Patricia wrote:

We are all but insignificant specks of sand on the beaches of the
universe.  There is no God.  No Jesus.  No Chupacabra.  No faeries. No
heaven.  No hell. No aliens. These are all inventions, or if it please
you, placebos man has invented to mask the fact that NOTHING awaits
you after death, and we are ALONE in the universe. We're born, we
live, we die.  We make a mark on history, or we don't.  We reproduce,
or we don't.  We may be sinners, or saints, or do nothings. We become
fervent devotees to religion, or science, or paranormal studies. 

It astounds me that that net surfers spend significant
portions of their time trying to convince people that

A. Their belief is true,

although it is more likely that you spent all
of 20 seconds formulating this opinion of yours,

it still seems that you have spent some
significant portion of your time trying
to convince people that your belief is true.

so, evidently, you astound yourself in
the same manner as you would accuse other
people of astounding you.

by the way;

if you tell me that you have spent a large
and significant amount of your time formulating
this opinion and, now, attempting to spread
it around, then you most definitely convict
yourself of the selfsame crime you seem
to abhor in others,

and if you say that you spent no time at all
in formulating this opinion of yours, one may
do well to ask why they should consider such
an unlearned and hasty opinion.


Patricia wrote:

B. It is superiour to all other ideologies,

this may be your intent, and then again,
you may just want to spend this significant
amount of your time denigrating everyone
who does not hold your carte blanche.

that is, seeing that it is the great and
wonderful YOU who is making the 'observation'
you can very neatly excuse yourself from
your own notice.

just so long as you don't have a personal
statement to make about 'God' or 'paranormal'
things, you grant yourself the right deliver
this pompous sermon to whomsoever.

that is, if anyone wants to share about
'God' or 'paranormal' they are quacks,
but -you- know better that no such phenomena exist,
so your deliveries fall outside of your own
determined efforts against people whom you
believe are trying to convince other people
of the correctness of their own personal view.

some call this a myopic inconsitency,
some call it hypocrisy.


Patricia wrote:

and C. Becoming a believer
guarentees happiness in life, and the "afterlife."

what are you trying to guarantee people?

your statements seem to deliver an
"eat and drink for tomorrow we die"
type of sentiment.

in fact, you guarantee that this
is the only correct view.

are you trying to convince people
that everyone would be happier
if they held your view?

if so, why "The Insignificance of Life"?

why not;

            "The Significance of Life"?


why are -you- so bummed out on life?


Patricia wrote:

Here's what I think about people who have had
paranormal and/or religeous experiences.

you mean, YOU haven't had a 'religeous' experience?

sort of like YOU wanting to tell me what
strawberry iced cream is like without
ever having had a taste.

looks as if YOU are engaged in some sort
of metaphysical approach to understanding.

you simply deduce the correct view from
the air without ever having to see for your self.

maybe you should revise your statement to say;

"I, Patricia, the speck of sand, have never
  met God nor Jesus nor Chupacabra, and don't
  personally know anything of God etc.
  but i feel that this lack of knowledge
  on my part grants me the right to say
  that all such phenomena are man-made invention"

this leads one to wonder from where you
are getting your rather hasty opinion set.

is it at all possible that you have fallen
victim to some other crusader against God?

who granted you the right to make such
adamant generalization against things
you know absolutely nothing about?

just passing on the "No God"
axiomatic virus system?

Patricia wrote:

They are most likely..

which are you?


Patricia wrote:

1.  Rednecks looking for their 15 seconds of fame

this may be you, only you don't recognize
your own neck because you haven't managed
to turn that 'highbrow' acumen on yourself.


Patricia wrote:

2.  Displaced intellectual loners who somehow found
no other productive purpose but to devote themselves
to a lost, and questionable cause that will single
themselves out as a "unique" individual

this definitely isn't you, because you
don't sound very intellectual at all.

in fact, the question as to the amount
of time you placed into the formulation
of this opinion of yours is still open
and seems as if it is a hasty one.

and, if you claim to have formulated this
opinion over several decades, then you
convict yourself under (A.) as
astounding to yourself.

trouble is, it sounds like a naive
statement of a bloated personal ego
and not of some 'speck of sand'.

atheism is not only a "lost cause" but
a completely false axiomatic self-induction.


Patricia wrote:

3.  The mentally ill, subject to the disorders and hallucinations that
come with various mental illnesses, but still functional enough to use
the internet.

considering the fact that you can see
disorders in others that you cannot
see in your self, you may very well
be caught in a personal ego delusion.

if you could please leave me out of
your delusional pattern, i would be
much appreciative.


Patricia wrote:

To be continued..

could you leave alt.god.timothy.sutter out of it?


Patricia wrote:

This is me, a speck of sand

you certainly sound enamored of yourself.

maybe you just have some lofty, selfish
ambition which you know you will never
fulfill and so, you have become
embittered to the world.

go have a soda.