Re: God is an atheist!
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:45:32 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: On Thursday, May 8, 2014 9:40:58 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.comwrote: In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an extraordinary claim with no evidences. Why would the expectation of singularity be any more extra-ordinary than the expectation of multiplicity? Because of the finely tuned physical constants. Finely tuned physical constants is consistent with a sense-primitive universe. Physics conforms to experience, so it is only finely tuned relative to an expectation of alternate, sense-independent physics. Humm.. I think that a problem we have here, and I think that this is also a source of your disagreement with Bruno, is that you somehow reject the idea that mathematical symbols are representations of an underlaying abstraction. I like the idea of subjugating physics to experience, it seems to be a fertile path. I am more willing to accept that you explain away x = vt or f = ma or e = mc^2 in this fashion than the physical constants. The previous are relations, the constants are specificities. There is something intuitively nasty with the idea that mathematics is unreasonably effective at describing reality, but then these ugly, super-specific constants show up. It offends me aesthetically, I cannot put it any other way. The MWI recovers the simple beauty of it all. Can you explain away the constants in a way that does not require arbitrary specificity? Our ordinary experience is that we share many common realities and that those realities are very consistent. I agree. In a multiverse, I would expect much more interruption of our expectations. Why? Suppose Everett is right. Is interpretation recovers the classical world from the many worlds. Why wouldn't that be enough? Because there would have to be many more worlds which are shades of semi-classical, non-classical, and non-sensical instead. Multiverse to me seems good for only one thing: To rescue our expectations of mechanism Mechanism for me is not so much an expectation as it is a hope. It's the hope that we live in a rational universe, as Gödel called it. and pimordial unconsciousness. I'm not so sure about this. I tend to see the MWI in the context of primordial consciousness. Once we admit that view is no less compulsive than anthropomorphism, then there is no reason to impose the machina ex deus of near-infinite multiplicity. And what do we do then? I would not expect that singularity/unity would hold the kind of significance that it seems to for us. Why? Because in a MWI ontology, all uniqueness would be an irrelevant illusion. We are made of cells that are self-contained and interact only locally. Wouldn't that already break our sense of unity? We care about what is unique vs what is redundant. Why? Because organisms that are good at pattern recognition are more resilient that organisms that are not? Why would pattern recognition be related to uniqueness though? Because the feeling of uniqueness seems to be related to our brain failing to match a pattern or, putting it another way, to fail at a prediction. This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. I don't think that simulation of any kind is possible without a foundation of consciousness to be simulated in the first place. If that's true, and the universe is made of 100% genuine awareness, then the probability of a 'simulation' becomes trivial. Simulation does not exist, it is only an idea that genuine awareness has about the difference between direct and indirect awareness. The idea can be true locally, but not ultimately. In the absolute sense, nothing can be simulated. I think I agree. I see the simulation as just a set of things that can be experienced. If comp is true, and some Lovecraftian creature in a non-euclidian reality is running the universal dovetailer where we exist, it cannot really be said that the Great Old Ones created us. They just unleashed us, I guess. There's no point in starting a cult to worship them -- although there could be some entertainment value in that. Even so, Uberthulhu has the same problem that we do. Poor Uberthulhu :) The explanatory gap is not explained, only miniaturized
Re: God is an atheist!
In much the same spirit take a look at this cartoon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODetOE6cbbclist=PLECD9ACF9D6F1F8FF John K Clark = On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:51 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher power is determined to stop me. OK, let's try again... (Or does God lie awake at nights wondering where HE came from?) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
On 8 May 2014, at 3:09 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... Apparently not. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
Any theory that stand over non intelligent axioms has to accept an infinity of multiverses, That may be refined, taking into account information=0 etc, but I will not go further on that. That multiverse must include among other things the universes with gods , and the universes with goods that have miracles, and the universes with gods that have miracles whose first miracle is the creation of the universe by the god. And what if certain kinds of miracles are one more among the many preconditions for a universe with intelligent beings for some reason that we still don´t know? In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. The multiverse is the hypothesis neccessary in order to rule out the miracle. What more -single universe- miracles that we still don´t know are necessary for intelligent sentient human life? Yet the mere existence of intelligence in this universe and the easily acceptable hypothesis by naturalists that after some time we will be capable to create or emulate worlds with simulated living beings or robots in this universe that probably by the laws of robotics (Asimov et al) have to virtually worship us in order to create or be part of an self sustainable society... This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com: What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.comwrote: Any theory that stand over non intelligent axioms has to accept an infinity of multiverses, That may be refined, taking into account information=0 etc, but I will not go further on that. I would say that the anthropic principle allows for a dumb multiverse where all the universes where you can actually exists contain the illusion of intelligent design. That multiverse must include among other things the universes with gods , and the universes with goods that have miracles, and the universes with gods that have miracles whose first miracle is the creation of the universe by the god. I am not so sure of this. An infinity of universes does not imply that there is a universe for which something is possible. You can have infinite variations within certain constraints. For example: you can have the infinite set of all the possible combinations of english characters and never see a chinese character. It depends on the generative rule. I'm not sure, for example, that a universal dove tailer produces all conceivable universes -- to use a simple trick, it cannot produce a universe that was not generated by computation. I would say that the MWI necessarily implies the existence of worlds where deities appear to exist, but with two caveats: - the probability of finding yourself in such a world is tremendously small; - the deity is not stable, even if you find yourself in such a world, with very high probability the deity will fail in the next instant. I say this because the MWI assumes the wave equation, so the generative rule already limits what's possible, even at infinity. Is there some flaw in my reasoning? And what if certain kinds of miracles are one more among the many preconditions for a universe with intelligent beings for some reason that we still don´t know? That could be the case, but then they are not miracles. They are just laws of reality that we don't know about yet. In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an extraordinary claim with no evidences. The multiverse is the hypothesis neccessary in order to rule out the miracle. What more -single universe- miracles that we still don´t know are necessary for intelligent sentient human life? Ruling out miracles is just an optimistic attitude: we assume that we can understand. There's no way to prove this, it's just an attitude towards knowledge. If we don't have this attitude, the alternative is to give up. Given that his attitude gave us modern medicine, electricity and so on (the so on includes the fact that we can have this debate at a distance), there are utilitarian reasons to adopt it, if nothing else. Yet the mere existence of intelligence in this universe and the easily acceptable hypothesis by naturalists that after some time we will be capable to create or emulate worlds with simulated living beings or robots in this universe that probably by the laws of robotics (Asimov et al) have to virtually worship us in order to create or be part of an self sustainable society... Why would they have to worship us? I don't see how that follows. This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. Telmo. 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com: What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to
Re: God is an atheist!
On Thursday, May 8, 2014 9:40:58 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an extraordinary claim with no evidences. Why would the expectation of singularity be any more extra-ordinary than the expectation of multiplicity? Our ordinary experience is that we share many common realities and that those realities are very consistent. In a multiverse, I would expect much more interruption of our expectations. I would not expect that singularity/unity would hold the kind of significance that it seems to for us. We care about what is unique vs what is redundant. Why? This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. I don't think that simulation of any kind is possible without a foundation of consciousness to be simulated in the first place. If that's true, and the universe is made of 100% genuine awareness, then the probability of a 'simulation' becomes trivial. Simulation does not exist, it is only an idea that genuine awareness has about the difference between direct and indirect awareness. The idea can be true locally, but not ultimately. In the absolute sense, nothing can be simulated. Craig Telmo. 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript:: What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR liz...@gmail.com javascript: To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript: Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Thursday, May 8, 2014 9:40:58 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.comwrote: In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an extraordinary claim with no evidences. Why would the expectation of singularity be any more extra-ordinary than the expectation of multiplicity? Because of the finely tuned physical constants. Our ordinary experience is that we share many common realities and that those realities are very consistent. I agree. In a multiverse, I would expect much more interruption of our expectations. Why? Suppose Everett is right. Is interpretation recovers the classical world from the many worlds. Why wouldn't that be enough? I would not expect that singularity/unity would hold the kind of significance that it seems to for us. Why? We are made of cells that are self-contained and interact only locally. Wouldn't that already break our sense of unity? We care about what is unique vs what is redundant. Why? Because organisms that are good at pattern recognition are more resilient that organisms that are not? This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. I don't think that simulation of any kind is possible without a foundation of consciousness to be simulated in the first place. If that's true, and the universe is made of 100% genuine awareness, then the probability of a 'simulation' becomes trivial. Simulation does not exist, it is only an idea that genuine awareness has about the difference between direct and indirect awareness. The idea can be true locally, but not ultimately. In the absolute sense, nothing can be simulated. I think I agree. I see the simulation as just a set of things that can be experienced. If comp is true, and some Lovecraftian creature in a non-euclidian reality is running the universal dovetailer where we exist, it cannot really be said that the Great Old Ones created us. They just unleashed us, I guess. There's no point in starting a cult to worship them -- although there could be some entertainment value in that. Cheers Telmo. Craig Telmo. 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everyth...@googlegroups.com: What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR liz...@gmail.com To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are
Re: God is an atheist!
On Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:45:32 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Thursday, May 8, 2014 9:40:58 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.comwrote: In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an extraordinary claim with no evidences. Why would the expectation of singularity be any more extra-ordinary than the expectation of multiplicity? Because of the finely tuned physical constants. Finely tuned physical constants is consistent with a sense-primitive universe. Physics conforms to experience, so it is only finely tuned relative to an expectation of alternate, sense-independent physics. Our ordinary experience is that we share many common realities and that those realities are very consistent. I agree. In a multiverse, I would expect much more interruption of our expectations. Why? Suppose Everett is right. Is interpretation recovers the classical world from the many worlds. Why wouldn't that be enough? Because there would have to be many more worlds which are shades of semi-classical, non-classical, and non-sensical instead. Multiverse to me seems good for only one thing: To rescue our expectations of mechanism and pimordial unconsciousness. Once we admit that view is no less compulsive than anthropomorphism, then there is no reason to impose the machina ex deus of near-infinite multiplicity. I would not expect that singularity/unity would hold the kind of significance that it seems to for us. Why? Because in a MWI ontology, all uniqueness would be an irrelevant illusion. We are made of cells that are self-contained and interact only locally. Wouldn't that already break our sense of unity? We care about what is unique vs what is redundant. Why? Because organisms that are good at pattern recognition are more resilient that organisms that are not? Why would pattern recognition be related to uniqueness though? This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and now, the product of it. Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. I don't think that simulation of any kind is possible without a foundation of consciousness to be simulated in the first place. If that's true, and the universe is made of 100% genuine awareness, then the probability of a 'simulation' becomes trivial. Simulation does not exist, it is only an idea that genuine awareness has about the difference between direct and indirect awareness. The idea can be true locally, but not ultimately. In the absolute sense, nothing can be simulated. I think I agree. I see the simulation as just a set of things that can be experienced. If comp is true, and some Lovecraftian creature in a non-euclidian reality is running the universal dovetailer where we exist, it cannot really be said that the Great Old Ones created us. They just unleashed us, I guess. There's no point in starting a cult to worship them -- although there could be some entertainment value in that. Even so, Uberthulhu has the same problem that we do. The explanatory gap is not explained, only miniaturized and hidden behind the alien-ness of disembodied dovetailing. Thanks, Craig Cheers Telmo. Craig Telmo. 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everyth...@googlegroups.com: What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. -Original Message- From: LizR liz...@gmail.com To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am Subject: God is an atheist! As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
Re: God is an atheist!
Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher power is determined to stop me. OK, let's try again... (Or does God lie awake at nights wondering where HE came from?) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
On 5/8/2014 2:51 PM, LizR wrote: Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher power is determined to stop me. OK, let's try again... (Or does God lie awake at nights wondering where HE came from?) Q: What's a dyslexic agnostic insomniac? A: Someone who lies awake at night wondering if there is a dog... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: God is an atheist!
...or if that's God, barking in the quad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
