Are religious people less intelligent than atheists?

How is your belief in killing preventing you from going to Sacramento?

LOL

1. You aren't going anywhere, for any purpose, because you're always dead broke.

1. Your history is clear - lots time spent on idle threats, which leads to 1.

2. It is galactically stupid to write out threats. You might think your life couldn't get any worse, but it damn sure can.

Fuck you little man Ball - you ARE a fictional character!

Here's some data on YOU little man Ball:

11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from William T. Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your correspondence with William Sessions. [start- Jon to me] Eat shit and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the "meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William" To: Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the standards have not been published in a final form for use. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if further information is needed. Thanks, William T. Sessions Associate Deputy Administrator Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message----- From: jonball@[...] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM To: Sessions, William Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find anything to indicate if the standards were adopted. Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance. Jonathan Ball Pasadena, CA ___________________________________________________ Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005

[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan Ball, you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to

5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon. You ought to be very careful.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old. You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.

3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

Fuck you little man Ball - you ARE a fictional character!

Here's some data on YOU little man Ball:

11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from William T. Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your correspondence with William Sessions. [start- Jon to me] Eat shit and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the "meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William" To: Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the standards have not been published in a final form for use. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if further information is needed. Thanks, William T. Sessions Associate Deputy Administrator Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message----- From: jonball@[...] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM To: Sessions, William Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find anything to indicate if the standards were adopted. Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance. Jonathan Ball Pasadena, CA ___________________________________________________ Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005

[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan Ball, you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to

5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon. You ought to be very careful.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old. You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.

3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

'Getting yourself kind of worked up, "Terron." Calm down or you might wind up like Gunner -- with a stroke.

Hello, Poxed Pee-Pee! Why are you posting as "terron musgrave" (and "Schuman" and "Phil Laundry" and "andy memory") and using discredited bullshit from Derek Nash?

Hello, Poxed Pee-Pee! Why are you posting as "terron musgrave" (and "Schuman" and "Phil Laundry" and "andy memory") and using discredited bullshit from Derek Nash?

I am an "evangelical Christian" (anabaptist)by definition, but I don't push my views and beliefs on the newsgroups or anywhere else. Anyone who feels the need to inject their beliefs/unbeliefs at any possible opportunity has a "strong" belief that they feel is important to pass on to or inflict on others. To THEM it IS a religion.

I don't care what he, or you, believe, but if he wants to push his ideology (since he doesn't call it a belief) on everybody with "religeous zeal" - it is a religion - pure and simple.

Who is doing that?

I don't push my beliefs on this or any other group. Some of you know where I stand from responses on the group - but I have NEVER, nor will I EVER start a discussion based on or related to religion or politics or beliefs of any sort on a metalworking or home improvement or any other newsgroup or forum.

Anyone who feels it necessary to start these off-topic and frankly antagonistic threads has a "religeous fixation" - whether he is an atheist or a "bible thumper" or a Mormon or a Muslim or a Jew.

Pushing their "beliefs" by starting threads of this tipe does NOT show a higher intelligence on his side. Period.

What I believe should be of no interest to you - and I'm not saying anyone has to believe what I believe. I AM saying anyone who has such strong beliefs that those who have a "belief system" that he does not agree with are by definition less intelligent than himself has a serious problem.

Have I ever said someone was "dumb" for not believing what I believe? You are free to believe what you want to believe - I will say I do not agree, but I will not say you are stupid for believing what you believe. Exactly where am I "stooping low"?

I have a 4 stroke, it runs REAL nice...

If I were in charge of your religion, I'd ban you from talking about your beliefs. You're a bad example, and a poor salesman.

In fact, you've made a habit of advertising your beliefs in this newsgroup. It never goes well, and you never learn.

No.

Nobody's "pushing" anything on you. You've been given the facts, repeatedly, and you refuse to accept them because it busts your belief that you're a logical thinker. You aren't, at least not when it comes to your delusion. Pigheaded is the word that comes to mind.

No.

You do not believe in a god. That's fair. That is your decision, and you can base that decision on whatever you want. However, do you also believe there IS no god? If so, that is also your decision - it is up to you. If you CLAIM there is no god - as a FACT - that is different. There is no way for you to support your clain AS FACT that there is no god, with or without a Capital G. Most Christians I know BELIEVE there is a god - without undisputible proof. No proof is required for a belief - so the assertion that you, or anyone else, believes there is no god - is just that - a belief - without concrete undisputible proof.

So sorry - it IS a "belief based" system - and you ARE taking that "belief" as a "leap of faith". You have faith in yourself that you have made the correct judgement, and that your "belief" is correct.

That said - I really do not care WHAT you believe.

You didn't answer the question.

3926

think he's in the "strong atheist" category, which you call "hysterical at heist" because you're resentful and possibly afraid of the fact that the "s cientific atheist" category is gaining in numbers throughout the developed world.

oing with "Bill."

The only "pushing" I see is indirect judgment through the use of disparagin g adjectives, like "hysterical."

This started off with a post by Iggy, linking to an article about the intel ligence of believers versus atheists. Of course, this provoked an immediate flame, with Jim disparaging liberals, Gunner disparaging anyone, and some trolls from other NGs (I think; I don't see them the way I'm posting) pilin g on.

I haven't seen any hysteria aside from that.

Iggy started it. And he's pretty intelligent. d8-)

Do you believe you are correct that there is no such thing as (a) GOD)? Not saying you are right or wrong either way. Just answer the question. Do you BELIEVE there is no God. You have no incontivertible proof there is no God - so either you believe there is no such thing, or you say there might be, but you do not believe he/she/it has any importance to you? One is a beliefe. The other is an unbelief.

One is, by the definitions others have given, an Antitheist, the other an atheist.

From everything you and several others have said in this thread you are in the first camp. You believe there is no God (and that anyone who believes there is a God, or gods, is by definition less intelligent than yourself.)

And I respect your decision.

You are not opposed to a belief - then you "have no dog in the fight"

Whoever started the thread definitely appeares to have a dog in the fight