if in magic men in the sky it will also. 😉
Reply addressees: @OakOdyssey @judicialist
Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology
-
if in magic men in the sky it will also. 😉
-
if in magic men in the sky it will also. 😉
if in magic men in the sky it will also. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-14 03:30:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282880226658258952
Reply addressees: @OakOdyssey @judicialist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282869564519469063
-
Again, the way to show Abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism,denialism)
Again, the way to show Abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism,denialism) is to return to the central argument and demonstrate they fear it: falsify reciprocity as an immutable law of logic and nature.
(All that is required is sufficient force to make conflict intolerable)
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420 -
Again, the way to show Abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism,denialism)
Again, the way to show Abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism,denialism) is to return to the central argument and demonstrate they fear it: falsify reciprocity as an immutable law of logic and nature.
(All that is required is sufficient force to make conflict intolerable)
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-12 22:11:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282437378083368960
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282436937534627841
-
Again, the way to show abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism, denialism)
Again, the way to show abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism, denialism) is to return to the central argument and demonstrate they fear it: falsify reciprocity as an immutable law of logic and nature.
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420 -
Again, the way to show abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism, denialism)
Again, the way to show abrahamists (theology, pseudoscience, sophism, denialism) is to return to the central argument and demonstrate they fear it: falsify reciprocity as an immutable law of logic and nature.
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-12 22:09:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282436977556586496
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282436673658392577
-
I don’t do religion. I science, testimony, law. The reason you don’t answer is t
I don’t do religion. I science, testimony, law. The reason you don’t answer is that if you even try it will falsify your frame.
AFAIK I am the current specialist the Abrahamic (theology), Marxist (pseudoscience), postmodern (Sophistry), technique of lying by false promise.
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420 -
I don’t do religion. I science, testimony, law. The reason you don’t answer is t
I don’t do religion. I science, testimony, law. The reason you don’t answer is that if you even try it will falsify your frame.
AFAIK I am the current specialist the Abrahamic (theology), Marxist (pseudoscience), postmodern (Sophistry), technique of lying by false promise.
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-12 22:06:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282436298825969665
Reply addressees: @SARMseller420
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1282435102404947970
-
well we were only apart on method anyway but i finished that part of my work. mo
well we were only apart on method anyway but i finished that part of my work. moved on to religion. Thats done. But not a new religion. Which is where i thought Imperious would get to.
Reply addressees: @_Indirection -
well we were only apart on method anyway but i finished that part of my work. mo
well we were only apart on method anyway but i finished that part of my work. moved on to religion. Thats done. But not a new religion. Which is where i thought Imperious would get to.
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-11 04:43:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281811211475197953
Reply addressees: @_Indirection
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281810197376380928