2013/12/26 LizR
> On 26 December 2013 20:17, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> There are other viewpoints though. QM makes for some interesting
>> questions about time as raised in this speculative paper by a couple of top
>> experimentalists:
>>
>>
>> http://a-c-elitzur.co.il/uploads/
Vu
Le 24 déc. 2013 19:44, "John Clark" a écrit :
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux
wrote:
>
>>>> >>> He did answer and did it correctly,
>>>
>>>
>>> >> I somehow missed that post. What number
That makes it ill defined and useless...
As reality is not well defined, so is god then... also, why use "god"
instead of reality, the word reality is enough.
Quentin
2013/12/24 Edgar L. Owen
> Bruno,
>
> No faith is needed at all for a God defined as reality itself. It's simply
> a definitio
2013/12/23 meekerdb
> On 12/23/2013 12:46 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 2:12 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 12/23/2013 9:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> Crypto-currencies, like cryptography, can surely help to save the freedom
>> of privacy and privateness.
>>
>> Cryp
Vie privée", but
"Intimité" is ok too...
Quentin
> JohnM
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would translate privacy in french by "Intimité" or "Vie privée".
>>
>> Regards,
>&
Hi,
I would translate privacy in french by "Intimité" or "Vie privée".
Regards,
Quentin
2013/12/23 John Mikes
> List-Friends of diverse linguistic origins: is there in another language a
> WORD meaning the same idiosyncrasy as what the USA " p r i v a c y " indeed
> covers? I know of none in
2013/12/23 Richard Ruquist
> Quentin,
>
> Your 3dot method does not work for me.
> Richard
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>> 2013/12/23 Richard Ruquist
>>
>>> I post and receive via google email.
>&g
2013/12/23 Richard Ruquist
> Quentin,
>
> Your 3dot method does not work for me.
>
It works for everyone using gmail, just click on the dots...
Quentin
> Richard
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>> 2013/12/23 Richard
2013/12/23 Richard Ruquist
> I post and receive via google email.
> My only complaint is that I cannot intersperse
> in others posts as is the practice here.
>
You can, I'm using gmail for posting right now, just click on the three
dots "..." when replying, that will display the entire post and
2013/12/23 meekerdb
> On 12/23/2013 10:55 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> 2013/12/23 Edgar L. Owen
>
>> All,
>>
>> The question of whether God exists is meaningless without first giving
>> some definition of what is meant by God, of how God is defined. Ot
It's not a problem of signing up, it is a problem of using the correct SMTP
server to send an email with your address in "from" header. You must use
the SMTP server of att.net to send an email with a from address of "att.net
".
Quentin
2013/12/23 Edgar L. Owen
> I'm using my email edgaro...@at
Or maybe your SMTP server that your email program is using is somehow
rejected by googlegroups or by SPF... Do you correctly use the smtp server
associated with your domain email (att.net) ?
SPF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework can prevent email
from being sent correctly if yo
Hi,
I'm using gmail and it works flawlessly. Just check when replying that the
address is set to "everything-list@googlegroups.com" (it should normally
default to that as the Reply-To header is set to that address).
Regards,
Quentin
2013/12/23 Edgar L. Owen
> I've set option of getting all po
2013/12/23 Edgar L. Owen
> All,
>
> The question of whether God exists is meaningless without first giving
> some definition of what is meant by God, of how God is defined. Otherwise
> everyone is talking about different things and nothing will go anywhere.
>
> If you need a God there is only one
2013/12/23 John Clark
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> > He did answer and did it correctly,
>>
>
> I somehow missed that post. What number did Bruno give?
>
Buy some pair of eyes and come back here.
>
> > Liar Clark is dodging
2013/12/23 John Clark
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrot
>
> >>> The question is ambiguous.
>>>
>>
>> >> If the question is ambiguous it is because I used YOUR phrase " the
>> first person experiences viewed from their first person points of view" !
>> If your phrase m
2013/12/21 Quentin Anciaux
>
>
>
> 2013/12/21 John Clark
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> That's a great answer but unfortunately it's NOT a answer to the question
>>>> John Cla
2013/12/21 John Clark
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> That's a great answer but unfortunately it's NOT a answer to the question
>>> John Clark asked, the question never asked anything about "the 3p view",
>>> it was never mentioned. So John Clark will repeat th
Le 18 déc. 2013 23:21, "LizR" a écrit :
>
> On 19 December 2013 10:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>> Le 18 déc. 2013 22:37, "Telmo Menezes" a écrit :
>>
>> >
>>
>> > This is often repeated but not true. The blockchain can b
Le 18 déc. 2013 22:37, "Telmo Menezes" a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Quentin Anciaux
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/12/18 LizR
> >>
> >> On 19 December 2013 08:01, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> >>>
> >
Le 18 déc. 2013 22:31, "LizR" a écrit :
>
> On 19 December 2013 10:09, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>> 2013/12/18 LizR
>>>
>>> On 19 December 2013 08:01, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2013/12/18 Bruno Marchal
>>>&g
2013/12/18 LizR
> On 19 December 2013 08:01, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> 2013/12/18 Bruno Marchal
>>
>>> On 18 Dec 2013, at 09:47, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>>> Depends on the problem you're considering, I think it can lead to a
>&
2013/12/18 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 18 Dec 2013, at 09:47, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> Depends on the problem you're considering, I think it can lead to a
>> society with more individual freedoms, for example.
>>
>
> I don't think it can... can you give a
2013/12/18 John Clark
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>> >> Acording to Bruno Marchal's terminology "you" will see only one city
>> and one city only; and "you" will see both Washington and Moscow;
>> therefore Bruno Marchal's terminology is inconsistent in the one pe
2013/12/17 Telmo Menezes
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> > On 12/16/2013 12:53 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:59 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 12/15/2013 4:23 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 9
2013/12/13 Stephen Paul King
> Hi Bruno,
>
>Why does an entire universe need to be simulated?
>
It does not... it is an example showing that the substitution level could
be arbitrarily low... anyway as I said some years ago, if the level is that
low, I don't see how computationalism (the ide
e 100 years after the first reconstruction occurs forbidding any
meeting between both doppelganger... following bogus john clarck logic,
that should restore probability as in MWI... right ?
Quentin
2013/12/12 Quentin Anciaux
>
>
>
> 2013/12/11 John Clark
>
>> On Wed, Dec
2013/12/11 John Clark
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
> > We always feel that we are a single person
>>
>
> Yes but the copy that walked out of the duplicating chamber with you (or
> perhaps you are the copy and he is the original, no way to tell and no
> reason to care)
2013/12/10 meekerdb
> On 12/10/2013 12:49 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 09 Dec 2013, at 23:28, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 12/9/2013 12:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:57 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 12/9/2013 12:44 AM, LizR wrote:
>>
>> On 9 December 2013 20:56,
2013/12/8 John Clark
> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> > what you assert below is plain lies. While I can agree sometimes with
>> things you say, I cannot let such obvious lies pass through.
>>
> But you've just let "such
As I've shown numerous times now, what you assert below is plain lies.
While I can agree sometimes with things you say, I cannot let such obvious
lies pass through. Quentin
Le 8 déc. 2013 17:24, "John Clark" a écrit :
>
> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> > Comp is the be
2013/12/8 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 07 Dec 2013, at 20:05, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 12/7/2013 12:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 06 Dec 2013, at 20:16, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 12/6/2013 7:27 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Quent
2013/12/6 Platonist Guitar Cowboy
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/6 Jason Resch
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch < jasonre...@gmail.com>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux <
>> allco...@gmail.com&
2013/12/6 Jason Resch
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch < jasonre...@gmail.com>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux <
>> allco...@gmail.com&
2013/12/6 Richard Ruquist
> On 05 Dec 2013, at 21:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
>
> Well John not you nor I are believers in QI
> but there seem to be plenty on this list.
>
>
> Bruno: Can you refute comp-I?
>
> I can't, even without the step 8.
>
> Richard: I do not have to since it is a matter of
2013/12/6 Telmo Menezes
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux
> wrote:
> > Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
> questionned...
>
> That is philosophy. Science is more narrow -- and it should be.
> Science is empiricism. It is rest
2013/12/6 Telmo Menezes
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux
> wrote:
> > Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
> questionned...
>
> That is philosophy. Science is more narrow -- and it should be.
> Science is empiricism.
Empiricism
Science comes from latin and means knowledge... if some wants to use
science as a cover for something else, that doesn't redefine what it is...
science is an attitude towards pursuit of knowledge...
Quentin
2013/12/6 Alberto G. Corona
>
>
>
> 2013/12/6 Quentin Anciaux
&g
by
> discrediting and prohibiting metaphysics and pulling philosophy out of the
> sciences.
>
>
> 2013/12/5 Quentin Anciaux
>
>> A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
>> religion.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Richard Ruquist
>
2013/12/6 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
>
> I repeat the cult of men to men is the most primitive and dangerous
> religion. And RELIGION CAN NOT BE AVOIDED: you
2013/12/6 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>> A religion is based on dogma, science i
arth)
Quentin
> -Original Message-
> From: Quentin Anciaux
> To: everything-list
> Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 2:23 pm
> Subject: Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
>
> It isn't... QI is not worshipped, it is not a belief per se (you can
> entertain the idea for an argum
2013/12/5 meekerdb
> On 12/5/2013 8:09 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> No, because there is no absolute measure to decrease to begin with. The
> thing is, doing dangerous thing *increase* likeliness to experience being
> crippled, that's what is more likely.
>
>
> So
m immortality is not religion.
> BTW it is not dogma that I believe in.
> Richard
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
>> religion.
>>
>>
>>
> Some religions may be, that doesn't mean they all are, ho
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
>> religion.
>>
>>
>>
> Some religions may be, that doesn't mean they all are
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
2013/12/5 Richard Ruquist
> I believe in science.
> That is my religion.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:35 PM, John Clark wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
>>
>> > you can
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>>
>> On 05 Dec 2013, at 09:53, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>>
>>&
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>
2013/12/5 LizR
> On 5 December 2013 20:58, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> 2013/12/5 LizR
>>
>>> Well all the possibilities ever experienced by an human beings anywhere
>>> in the multiverse add up to a vanishingly small measure compared to all the
>>
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>&
are of is always going to be infinitesimal from a
> "God's eye perspective" - and 100% from our own.
>
As I said, only relative measure count... ASSA is useless and wrong. When I
talk about low measure, I alway talk about relative measure from your
current state.
Quentin
&
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> Measure is relative,
>>
>
> Yes, so your current measure of next finding yourself in a Drelb
> continuation, is relatively low compared to the measure of you still be
Measure is relative, it doesn't drop while you approach death.
Probabilities add up to one... And by no cul de dac you should not count
where you 're dead.
Le 5 déc. 2013 03:44, "Jason Resch" a écrit :
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrot
2013/12/4 Jason Resch
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:13 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2013 10:24 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:17 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> Theory? I am betting neither Clarke the writer, nor Shermer, the
>>> Atheist, has put a lot of intellectual
2013/12/2 Platonist Guitar Cowboy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/2 Platonist Guitar Cowboy
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Quentin Anciaux w
2013/12/2 LizR
> On 3 December 2013 09:40, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/2013 8:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> I'm sorry but we will have to agree we disagree on that. You're also
>> misleading atheistic position, and you're wrongly attributing "belief" to
>> atheist people (especially belg
2013/12/2 Platonist Guitar Cowboy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/2 Bruno Marchal
>>
>>>
>>> On 01 Dec 2013, at 21:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>&g
2013/12/2 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 01 Dec 2013, at 21:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
>>
>> If a machine equates God with "ultimate reality",
>>
>
> I do not... I don't equate god with anything.
>
>
2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 01 Dec 2013, at 12:32, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
>>
>> On 01 Dec 2013, at 09:51, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>>
>>>
2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 01 Dec 2013, at 09:51, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2013, at 22:37, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>> I can conceive of (with apologies to H. L. Me
2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 01 Dec 2013, at 08:45, Samiya Illias wrote:
>
> We exist,
>>
>
> OK.
>
>
>
> then why should we reject the idea of having been created,
>>
>
>
> Or of having a non physical origin. "creation" involves the idea of
> someone doing something with something, and so th
2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 30 Nov 2013, at 23:33, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 11/30/2013 10:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>> Brent,
>>>
>>> I hope you don't mind I re-answer this.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 Nov 2013, at 21:19, meekerdb wrote:
>>>
>>>
I can conceive of (with apologies to H. L.
2013/12/1 Bruno Marchal
>
> On 30 Nov 2013, at 22:37, meekerdb wrote:
>
>
>> I can conceive of (with apologies to H. L. Mencken), Agdistis or
>> Angdistis, Ah Puch, Ahura Mazda, Alberich, Allah, Amaterasu, An, Anansi,
>> Anat, Andvari, Anshar, Anu, Aphrodite, Apollo, Apsu, Ares, Artem
That's you
who said atheist must be deaf because they don't hear what's screaming in
their mind, if it's not a "superiority mode", don't know what is... anyway,
I'll stop here, it's useless.
Quentin
>
>
> 2013/12/1 Quentin Anciaux
>
>>
2013/12/1 Alberto G. Corona
> If what I said were absurd you would have not responded so quickly and so
> seriously.
> Sorry if I offended your faith. That was an experiment.
>
>
Oh easy to do that, the first to say is... childish.
>
>
>
> 2013/12/1 Quentin Ancia
2013/12/1 Alberto G. Corona
> As I said to Telmo talking about sacrifices somewhere above, individual
> sacrifices are the only way to create trust among non cloning entities.
> And what higher sacrifice than to negate'what is screaming in his mind, in
> the universe and in everithing? That is t
2013/12/1 meekerdb
> On 11/30/2013 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:40 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids
>> trying to explain it at the start.
>>
>>
2013/12/1 Samiya Illias
> We exist, then why should we reject the idea of having been created, just
> because we are unable to comprehend or define our Creator? Is that not
> intellectual dishonesty?
>
Why should we have been created in the first place by an intentional act of
an uncreated perso
d say... nawak !
Quentin
>
> Samiya
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/29 Samiya Illias
>>
>>> Simple? It takes intelligence and knowledge to write computer program,
>>> build a
s clear to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that your
> Lord is the witness of all things? [Quran 41:53]
>
> We created human from a mingled drop to test him, and We made him hearing
> and seeing. (Qur'an 76:2)
>
> Regards,
> Samiya
>
>
>
>
&g
;
> Samiya
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 29-Nov-2013, at 12:32 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/29 Samiya Illias
>
>> I understand that so many deities and faith-systems and all the myths and
>> fantasies in them easily put off any thi
2013/11/29 Samiya Illias
> I understand that so many deities and faith-systems and all the myths and
> fantasies in them easily put off any thinking mind. Yet, the more we
> discover, the closer we get to theorizing about everything, the more
> difficult it is to believe that everything just happ
ith consequences...
> eternal consequences!
>
Well if you want... but let me appreciate it for the BS it is... thanks.
Quentin
>
> Samiya
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 28-Nov-2013, at 8:42 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> > Because we are not all loving, omnipot
potent, omniscient beings and we can
*do* evil. If such being(s) existed, it would not allow that, but there is
evil...
Quentin
> Samiya
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 28-Nov-2013, at 8:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> > if there was an all loving god, it wouldn&#x
2013/11/28 Samiya Illias
> Bruno wrote: 'I was of course alluding to the greek (neo)platonists. They
> did invented the God used by both the abramanic cultures (even if terribly
> deformed, notably by the abandon of science about it, and the use of
> authoritative arguments, by Christians, Muslim
No, you just have to filter him.
If you use gmail, just add a filter to send that to the trash or tag it.
You can add filter with almost all email reader programs.
Quentin
2013/11/26 Gabriel Bodeen
> Is there another version of this list anywhere with a lower density of
> Cloughisms?
>
>
> On
2013/11/20 Telmo Menezes
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Quentin Anciaux
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/11/19 Telmo Menezes
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
2013/11/19 Telmo Menezes
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/11/18 meekerdb
> >>
> >> On 11/18/2013 4:43 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:23 P
2013/11/18 meekerdb
> On 11/18/2013 4:43 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:23 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/17/2013 4:25 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 8:41 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 11/16/2013 11:36 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>
>>>
Le 12 nov. 2013 22:53, "meekerdb" a écrit :
>
> On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>>
>>> On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>&
is true.
Quentin
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>
>>> On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/11/12 meeke
2013/11/13 Quentin Anciaux
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>> So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
>>> necessarily continue. It is just that there is a co
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
>> necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
>> So we're down to the question of what
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>
>>> On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quen
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>
>>> On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Qu
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>> This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
>> being aliv
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
> being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
>
>
> But there's a probability of being alive at tim
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
> being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
>
>
> But there's a probability of being alive at tim
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>
>>> On 11/12/2013
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>>
>>> On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013/11/12 meekerdb
>
>> On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>>
>
2013/11/12 meekerdb
> On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
>>
>> Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
>>
>> So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from
>> the fact you, and every body you've e
2013/11/11 meekerdb
> On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen,
> only being 10¹⁰⁰ is likely, it's just
> non-sense, your life is not random sampled, yesterday happe
701 - 800 of 1448 matches
Mail list logo
