the farther back in time you go. The farther back, the simpler the rules that govern that universe (as per Godel). This Universe that we see around us today was formed when the LG discovered how to create it – to generate it. At first her ability was very basic, but over time She has evolved to be better and better at it. Now She can hold Billions and Billions of entities here all at one time, and her ability to condition them is greatly improved.

One day, perhaps one of us (maybe you) will come up with an even better way to build a Universe, and a new age will dawn. The fact of the matter is … this has already happened. When you “die” if you make it across, you will see for yourself.

The fact of the matter is, to really make an improved universe over this one, you don’t need better rules, you need better consciousnesses. This Universe is like a refinery. It is sorting out those “better consciousnesses” for the next superior universe. But so long as you are moving up in the Omniverse your self-awareness will only increase from its current level. Just as your self-awareness has increased exponentially better since you arrived here.

I’m glad we are both benefiting from it

It is the moral thing after all … ;)

[Franko]

Damn! ... 155 posts on this stupid (title) thread?

I feel compelled to say it again ... Deism.org is run by two Atheists. It has Nothing to do with Deism. I'm sure Thomas Paine is rolling over in his grave.

[Tricky]

Franko, I'd just like to say thank you for giving us the most in-depth view so far of what your beliefs are. Perhaps I'll discuss certain points at another time, but for now, let me just say that I hope this style of posting becomes the norm for you.

[whitefork]

Where's Thomas Paine buried anyway? Isn't his final resting place unknown?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Tricky
Franko, I'd just like to say thank you for giving us the most in-depth view so far of what your beliefs are. Perhaps I'll discuss certain points at another time, but for now, let me just say that I hope this style of posting becomes the norm for you.

Franko has now started posting on deism.org as "wraith" he has (so far) restrained the potty mouth. Maybe he really has decided to clean up his act.

[Franko]

They BANNED me at Deism.org (Actually run by A-Theist) -- you Fool!

Remember? When you found out you were SOOO excited ...

Besides ... everyone except the person reading this is just a figment of your imagination, including Me ... and the wraith.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Franko
They BANNED me at Deism.org (Actually run by A-Theist) -- you Fool!

Remember? When you found out you were SOOO excited ...

Besides ... everyone except the person reading this is just a figment of your imagination, including Me ... and the wraith.

Sorry Franko I was talking about you, not to you. Please tell someone who cares.

Posted by Franko

----
Besides ... everyone except the person reading this is just a figment of your imagination, including Me ... and the wraith.
----


You act has been stale for quite some time.

Please work on it.

[Darat]

Franko - Just to say thanks for the (long!) reply.

Please be patient for my reply - unfortunately I've got to work! But I'll get a reply back to you sometime tonight (UK time).

[Franko]

Whodidi,

You act has been stale for quite some time.

That sure hasn’t stopped you from following me all around like a pathetic, love-sick little puppy dog. But honestly Whodidi, I do enjoy rubbing your nose in it and whacking you with a rolled up newspaper, once in a while. :D

[Franko]

Fool

Please tell someone who cares.

…apparently you didn’t NOT care enough to resist posting.

… espcially in a thread that has My name in the Title.

You such a liar Fool. And you make it so obvious! Anyone can see that you care. Who do you think you are Fooling?

[wraith]

Originally posted by The Fool


Franko has now started posting on deism.org as "wraith" he has (so far) restrained the potty mouth. Maybe he really has decided to clean up his act.

ROFL

wrong again balatro

[MRC_Hans]

Just met Franko's Logical Goddess:

Fascinating ......

Hans

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Just met Franko's Logical Goddess:

Fascinating ......

Hans

Holy sh--!!!!! Looks like it may be time to convert...

[MRC_Hans]

I guess I owe an explanation for the picture and why I say its Franko's LG. The attractive, but fierce-looking lady in the picture is the character "Trinity" in the movie "The Matrix" (Warner Bros.). This movie seems to be part of Franko's religious reference. It is an established cult movie, an SF story about a future world where nearly all people are kept in suspended animation and made to dream a reality, here we see Franko's obsession with his inverted solipsism; in The Matrix, people actually do dream reality. "Trinity" is a character with godlike properties and is helping to liberate "Neo" who is a sort of hero who can liberate the world.

Many references to Christian symbols have been deduced from the movie, for more reference do a Google search on the string "The Matrix".

(The reference to The Matrix comes from Franko, or rather from Wraith, but I never could distinguish between them).

Hans

[Franko]

... Franko, or rather from Wraith, but I never could distinguish between them

It doesn't really matter ... we're all just figments of your imagination ...

[Doubt]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


(The reference to The Matrix comes from Franko, or rather from Wraith, but I never could distinguish between them).

Hans

Many ideas others put forth here are adopted by Franko as he creates his religon. I pointed out the Matrix concept to him on September 13th:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=168453#post168453

I don't think he is consciously picking up ideas here, If you look at his old posts, he does pick up the ideas. I even put out some bait for him last week. I will wait and see if he takes it.

[Franko]

Doubt,

... and how exactly does that PROVE the existence of "free willy"?

When are you going to violate the Laws of Physics for us?

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt,

... and how exactly does that PROVE the existence of "free willy"?

When are you going to violate the Laws of Physics for us?

So you are now pretending not to have read what I wrote in the “fallacy of definitions” thread?

I already stated that I think it is impossible to prove free will true. Same goes for determinism.

In the mean time, are you going to refute your old post that I dragged out in that thread where you said we do have a chance at free will? Or how about where you claimed that you have “control”, which is better than free will?

For those of you who did not catch it. See this post here:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9348&pagenumber=1

I don’t dance to your tune, Wanko.

[Franko]

Doubt (a.k.a. Diet-Reasonedout)

So you are now pretending not to have read what I wrote in the “fallacy of definitions” thread?

Well … all except for the pretending part …

I already stated that I think it is impossible to prove free will true. Same goes for determinism.

Its nice to know what you think – thanks so much for sharing.

Let us know when you want to prove something – okay?

In the mean time, are you going to refute your old post that I dragged out in that thread where you said we do have a chance at free will? Or how about where you claimed that you have “control”, which is better than free will?

You get one Free Will decision. Use it wisely.

I don’t dance to your tune, Wanko

Yeah I realize that … because:

1) I only dance with women, and
2) Real men don’t actually dance (that much).

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt (a.k.a. Diet-Reasonedout)

You get one Free Will decision. Use it wisely.



I liked it better when you thought I was Dorman.

One free will decision does not make any sense. Either we have free will, by what ever definition you may wish to use, or we don’t. This is an obvious contradiction to other things you posted today.

[MRC_Hans]

Perhaps we should make a list of Franko's self contradictions. It would come in handy as he seems to keep forgetting them.

Hans

[Doubt]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Perhaps we should make a list of Franko's self contradictions. It would come in handy as he seems to keep forgetting them.

Hans

The fun part is he started using the Wriath name again to try and run away from his own BS. I recomend replying to all Wraith posts by using a Wraith/Franko heading instead of just one name.

[Checkmite]

While the coincidences do seem suspicious, I'm not completely exactly totally 100% sure that Franko and wraith are the same. Thus, I will have to refrain from using the Wraith/Franko heading...I did not appreciate it when Franko started calling me Tricky and Doubt and Mossy, when I knew it was untrue.

[Doubt]

Originally posted by jkorosi
While the coincidences do seem suspicious, I'm not completely exactly totally 100% sure that Franko and wraith are the same. Thus, I will have to refrain from using the Wraith/Franko heading...I did not appreciate it when Franko started calling me Tricky and Doubt and Mossy, when I knew it was untrue.

The evidence for Wraith being Franko is all circumstantial, but there is a great deal of it. Read his first posts. Also read Franko's posts from just before the appearance of Wraith.

1.) Wraith first appeared right after Franko's first departure from the board.
2.) Wraiths writing style is the same as Franko's.
3.) One of the first Wraith posts referred to Victor as Vicky, which is a tactic used by Franko.
4.) I specifically questioned Wraith about who he is and where he his. I provided many details about myself to make it fair, but he would give nothing away, not even a state or country.
5.) When first asked about what he believes, Wraith would not tell us, he would only criticize materialists.
6.) When it became apparent that Wraith could not assert new ideas about LD without giving away who he was, Franko returned. Wraith then became a bobble head the just posted to agree with Franko.
7.) When Franko made is second departure from the board, all posting by Wraith stopped.
8.) Wraith just started asserting the LD claims here on this board after Franko's contradictions were exposed to the light of day.

I know some would claim that 7 and 1 are contradictions, but they are indicative of the Franko behavior pattern. The first time that Franko left, he needed Wraith to start over again. Then he really tried to quit this board, and stopped posting altogether. He has come full circle again and is now using Wraith for his originally intended purpose.

Also, the Wraith ID is one of the things that clued me into Franko's solipsism hang up. If he is the only one that exists, than it should not be to hard to fool himself, (that includes us, ) into thinking the Wraith is believable.

As I said before, I do think Franko needs to talk to a shrink. The solipsism hang up is no joke. It is a serious problem. I don't know what is behind that. It could be a symptom of something worse. We do not do him any favors by humoring him.

[MRC_Hans]

I normally on principle take virtual persons on face value. It is one of the features of the internet that we cannot know the correlation between physical and virtual identities. But there is no reason to distinguish between them. I'm just now running a long discussion where they appear interchangeably.

I agree that the real Franko has a problem. But he is also a problem on this board, because he tends to hijack certain threads. If we could all agree on only reacting to his posts when they were civil and sensible, then maybe......

Hans

[Franko]

Diet Reasoned-out

One free will decision does not make any sense. Either we have free will, by what ever definition you may wish to use, or we don’t. This is an obvious contradiction to other things you posted today.

Well good ... since I am so full of contradictions I would recommend you move along and harass some other Non-believer in your One True Faith.

[Franko]

The evidence for Wraith being Franko is all circumstantial, but there is a great deal of it. Read his first posts. Also read Franko's posts from just before the appearance of Wraith.

Coming from you ... the irony is so thick it is touching.

Why are you sooo obsessed with me diet-reasonedout/dorman?

Don't you have a life you should be living? I suggest you enjoy yourself while you can, and stop wasting time with crazy theists and deists who obviously aren't as well informed about the nature of reality as You are ...

[Franko]

MRC_Hans,

I agree that the real Franko has a problem. But he is also a problem on this board

Ohh, you are just such a little cuttie-pie today. All this projecting of your feelings ...

... thank you for sharing Sweetheart. Would you like to come over and cook dinner for me? Maybe if you are nice I'll let you clean the bathroom? ;)

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Diet Reasoned-out



Well good ... since I am so full of contradictions I would recommend you move along and harass some other Non-believer in your One True Faith.

Pointing out your inconsistencies could become a hobby.

When did my agnosticism become the "one true faith"?

Diet Reasoned out? Now you are stealing other people's insults. Who was it that came up with Franko lite? You really need to get a new act. Your current fantasy is stale. I recommend you join a UFO cult, that way you never have to worry about evidence again.

[Franko]

Diet Reasoned out?

Doubt = Dorman? = Diet Reasoned Out

Now you are stealing other people's insults.

Why is their another Diet Reasoned Out on the forum already?

Who was it that came up with Franko lite?

Is that a beer or soda or something?

You really need to get a new act.

Looks who’s talking. Why do you follow me around DRO? What is your fascination with me and my beliefs? You look so obsessive the way you feel you must respond to every single one of my posts, and how you only show your face in this forum when I am here. You should be careful … people will begin to think that you are just my sock-puppet. Someone I just made up to make the Atheists look foolish and desperate.

Your current fantasy is stale.

I am only a figment of your imagination, so really it is your fantasy that is stale.

Besides … if this were really true, why are you still following me around? Who is really full of contradictions Diet-Reasoned-out? Who do you think is fooled by your obsessive posts?

I recommend you join a UFO cult, that way you never have to worry about evidence again.

Looks who’s talking – free-will-boy!

Tell your shrink about the UFO’s next time you visit her.

[hammegk]

Originally posted by Franko

Someone I just made up to make the Atheists look foolish and desperate.

No one person could possibly babble as much and say as little as what "appears" to be a group of materialists=atheists.

Although you might be able to move a few names to "doubting"; not that it would make a difference, of course... ;)

[Franko]

No one person could possibly babble as much and say as little as what "appears" to be a group of materialists=atheists.

A Dumbness of A-Theists

That's like a Gaggle of Geese?

Or a Murder of Crows?

... am I using it correctly?

[hammegk]

Originally posted by Franko


... am I using it correctly?

Sure.

I've tried to get an analogy out of kicking an anthill but that didn't work because ants
before a disturbance appear to be co-operating in some understood, common, goal.

Shall we consider an ant "anarchist"? LOL.

[Franko]

hehehe ... You seriously crack me up Mr. Hand ... ;)

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko


Looks who’s talking. Why do you follow me around DRO?



You can stop worrying about me in several ways:

1.) Stop hijacking threads.
2.) Start backing up your assertions. (Female Goddess, etc.)
3.) Stop building strawmen to argue with. (Me being atheist, for example.0
4.) Admit when you change your mind.
5.) GO AWAY

The last one is the easiest to do.

[Franko]

Doubt (a.k.a. Diet Reasoned-Out)

You can stop worrying about me in several ways:

don’t flatter yourself.

1.) Stop hijacking threads.

This thread is titled: Franko and Deism.org.

Did I hijack this one? How about all the others that mention me specifically by name?

2.) Start backing up your assertions. (Female Goddess, etc.)

Why? Obviously you have already decided I am just another Religious nut, so explain why you care what I believe?

3.) Stop building strawmen to argue with. (Me being atheist, for example.0

I’ve noticed that you A-Theists all like to scream “STRAWMAN” in almost every post, but you have NO IDEA what that term really means. None of you ever explain what the actual “strawman” is? Is it a strawman that your nutty Religion is based on a bogus belief in the fantasy of “free will”? Is it a strawman that positive and negative reinforcement is tried and true science?

Spare me your nonsense Diet-Doubt.

4.) Admit when you change your mind.

Can you do the same A-Theist?

5.) GO AWAY

**** YOU!

If you left this forum Doubt … who would even notice. Obviously a lot of people around here are interesting in talking with me or about me (based solely on all the aforementioned threads bearing my name).

But as You are well aware, Solipsism is TRUE, and therefore you can speak for everyone here! If you don’t want to listen to my words, if they are driving you insane, I suggest you stop whining about Freedom of Speech and quietly place me on your ignore list.

The last one is the easiest to do.

Once again Diet-Doubt, take your own advice – get on some medication, see a shrink, whine about your sorry Fate, and most of all GO AWAY!!!

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt (a.k.a. Diet Reasoned-Out)

I’ve noticed that you A-Theists all like to scream “STRAWMAN” in almost every post, but you have NO IDEA what that term really means. None of you ever explain what the actual “strawman” is? Is it a strawman that your nutty Religion is based on a bogus belief in the fantasy of “free will”? Is it a strawman that positive and negative reinforcement is tried and true science?

Every time you make an argument up for someone else, you have built a strawman. You do this just about every day you post here.



F**k YOU!



The melt down is close at hand. Profanity shows you are running out of ammo again.


But as You are well aware, Solipsism is TRUE, and therefore you can speak for everyone here! If you don’t want to listen to my words, if they are driving you insane, I suggest you stop whining about Freedom of Speech and quietly place me on your ignore list.

Solipism is your argument, not mine. You have a pathological need to pin your fear on everyone else. Hense, the use of strawmen. You are the "Master Solipsist". I know of no one else here who has ever assumed solipism to be true.

Should I point our more of your contradictions?
[/B][/QUOTE]

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt (a.k.a. Diet Reasoned-Out)

This thread is titled: Franko and Deism.org.

Did I hijack this one? How about all the others that mention me specifically by name?

Of course you have every reason to post in this thread, especially since it mentions you by name. When he's talking about hijacking threads, he's talking about instances like what you tried to do in this (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9364) thread. It started off as a discussion simply about how to form proper syllogisms; you ignored the intent and tried to turn it into a debate about whether (sigh) we "obey" the laws of physics.

Originally posted by Franko
I’ve noticed that you A-Theists all like to scream “STRAWMAN” in almost every post, but you have NO IDEA what that term really means. None of you ever explain what the actual “strawman” is?

A "Strawman" argument is when you misrepresent a person's argument in order to make it easier to attack. It's when you put words in peoples' mouths. Here's an example of a strawman argument from you, from the Direct Questions thread which you seem to have run away from:

I said, "The laws of physics describe the chemicals' atoms' nature. It doesn't tell them to "turn this way and not that way" - they do it by themselves, because it is their nature."

You said, "So can you demonstrate an atom NOT obeying the Laws of Physics? What is your evidence that Atoms have “free will”? Are you also claiming that Atoms are conscious now? How do conscious Atoms imply a Non-conscious TLOP?"

If you read my statement again, you'll notice that I did not say atoms have free will, or that they are conscious. I said that they behave according to their nature, which is described but not dictated by the laws of physics. You put words in my mouth.

Another example of a strawman argument is when you purposefully misrepresent me by calling me an atheist. Apparently, this makes me easier to include when you talk about "all the evil atheists". You're not fooling anyone with this assertion, as everyone knows that I quite clearly believe in God - and you've seen me argue for the God hypothesis before. The inside joke that everyone here but you seems to get is that you say your religion is based on "logic", and nothing more...yet you have no qualms when it comes to using logically fallacious arguments, such as "Solipsism is true because it cannot be easily proven false."

Originally posted by Franko
Is it a strawman that your nutty Religion is based on a bogus belief in the fantasy of “free will”?

Yes.

Originally posted by Franko
Is it a strawman that positive and negative reinforcement is tried and true science?

Yes.

Originally posted by Franko
If you left this forum Doubt … who would even notice. Obviously a lot of people around here are interesting in talking with me or about me (based solely on all the aforementioned threads bearing my name).

Just about you. Talking with you is like trying to "disobey the laws of physics".

Originally posted by Franko
But as You are well aware, Solipsism is TRUE,

Proof? You can't get away from this one - you are out-right claiming Solipsism is true. Support yourself with evidence.

[Franko]

Diet doubt

Every time you make an argument up for someone else, you have built a strawman. You do this just about every day you post here.

yeah … well … as we all KNOW, A-Theists don’t actually make ANY claims, so you have to tell them what they believe.

The melt down is close at hand. Profanity shows you are running out of ammo again.

… Or maybe it just makes it clear that I have almost no respect for you Doubt?

Solipism is your argument, not mine.

… Actually there is no Me, so you are the Solipsist. This conversation is just as imagined as the “matter”.

You have a pathological need to pin your fear on everyone else.

You are projecting YET AGAIN. I fear nothing, I don’t exist.

Hense, the use of strawmen.

You and your invisible strawmen …

You are the "Master Solipsist".

Actually that is you if you are reading this.

I know of no one else here who has ever assumed solipism to be true.

That is because no one else here exist except the person reading this.

Should I point our more of your contradictions?

They are only contradictions in your mind.

I think you should run along and play with the other A-Theists, before you cease to exist.

[MRC_Hans]

Ohh, you are just such a little cuttie-pie today. All this projecting of your feelings ...

... thank you for sharing Sweetheart. Would you like to come over and cook dinner for me? Maybe if you are nice I'll let you clean the bathroom?

Ohh, Franko, this is really what you are best at. No difficult logic, no risk of those nasty logic traps. Just plain spreading bad memes, thats what you do so well.

Nevertheless, I will thank you for a nice game. It wasnt exacly pleasant, but hey, interesting it was. Have fun!

(Unfortunately, I have just imagined you dont have dinner tonite, sorry! And as you have no free will to decide, I guess you'll have to clean your bathroom yourself)

But if you behave nice I promise I wont stop imagining you totally.

Hans

[Franko]

MRC,

Ohh, Franko, this is really what you are best at. No difficult logic, no risk of those nasty logic traps. Just plain spreading bad memes, thats what you do so well.

Intrinsically I am still that same Hellspawn that I have always been. And if not for my Goddess, I would have the same Fate as any other Demon.

Nevertheless, I will thank you for a nice game. It wasnt exacly pleasant, but hey, interesting it was. Have fun!

I hope this means we are done playing.

(Unfortunately, I have just imagined you dont have dinner tonite, sorry! And as you have no free will to decide, I guess you'll have to clean your bathroom yourself)

But if you behave nice I promise I wont stop imagining you totally.

I am but the humble figment. Glad to be of service.

[MRC_Hans]

I hope this means we are done playing. So do I :cool:

I am but the humble figment. Glad to be of service. Your sense of humor has always been your best side.

Good luck, mate!

Hans

[Franko]

Good luck, mate!

... And to you my Friend. I wish you no ill fortune.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Franko
Doubt,

... and how exactly does that PROVE the existence of "free willy"?

When are you going to violate the Laws of Physics for us?

This is ridiculous. It is the same as asking "when are you going to do something that is impossible for us".

"Free will" if defined as "the ability to make conscious choices between available options" is not in contradiciton with being constrained by or "obeying" if you will the laws of physics.

Back to the drawing board Franko. This one (whatever it is you are trying to prove) just doesn't work.

[Franko]

CWL,

This is ridiculous. It is the same as asking "when are you going to do something that is impossible for us".

Hey A-Theist it is your nutty Religion! You are the one making this absurd claim!

If you say that you can DISOBEY the Laws of Physics – THEN DO IT!

Otherwise – withdraw the claim, and admit you do NOT have “free will”.

Why is this so difficult for you to understand. Wanting “free will” does not make it magically exist!

"Free will" if defined as "the ability to make conscious choices between available options" is not in contradiciton with being constrained by or "obeying" if you will the laws of physics.

What “choices”? It is all decided by chemicals reacting in your brain. Are you claiming to have magic powers over chemistry???

Back to the drawing board Franko. This one (whatever it is you are trying to prove) just doesn't work.

Keep telling yourself that the burden is on me to prove that Your God doesn’t exist A-Theist!

You claim “free will” – YOU Prove “free will”.

Your “Free willy God” is even more invisible then the Christians God is. There is direct evidence that your a-Theist God (“free willy”) doesn’t exist. Even children can comprehend it.

Do you believe in the tooth fairy also CWL? There is just as much evidence for Her as for "free willy" ...

[The Fool]

Dance little Franko..... We poke you with a stick, you dance. Its Cause and effect.

[Franko]

... and that proves you have "free will" exactly, how Fool?

Do you consider that a "Majorly Breach" of the Laws of Physics? :rolleyes:

[The Fool]

Your an idiot franko, stick to dancing for my amusement. Hey, I hear they banned you at deism.org under the name Wraith too... You should really change your mantras, they give you away too quickly. shortly Jref will be your only outlet to witness for the goddess.....after that? maybe door to door with little printed handouts? I forget ....remind me, are you Catholic or JW?

[CWL]

The world is NOT a computer program. End of story. This is not the Matrix.

Back to the drawing board Franko.

[Franko]

Fool,

Your an idiot franko …

where; Idiot = Non-A-Theist = Non-idiot in reality = a Skeptic = A person who speaks out against the Cult of Utter Pessimism (i.e. The Church of A-Theism)

… stick to dancing for my amusement.

Translation: I (Fool) will continue to dance for Your( Franko’s) amusement. I will follow you around making these lame –ass posts, which only further illustrate what a farce the Cult of A-Theism is; how we have nothing of substance to say. We cannot refute ANY of your devastating points against our ridiculous Religion, so I (Fool) am forced to offer nothing but Ad Hominems, and Blatant misrepresentation and mischaracterization of your (Franko’s) True position.

Carry on Fool. It’s guys like You, and Evildave, and CWL who are truly doing the best job of single-handedly demonstrating the utter absurdity of the dogma of A-Theism.

Hey, I hear they banned you at deism.org under the name Wraith too...

I’ve told you before, I am NOT the Wraith. But if you are so convinced that I am, perhaps you could explain why you don’t think that I am every other poster on this board? Perhaps we are all just figments of your imagination? Maybe you’re God?

You should really change your mantras, they give you away too quickly.

Unlike you A-Theists I have nothing to hide from.

… shortly Jref will be your only outlet to witness for the goddess.....after that?

Are you seriously contending that deism.org, and randi.org are the ONLY two forums on the Internet? Fool, just to let you in on a little secret … I’ve probably been BANNED from more forums, then the number you’ve posted on.

… maybe door to door with little printed handouts? I forget ....remind me, are you Catholic or JW?

I’m Your figment! Imagine me to be whatever you want. Imagine “free willy” while you are at it …

[The Fool]

Keep Dancing Frank, I will tell you when you can stop.

[wraith]

Originally posted by The Fool
Hey, I hear they banned you at deism.org under the name Wraith too...


lol
word travels quick in the atheist world I see

[Franko]

I (Fool) will continue to dance for Your (Franko’s) amusement. I will follow you around making these lame –ass posts, which only further illustrate what a farce the Cult of A-Theism is; how we have nothing of substance to say. I will limit myself to 1 to 3 sentences worth of fluff.

Fool: Keep Dancing Frank, I will tell you when you can stop.

Translation: I hear and obey Master …

[The Fool]

Originally posted by wraith



lol
word travels quick in the atheist world I see

Frank, you should just use the wraith name all the time. Its much cooler...now back to dancing please.

[Franko]

I (Fool) will continue to dance for Your (Franko’s) amusement. I will follow you around making these lame –ass posts, which only further illustrate what a farce the Cult of A-Theism is; how we have nothing of substance to say. I will limit myself to 1 to 3 sentences worth of fluff.

Frank, you should just use the wraith name all the time. Its much cooler...now back to dancing please.

Translation: I hear and obey Master …

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Franko
I (Fool) will continue to dance for Your (Franko’s) amusement. I will follow you around making these lame –ass posts, which only further illustrate what a farce the Cult of A-Theism is; how we have nothing of substance to say. I will limit myself to 1 to 3 sentences worth of fluff.



Translation: I hear and obey Master …

Keep dancing Frank, This is The last place on the www that will put up with you and you're just a dog and pony act here.....What a life's achievement eh? Goddess should get another messiah, you're not up to the job son.

[Franko]

Fool – You are under my spell. Henceforth, I command thee to follow me around on this forum like my shadow. You will pretend to be defending the dogma of A-Theism, but in reality you will only be making a mockery of that position. I command you to follow all of my posts with 1 to 3 sentences worth of fluff. DO NOT respond to any of the actual points that I raise. Rely on NOTHING but logical fallacy, and bland ad hominems. Obey me, my little pebble … I command your soul.

Fool: Keep dancing Frank, This is The last place on the www that will put up with you and you're just a dog and pony act here.....What a life's achievement eh? Goddess should get another messiah, you're not up to the job son.

Translation: I hear and obey, Master …

[CWL]

Franko,

Fool's got your number dude. You be the one doing the Moonwalk for our pleasure.

Your dogma's getting boring. Game over, friend.

[Franko]

CWL – You are under my spell. Henceforth, I command thee to follow me around on this forum like my shadow. You will pretend to be defending the dogma of A-Theism, but in reality you will only be making a mockery of that position. I command you to follow all of my posts with 1 to 3 sentences worth of fluff. DO NOT respond to any of the actual points that I raise. Rely on NOTHING but logical fallacy, and bland ad hominems. Obey me my little pebble … I command your soul.

CWL: Fool's got your number dude. You be the one doing the Moonwalk for our pleasure. Your dogma's getting boring. Game over, friend.

Translation: I hear and obey, Master …

[CWL]

Case in point. :D

[Franko]

CWL how is your predictablity evidence of "free will"?

[blackadder65738]

Hey, Franko, I don't want to get in the middle of the shooting here. I just have a few simple questions because I really don't understand where you are on matters of religion and all that. This isn't an attack, I just am confused. Here are the questions:

1. Do you go to church?

2. What kind of church is it?

3. Do you worship, as in, on your knees, praying to a higher being?

4. Who or what is that being?

5. I've heard mention of a Goddess in your deism, if so, who is she?

6. Have you ever met anyone who worships the laws of physics, or goes to a laws of physics church?

7. If you don't worship anything can you be said to have religion?

Just wondering. I need to know more. Thanks!

[blackadder65738]

I just realized that this thread is really old and Franko probably won't see it. Oh well. :)