Creationists

[Hollie]

You deny the absurdity that a big bang created all we see and over time organisms became more and more complex

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation. Not a single, understandable event in nature can be assigned a supernatural, supermagical cause.

We know with certainty that species and organisms evolve. That's a fact not in dispute by the modern science community. You and the Harun Yahya groupies will insist that modern science is flawed and unreliable but that is an issue only a fringe minority accepts.

You know changes can happen within a family that is the basis for your theory of macroevolution. I do hope by now you people know the difference between the two.

You place too much emphasis on terms (macro evolution) you don't understand and which are less important than you think. Evolution is a theory and a fact supported by evidence. Creationist ministries tend to subdivide evolution into macro and micro in the hope that doing so will provide an opportunity to discredit the science. You can be an accomplice to that if you choose but the underlying science remains fully intact.

 

[Hollie]

1. Design and pupsoe along with the word of God
2. The Bible is full of truth and facts that science has confirmed
3. There is plenty of evidence of Microevolution a better term would me Microadaptations which is extrapolated from as evidence for macroevolution because there is zero evidence of macroevolution.
4.Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger, because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

(A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)

Higher than a 3-story building!

Noah's Ark was three stories high (Genesis 6:16). Its total deck area was equivalent to the area of about 20 standard college basketball courts or 36 lawn tennis courts. The world had to wait until AD 1884 before the Ark's size was exceeded, when the Italian liner Eturia was built.
How big was Noah's Ark? What were the dimensions?

5. Radiometric dating has proven to be unreliable. Example,Diamonds dated to millions of years old it was discovered contained carbon which should not have been found in the diamonds. Carbon only lasts so long.

6.The fossil record is a joke,many creatures are merely inferrences of the mind because enough of the creature was not found. See cambrian explosion where supposedly complex oprganisms all of a sudden appeared. That is why the theory of PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM was developed. Also for your dating methods plus fossil arguments go check out Living-Fossils.com

7.Yes, design and purpose
8. The formation of the cell and the exact sequencing. The many organs needed for living organism's. Complex molecular machines. The atmoshere and planet alignment.
9. Already have.

10. I have


Now i will make it easy on you with only a few questions.

1. How did nonliving matter get converted to all the living organism's we see today ?

2. How did the first living cell form to where it could reproduce more cells ?

3. How did chaos create order and precision in nature ?

4. How did non intelligence create intelligence ?

5. Where did the Dna information come from ?

6. Can you point to any code or form of communication such as language ever come in to existence through natural priocesses and absent of intelligence ?

I've always found the Noah tale to be the most fantastically absurd of the many biblical tales. The gods wiping humanity from the planet because they were a disappointment seems a little harsh. The similarly confounding part is the idea of the all merciful, omni-everything, all-moral gods making an allowance for incestuous relationships by providing for Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

But I suppose if you're in the fraternity of the gods....

Hollie, here's the thing about Noah. They don't tell the whole story. In the book of Lamech, found in the dead sea scrolls in 1947, Noah was also an immaculate conception of sorts therefore 'pure in all his generations' as is stated in the Bible. The book of Lamech, Jasher and Enoch (a VERY important book) have all been left out of the Bible as we know it. That's why it doesn't make a lot of sense. The priests edited it to suit their own purposes. The whole thing is an incompleat sham.

Interesting info, CandySlice. I was only vaguely familiar with what was found as part of the dead sea scrolls.

I suppose the above only adds to the puzzle of how an all-merciful god could behave as delineated in the bible. At least in my opinion, there is no requirement to add sentience and other anthropomorphic attributes to the infinite nature of nature. Therefore, the theistic worldview unnecessarily complicates a simple concept in order to assign to nature a quasi-comforting paternal personality.

It is the process of science that explores and discovers. Now, it's possible that science could be stymied and could hit the wall so-to-speak at finding a purely natural cause for existence but that still wouldn't prove a supernatural causation and it still wouldn't prove god(s). How do we discern the truth? By faith? By assertion and stepping away and accepting untested and anecdotal claims? Or do we test our truths, hold them up to scrutiny and require they be accountable at some level?

In fact, the only model I see that opens up the possibility of nature gone awry is the theistic one. How often does nature simply allow a sea to part, or a dead man to rise? How many natural pillars of fire, burning bushes, or global floods are there? How often do virgins spontaneously impregnate? Where else do angels and demons fly about or dead men ascend to heaven?

Why is it that in a prior age when fear and superstition were far more easily imposed on a population did "miracles" happen and as mankind learned and explored, these "miracles" ceased to occur?

 

[daws101]

If I am a halfwit what does that say for you when I school you ?

what makes you a halfwit is you Thinking you could ("SCHOOL" ANYBODY ) BTW THAT'S SCHOOLED....MORE EVIDENCE YOU'RE A DUMB FUCK..

Anyone who has followed this thread knows you are very ignorant when it comes to science,heck you tried to use Abiogenesis as your answer for the origins of life.

When one gets schooled these are the tactics they turn to.

anyone who follows this thread knows that you lie constantly and are so ignorant about science that you believe that a super magical supernatural thing poofed everything in to existence then got pissed off at what it had made, told a 600 year old man to bulid a raft with a roof and collect all the living thing in the world to save them because for some unknown reason this supermagical supernatural thing forgot how to poof new things or remake the stuff he already poofed to life....
you also have tried to sell this steaming pile of shit: this same super magical supernatural thing cursed everything for being just like it made them to be by growing old and dying..
and how can forget this gem dinosaurs and mayans...
so in reality the only schooling you've done is present your ignorance, denial, dumbfuckery and lies to any one following this thread...

 

[daws101]

1. Design and pupsoe along with the word of God
2. The Bible is full of truth and facts that science has confirmed
3. There is plenty of evidence of Microevolution a better term would me Microadaptations which is extrapolated from as evidence for macroevolution because there is zero evidence of macroevolution.
4.Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger, because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

(A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)

Higher than a 3-story building!

Noah's Ark was three stories high (Genesis 6:16). Its total deck area was equivalent to the area of about 20 standard college basketball courts or 36 lawn tennis courts. The world had to wait until AD 1884 before the Ark's size was exceeded, when the Italian liner Eturia was built.
How big was Noah's Ark? What were the dimensions?

5. Radiometric dating has proven to be unreliable. Example,Diamonds dated to millions of years old it was discovered contained carbon which should not have been found in the diamonds. Carbon only lasts so long.

6.The fossil record is a joke,many creatures are merely inferrences of the mind because enough of the creature was not found. See cambrian explosion where supposedly complex oprganisms all of a sudden appeared. That is why the theory of PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM was developed. Also for your dating methods plus fossil arguments go check out Living-Fossils.com

7.Yes, design and purpose
8. The formation of the cell and the exact sequencing. The many organs needed for living organism's. Complex molecular machines. The atmoshere and planet alignment.
9. Already have.

10. I have


Now i will make it easy on you with only a few questions.

1. How did nonliving matter get converted to all the living organism's we see today ?

2. How did the first living cell form to where it could reproduce more cells ?

3. How did chaos create order and precision in nature ?

4. How did non intelligence create intelligence ?

5. Where did the Dna information come from ?

6. Can you point to any code or form of communication such as language ever come in to existence through natural priocesses and absent of intelligence ?

All of this has been asked and answered there is no need to rehash it again..
no answers but your own no basis in fact answers will suffice...

btw dimensions concerning the size of the ark are speculation as there is no evidence of a flood that covered the earth or that noah could write or do math .
also the ark fantasy is a plagerized version of the epic of Gilgamesh((somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BCE).
which also states the world was flooded.

it also pre dates the ark fantasy :One of the Biblical stories that forms a central part of creationist beliefs is the supposed universal flood of Genesis. According to the account, the flood took place when Noah was 600 years old; the data provided by the genealogies in Genesis allow us to calculate that this would have been about 1,600 years after creation. If we assume the earth to have been created in 4004 BCE, the flood would have happened about 2348 BCE, around the time the pyramids were being built at Giza.

No it hasn't.

This is my last post to you,you mental midget.

yes it has

 

[CandySlice]

I've always found the Noah tale to be the most fantastically absurd of the many biblical tales. The gods wiping humanity from the planet because they were a disappointment seems a little harsh. The similarly confounding part is the idea of the all merciful, omni-everything, all-moral gods making an allowance for incestuous relationships by providing for Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

But I suppose if you're in the fraternity of the gods....

Hollie, here's the thing about Noah. They don't tell the whole story. In the book of Lamech, found in the dead sea scrolls in 1947, Noah was also an immaculate conception of sorts therefore 'pure in all his generations' as is stated in the Bible. The book of Lamech, Jasher and Enoch (a VERY important book) have all been left out of the Bible as we know it. That's why it doesn't make a lot of sense. The priests edited it to suit their own purposes. The whole thing is an incompleat sham.

Interesting info, CandySlice. I was only vaguely familiar with what was found as part of the dead sea scrolls.

I suppose the above only adds to the puzzle of how an all-merciful god could behave as delineated in the bible. At least in my opinion, there is no requirement to add sentience and other anthropomorphic attributes to the infinite nature of nature. Therefore, the theistic worldview unnecessarily complicates a simple concept in order to assign to nature a quasi-comforting paternal personality.

It is the process of science that explores and discovers. Now, it's possible that science could be stymied and could hit the wall so-to-speak at finding a purely natural cause for existence but that still wouldn't prove a supernatural causation and it still wouldn't prove god(s). How do we discern the truth? By faith? By assertion and stepping away and accepting untested and anecdotal claims? Or do we test our truths, hold them up to scrutiny and require they be accountable at some level?

In fact, the only model I see that opens up the possibility of nature gone awry is the theistic one. How often does nature simply allow a sea to part, or a dead man to rise? How many natural pillars of fire, burning bushes, or global floods are there? How often do virgins spontaneously impregnate? Where else do angels and demons fly about or dead men ascend to heaven?

Why is it that in a prior age when fear and superstition were far more easily imposed on a population did "miracles" happen and as mankind learned and explored, these "miracles" ceased to occur?

Holly, reading the Dead Sea scrolls is one of the most eye opening things I've done in a long time. Reading them in a study group at HCC was mind boggling. Yes, there is still a lot of magical thinking in there but remember these people were used to reading 'apocalyptic' literature and knew how to translate it. Alot of it took on sort of a 'wink wink, nudge nudge' aura as if to say 'We can't say what we REALLY mean but you guys out there get it, huh?'
Remenber the Bible was edited by church elders over the centuries leaving in just enough to keep people stupid, uneducated and superstitious. They wanted to control people and see what a good job they did on poor old YWC??
As for miracles and how they suddenly 'stopped happening' that's a no-brainer. Modern man is too well educated and too smart to fall for all that stuff. Except for YWC here who evidently read the Bible, liked what he read and forever after turned his brain off.

 

[CandySlice]

Hollie:
level?It is the process of science that explores and discovers. Now, it's possible that science could be stymied and could hit the wall so-to-speak at finding a purely natural cause for existence but that still wouldn't prove a supernatural causation and it still wouldn't prove god(s). How do we discern the truth? By faith? By assertion and stepping away and accepting untested and anecdotal claims? Or do we test our truths, hold them up to scrutiny and require they be accountable at some level?
Accountabilty is what one must insist upon in any situation where new info is being introduced. It is just this lack of accountability that drives me crazy when these glazed over thumpers get rolling. You can set your watch by how far along they can get before they go off the track but still asking them to consider something else is indeed like that brick wall.

 

[daws101]

has ywc ascended to heaven ?
the rapture is near!!!!!!!!!

 

[UltimateReality]

Skimmed the last few pages. Big surprise... Hollie doesn't have any new material and daws is stil in the dark. Hollie has assumed yet another fake screen name Candy Homeslice in an attempt to lend some validation to her whacky posts and she and her other screen name praise each other for a post well done. Druggy Huggy, seeing the cop was gone felt safe to post again. The funniest thing of all is Rugged Touch having the hugest of balls to call YWC out on his credentials. Like she can call anyone out on their qualifications "oh one who conveniently ignores any questions about her false identities and education level". Yep, it's biz as usual.

Did you miss me?

 

[UltimateReality]

I've always found the Noah tale to be the most fantastically absurd of the many biblical tales. The gods wiping humanity from the planet because they were a disappointment seems a little harsh. The similarly confounding part is the idea of the all merciful, omni-everything, all-moral gods making an allowance for incestuous relationships by providing for Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

But I suppose if you're in the fraternity of the gods....

You deny the absurdity that a big bang created all we see and over time organisms became more and more complex

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

 

[ima]

You deny the absurdity that a big bang created all we see and over time organisms became more and more complex

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

 

[newpolitics]

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

I second this. We don't have an answer. This isn't like a competition where the first person to place an explanation, gets to decide reality, and worse, if that explanation can't be disproven (because it is unfalsifiable), it stands. Once again, theists are using an argument from ignorance, again, and again, and again. It's totally unconvincing to anyone else but yourself. You lay claim to an explanation that you can not at all demonstrate, because you can't at all demonstrate the mechanism of your explanation: God. Therefore, you're missing quite a big piece, yet you arrogantly assert its truth because it has not been disproven, which is technically impossible, because it is unfalsifiable. So, around we go, in circles and circles. The only way to break this, is faith, because if you depended on evidentiary support, you would never find god, because god simply doesn't exist in this universe, if one at all exists. This is demonstrated by the simple fact that you must have faith to believe, because faith by definition, is believing with evidence or logical reasoning. In other words, the logic and reasoning comes after the belief is already formed, and so used only to justify the belief, not to assess it. If you did assess you're own beliefs, you would find they fall beneath skepticism and rationalism. So, if you want to believe, go ahead, but stop thinking you can actually convince people with a rational argument. The need to believe is an emotional one, I believe, and hence, doesn't need rational argument, from the point of view of the believer, in order for them to justify it, because simply, it feels good. Well, what feels good isn't reality. It is so highly subjective that to assert it as belonging ontologically to the universe, objectively, is simply impossible to do. Theist philosophers have been trying for centuries to find both a valid and sound logical argument for god, from the cosmological, ontological, teleological, and transcendental arguments, but they all fail at demonstrating their premises to be true, making them unsound, however internally consistent.

However, when you theists try to peel back science, as if it never happened, and claim that scientific claims are unfounded, now you are messing with the ontology of the universe, as discovered by the best method we have for discerning fact from fiction, reality from non-reality. You will consistently fail at this with those who truly understand science. You are not spreading the of god, because you can't demonstrate that the bible is the word of a deity, or that it accurately depicts the events it tries to relate. The historicity of jesus is questionable at best, being that we have almost zero extrabiblical accounts of this person even existing.

Please stop thinking you can use rationality and logic to prove your arguments, because fundamentally, they are based on emotion, and as such, lack a foundation of logic and reason. This is faith, and will never be reconcilable with evidence, by definition.

 

[Hollie]

You deny the absurdity that a big bang created all we see and over time organisms became more and more complex

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Gee whiz. The fundie is back with the same pointless babble.

 

[Hollie]

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

Good post.

I was hoping the fundie could explain what is supernatural about DNA, gravity or the universe but that would only prompt a lengthy cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

 

[LOki]

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

Good post.

I was hoping the fundie could explain what is supernatural about DNA, gravity or the universe but that would only prompt a lengthy cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

In the end, evidence, proof, valid logic, are all meaningless terms to him, to all Creationists in fact. It's just a better, and more useful expenditure of your time to expose them for the intellectually dishonest superstitious retards that they are; to point out vividly their intellectual and moral cretinism to children and those with childish intellects, so the Creationists' vain, mendacious, anti-reason, reality-denying hubris doesn't spread and kill every hope for a decent, thoughtful, just, and peaceful society.

 

[UltimateReality]

There is nothing absurd about the natural world. Every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural causation and natural explanation.

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

Again I see that reading concepts that don't exist into specific posts hasn't changed either. Please show me in the specific post above where I claimed supernatural causes. You won't find it so again you are with the strawman. I am assuming your post above, and NP's as well, was intended for the bully Hawly since it is she who made the claim "every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural caus...."

This is a lie, with not one shred of evidence to back it up, as pointed out in my post above. You have chosen to infer the rest.

 

[UltimateReality]

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

Good post.

I was hoping the fundie could explain what is supernatural about DNA, gravity or the universe but that would only prompt a lengthy cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

In the end, evidence, proof, valid logic, are all meaningless terms to him, to all Creationists in fact. It's just a better, and more useful expenditure of your time to expose them for the intellectually dishonest superstitious retards that they are; to point out vividly their intellectual and moral cretinism to children and those with childish intellects, so the Creationists' vain, mendacious, anti-reason, reality-denying hubris doesn't spread and kill every hope for a decent, thoughtful, just, and peaceful society.

The only retards are the last three posters with terrible reading comprehension problems. Hollie's statement is a lie, and your materialist religion has blinded you to the foolishness of her lie. You speak of faith, but it is your faith that allows to to believe that the things I mentioned in my post have a natural cause, because you don't have a single shred of scientific evidence to prove otherwise. So it is by faith you believe, absent from any facts. This is where I ask you to put up or shut up for even one of the items, let's say, DNA for instance. Please show me the scientific "evidence" for a natural cause. I'm not talking about the "just so", "might have", "could have" evolution stories, but real, experimentally verifiable evidence for DNA's natural cause.

This is the point the crickets start chirping.

 

[UltimateReality]

"It is self-evident that no number of men, by conspiring, and calling themselves a government, can acquire any rights whatever over other men, or other men's property, which they had not before, as individuals. And whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." -Lysander Spooner.

Foolish Loki. What are these so called "rights" that you speak of. And just where do these imaginary rights come from? Can we do a scientific experiment to verify they exists? Can we somehow measure your imaginary "rights"? Since your religion teaches matter is the only reality, how do we give birth to a thought? What is an idea? Can you prove it exists?

 

[newpolitics]

every discovery? You're funny! Like DNA and human consciousness. Please show me DNA's natural cause? The cell's natural cause? Gravity's natural cause? The cause of the universe? Yep Hollie you have it ALL figured out.

Not knowing all the answers STILL doen't mean that everything was made by an invisible superbeing in another dimension that no one has ever seen. That's not a logical conclusion, in an otherwise logical universe.

Again I see that reading concepts that don't exist into specific posts hasn't changed either. Please show me in the specific post above where I claimed supernatural causes. You won't find it so again you are with the strawman. I am assuming your post above, and NP's as well, was intended for the bully Hawly since it is she who made the claim "every discovery by science has been shown to have a natural caus...."

This is a lie, with not one shred of evidence to back it up, as pointed out in my post above. You have chosen to infer the rest.

Name one discovery by science that has a known supernatural cause, please. I would love to know.

 

[LOki]

Good post.

I was hoping the fundie could explain what is supernatural about DNA, gravity or the universe but that would only prompt a lengthy cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

In the end, evidence, proof, valid logic, are all meaningless terms to him, to all Creationists in fact. It's just a better, and more useful expenditure of your time to expose them for the intellectually dishonest superstitious retards that they are; to point out vividly their intellectual and moral cretinism to children and those with childish intellects, so the Creationists' vain, mendacious, anti-reason, reality-denying hubris doesn't spread and kill every hope for a decent, thoughtful, just, and peaceful society.

The only retards are the last three posters with terrible reading comprehension problems. Hollie's statement is a lie, and your materialist religion has blinded you to the foolishness of her lie. You speak of faith, but it is your faith that allows to to believe that the things I mentioned in my post have a natural cause, because you don't have a single shred of scientific evidence to prove otherwise. So it is by faith you believe, absent from any facts. This is where I ask you to put up or shut up for even one of the items, let's say, DNA for instance. Please show me the scientific "evidence" for a natural cause. I'm not talking about the "just so", "might have", "could have" evolution stories, but real, experimentally verifiable evidence for DNA's natural cause.

This is the point the crickets start chirping.

Not to imply that your anti-reason paradigm is in any way valid, but bhere's a whole world out there that runs on a natural process called chemistry. Perhaps you've heard of it?

 

[LOki]

"It is self-evident that no number of men, by conspiring, and calling themselves a government, can acquire any rights whatever over other men, or other men's property, which they had not before, as individuals. And whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." -Lysander Spooner.

Foolish Loki. What are these so called "rights" that you speak of. And just where do these imaginary rights come from? Can we do a scientific experiment to verify they exists? Can we somehow measure your imaginary "rights"? Since your religion teaches matter is the only reality, how do we give birth to a thought? What is an idea? Can you prove it exists?

Yes. The reality of thought is axiomatic; denying that thought exists is an application of the "stolen concept fallacy."

And as far as "rights" are concerned: if there are no rights at all, Spooner's assertion remains valid.

So then Ultimatereality, while we're playing with dopey rhetoric, what feature of "ultimate reality" is "actual reality" is missing that prevents "actual reality" from being the "ultimate reality"?