"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208282353.351a9f17@posting.google.com...

> "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message news:<vlPa9.14084$Ic7.1317648@news2.west.cox.net>...
>
> > This is the classic "negative knowledge" derived from women's intuition and
> > mass hysteria.
>
> There's no such thing as "negative knowledge" nor could there be...
>
> > You continue to believe exactly the WRONG thing, even long
> > after the facts have been presented.
>
> John, I've read all your posts.  You've never presented one, single
> fact.
>
> BTW, why don't you pay child-support?
>
> Get professional help for your delusions, John.
>
> -=Chive

 

John Knight is a troubled person.

It's kinda funny how it calls himself a Christian when he violates
every single Christian tenet and belief.

Poor guy needs professional help.

-=Chive

 

 

Bwahahaha!  Are you aware John, that YOU just constructed an
ad hominem argument?  Does that mean YOU are a liberal, John?

And btw, I did not posit an ad hominem argument.  I merely noticed
that you lack normal critical thinking skills, to the point where
you might require a psychiatrist.  Did you, btw, get to talk to
to a psychiatrist when you were in prison for failing to pay
child-support?

> Your rebuttal is stupid anyway, which may be why you threw in the ad
> hominem--to cover the deficiencies of your rebuttal.

It's not an ad hominem, John.  Look it up.  However, YOU did
construct an ad hominem argument when you wrote:

> Isn't it interesting how "liberals" always resort to ad hominems, even after
> they pretend to submit an articulate rebuttal?

That's an ad hominem argument, John.  Requesting that you visit
a psychiatrist is not an ad hominem argument, John.  It's an
observation on your state of mind.

> It's true that there are other factors involved

So you admit your entire argument is fallacious.

Therefore, your entire argument is FALSE.

HTH.

-=Chive

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208290005.eac0eb9@posting.google.com...

> "Michael Price" <nini_pad@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3d6ce1fa$0$31147$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > "Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:c71e84dc.0208280212.73e8b83f@posting.google.com...
> > > "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message
> >  news:vlPa9.14084$Ic7.1317648@news2.west.cox.net...
> > >
> > > > 1962: Engel v. Vitale. The Court ruled that public
> > > > school officials could not require pupils to recite a slate-
> > > > composed prayer at the start of each school day, even if the
> > > > prayer was nondenominational and pupils who so desired
> > > > could be excused from reciting it, because such official
> > > > state sanction of religious unerances was an unconsitu-
> > > > tional attempt to establish religion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This was called "BANNING SCHOOL PRAYER".
> > > >
> > > > It violated almost two centuries of "case law" to the contrary.
> > > >
> > > > It was 180 degrees out of synch with the spirit and intent of the US
> > > > Constitution, and of the dreams of our Christian Founding Forefathers.
> > > >
> > > > It was the STUPIDEST thing this country ever did.
> > > >
> > > > It was followed by a 98 point drop in SAT scores which left the US dead
> >  last
> > > > in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects, more than a quintupling of our illigetemacy
> >  and
> > > > incarceration rates, and more than a doubling of the murder and divorce
> > > > rates.
> > >
> > > Questionable Cause: This fallacy occurs when an arguer gives
> > > insufficient evidence for a claim that one thing is the cause of
> > > another. You should recognize the following instances of Questionable
> > > Cause:
> > >
> > > o Post hoc fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer assumes,
> > > without adequate reason, that because one event precedes another, that
> > > the first event was the cause of the second.
> > >
> > > o Mere correlation fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer
> > > assumes, without adequate reason, that because two conditions or
> > > events regularly occur together, that there must be a causal
> > > relationship between them.
> > >
> > > o Oversimplified cause fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer
> > > assumes, without sufficient evidence, that a single condition or event
> > > is the sole cause of some effect, when there are in fact other
> > > contributing causes.
> > >
> > >
> > > John, get thee to a psychiatrist.
> > >
> > > -=Chive
> > >
> > > Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
> >
> >   Don't you remember the old joke?  The lightbulb has to _want_ to change.
> > And
> > this dim bulb is perfectly happy to remain as he is.
>
> John Knight is a troubled person.
>
> It's kinda funny how it calls himself a Christian when he violates
> every single Christian tenet and belief.
>
> Poor guy needs professional help.
>
> -=Chive
>

 

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208282355.6a2ea44b@posting.google.com...

> "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message news:<vlPa9.14084$Ic7.1317648@news2.west.cox.net>...
>
> > This is the classic "negative knowledge" derived from women's intuition and
> > mass hysteria. 
>
> John, there is no such thing as "negative knowledge" nor could
> there be...
>
> > You continue to believe exactly the WRONG thing, even long
> > after the facts have been presented.
>
> John, you've never presented any "facts".
>
> BTW, John, why don't you pay child-support?
>
> -=Chive
>
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.

 

 

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208290020.5b86f7da@posting.google.com...

> "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message news:<vS7b9.17457$Ic7.1532869@news2.west.cox.net>...
> > "Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:c71e84dc.0208280212.73e8b83f@posting.google.com...
> > > "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message
> >  news:vlPa9.14084$Ic7.1317648@news2.west.cox.net...
> > >
> > > > 1962: Engel v. Vitale. The Court ruled that public
> > > > school officials could not require pupils to recite a slate-
> > > > composed prayer at the start of each school day, even if the
> > > > prayer was nondenominational and pupils who so desired
> > > > could be excused from reciting it, because such official
> > > > state sanction of religious unerances was an unconsitu-
> > > > tional attempt to establish religion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This was called "BANNING SCHOOL PRAYER".
> > > >
> > > > It violated almost two centuries of "case law" to the contrary.
> > > >
> > > > It was 180 degrees out of synch with the spirit and intent of the US
> > > > Constitution, and of the dreams of our Christian Founding Forefathers.
> > > >
> > > > It was the STUPIDEST thing this country ever did.
> > > >
> > > > It was followed by a 98 point drop in SAT scores which left the US dead
> >  last
> > > > in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects, more than a quintupling of our illigetemacy
> >  and
> > > > incarceration rates, and more than a doubling of the murder and divorce
> > > > rates.
> > >
> > > Questionable Cause: This fallacy occurs when an arguer gives
> > > insufficient evidence for a claim that one thing is the cause of
> > > another. You should recognize the following instances of Questionable
> > > Cause:
> > >
> > > o Post hoc fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer assumes,
> > > without adequate reason, that because one event precedes another, that
> > > the first event was the cause of the second.
> > >
> > > o Mere correlation fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer
> > > assumes, without adequate reason, that because two conditions or
> > > events regularly occur together, that there must be a causal
> > > relationship between them.
> > >
> > > o Oversimplified cause fallacy: This fallacy occurs when an arguer
> > > assumes, without sufficient evidence, that a single condition or event
> > > is the sole cause of some effect, when there are in fact other
> > > contributing causes.
> > >
> > >
> > > John, get thee to a psychiatrist.
> > >
> > > -=Chive
> >
> >
> > Isn't it interesting how "liberals" always resort to ad hominems, even after
> > they pretend to submit an articulate rebuttal?
>
> Bwahahaha!  Are you aware John, that YOU just constructed an
> ad hominem argument?  Does that mean YOU are a liberal, John?
>
> And btw, I did not posit an ad hominem argument.  I merely noticed
> that you lack normal critical thinking skills, to the point where
> you might require a psychiatrist.  Did you, btw, get to talk to
> to a psychiatrist when you were in prison for failing to pay
> child-support?
>
> > Your rebuttal is stupid anyway, which may be why you threw in the ad
> > hominem--to cover the deficiencies of your rebuttal.
>
> It's not an ad hominem, John.  Look it up.  However, YOU did
> construct an ad hominem argument when you wrote:
>
> > Isn't it interesting how "liberals" always resort to ad hominems, even after
> > they pretend to submit an articulate rebuttal?
>
> That's an ad hominem argument, John.  Requesting that you visit
> a psychiatrist is not an ad hominem argument, John.  It's an
> observation on your state of mind.
>
> > It's true that there are other factors involved
>
> So you admit your entire argument is fallacious.
>
> Therefore, your entire argument is FALSE.
>
> HTH.
>
> -=Chive
>
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.

 

 

 

"Jeff George" <jeffgeorge666@DAMNSPAMmsn.com> wrote in message news:enismug0siuhcq4bb37pnp2c1nnulssr1v@4ax.com...

> On 29 Aug 2002 00:40:20 -0700, are_chive_mind@yahoo.com (Chive Mynde)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >As some have already stated, he has been in jail for refusing to pay
> >child-support.  This may explain his transferaence in the form of
> >racism, misogyny, and bigotry.
> >
>
> There is nothing lower than a father that refuses to take care of his
> children.
>
> Jeff George
> Soy El Diablo Gringo Supremo (Loco)
> I am a common cunning linguist, a master of many tongues.
> I'm not just a drug addict, I play one on TV.

 

 

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208282340.428fb26c@posting.google.com...

> "Michael Price" <nini_pad@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3d6ce28f$0$31147$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > "Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:c71e84dc.0208280200.1e1cb585@posting.google.com...
> > > "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message
> >  news:BA_a9.15531$Ic7.1464751@news2.west.cox.net...
> > >
> > > > Strong's is a reference point, not an authority.
> > >
> > > A reference point for whom?
> > >
> > > > The Holy Bible is the authority.
> > >
> > > What is the "Holy Bible", John?  The Gnostic Gospels?
> > > Is it what you say it is?
> > >
> > > Clearly, Yeshu did not have access to your "Holy Bible".
> > > Nor did he need to...
> > >
> > > And, what kind of authority is it?  Your authority?
> > >
> > > > When the two conflict, the Holy Bible is the authority.
> > >
> > > The only conflict you will find, is the conflict between the
> > > words of your "Holy Bible" and your actions.
> > >
> > > > That's not too difficult to understand, is it?
> > >
> > > It's quite easy, actually.  Anyone who bothers to waste their
> > > precious time reading your meaningless posts, can tell that
> > > you're a hypocritical, ignorant moron who hasn't a clue about the
> > > "bible".
> > >
> > > You are, however, an avid racist and a delusional nutcase.
> > >
> > > HTH.
> > >
> > > -=Chive
> > >
> > > Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
> >
> >   Dammit Knight!  Now you've gone and made me agreee with Chive!   That
> > pisses me off!
>
> As I have repeatedly stated, I am not interested in whether or not
> somebody agrees or disagrees with me. 
>
> I am however, interested in the motivation for John's delusions.
>
> As some have already stated, he has been in jail for refusing to pay
> child-support.  This may explain his transferaence in the form of
> racism, misogyny, and bigotry.
>
> -=Chive

 

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208282348.1099c21@posting.google.com...

> "Nemesis" <judgedredd@ij.net> wrote in message news:<akiga8$1du$1@news1.ij.net>...
> > "Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:c71e84dc.0208280200.1e1cb585@posting.google.com...
> > > "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message
> >  news:BA_a9.15531$Ic7.1464751@news2.west.cox.net...
> > >
> > > > Strong's is a reference point, not an authority.
> > >
> > > A reference point for whom?
> > >
> > > > The Holy Bible is the authority.
> > >
> > > What is the "Holy Bible", John?  The Gnostic Gospels?
> > > Is it what you say it is?
> > >
> > > Clearly, Yeshu did not have access to your "Holy Bible".
> > > Nor did he need to...
> > >
> > > And, what kind of authority is it?  Your authority?
> > >
> > > > When the two conflict, the Holy Bible is the authority.
> > >
> > > The only conflict you will find, is the conflict between the
> > > words of your "Holy Bible" and your actions.
> > >
> > > > That's not too difficult to understand, is it?
> > >
> > > It's quite easy, actually.  Anyone who bothers to waste their
> > > precious time reading your meaningless posts, can tell that
> > > you're a hypocritical, ignorant moron who hasn't a clue about the
> > > "bible".
> > >
> > > You are, however, an avid racist and a delusional nutcase.
> >
> > The funny thing about the Bible is that two people can read the same passage
> > and get entirely different things from it.
>
> Pure nonsense.  The purpose of a written traditon (as opposed to an
> oral tradition) is to prevent such a thing from happening.  The bias
> that you speak of finds its roots in the cultural paradigms and prejudcies
> of those who are reading the document.
>
> > It was mean to be that way.
>
> That is complete and total nonsense. 
>
> Please, get help for your delusions.
>
> -=Chive
>
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.

 

 

 

"Chive Mynde" <are_chive_mind@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c71e84dc.0208282353.351a9f17@posting.google.com...

> "John Knight" <jwknight@polbox.com> wrote in message news:<vlPa9.14084$Ic7.1317648@news2.west.cox.net>...
>
> > This is the classic "negative knowledge" derived from women's intuition and
> > mass hysteria.
>
> There's no such thing as "negative knowledge" nor could there be...
>
> > You continue to believe exactly the WRONG thing, even long
> > after the facts have been presented.
>
> John, I've read all your posts.  You've never presented one, single
> fact.
>
> BTW, why don't you pay child-support?
>
> Get professional help for your delusions, John.
>
> -=Chive
>
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.