<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for D. Wiggs&#039; Garage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com</link>
	<description>My cars, reviews, and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 09:09:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by D.Wiggs</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-5465</link>
		<dc:creator>D.Wiggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 09:09:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-5465</guid>
		<description>Yes, an atheist can; however, one needn&#039;t worry about doing so since imaginary people pose no threat. It&#039;s the same reason no one gets insurance against robotic unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, an atheist can; however, one needn&#8217;t worry about doing so since imaginary people pose no threat. It&#8217;s the same reason no one gets insurance against robotic unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by Scott Klabunde</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-5422</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Klabunde</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-5422</guid>
		<description>CAN AN ATHEIST GET INSURANCE AGAINST ACTS OF GOD?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CAN AN ATHEIST GET INSURANCE AGAINST ACTS OF GOD?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by D.Wiggs</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-244</link>
		<dc:creator>D.Wiggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-244</guid>
		<description>Now that&#039;s a question!

Religious people make the very common mistake of thinking that a &#039;supreme being&#039; (viz., god) is needed in order to explain something from nothing (i.e., how the first particle came from nothing).  First off, we can ALWAYS rule god out as an explanation of ANYTHING.  I will re-state this:  GOD IS NEVER AN EXPLANATION OF ANYTHING.  It doesn&#039;t matter what it is, god NEVER explains it.  Why?  Because god is an infinitely COMPLEX being.  This means that to invoke god as an explanation is to do the OPPOSITE of explain anything.  In order to explain something, you must describe X in simpler terms.  God is ALWAYS more complex than ANYTHING you are trying to explain (by virtue of him being infinitely complex) therefore making it impossible to explain anything in terms of god.  The simplest EXPLANATION of anything is to explain something in terms of nothing.  the only thing simpler than one particle is zero.  The CERN is attempting to prove this very theory and we should soon know how to get &#039;something from nothing&#039;.

Next, if you needed an &#039;uncreated creator&#039;, there is NO reason to think such a creator is god.  The creator need NOT be omnipotent, only sufficiently powerful; it need NOT be omniscient, only sufficiently knowlegable; it need NOT be omnibenevolent, in fact, it could be PERFECTLY EVIL.  This means that the &#039;creator&#039; argument does nothing for thinking god exists, and actually makes it MORE likely that he doesn&#039;t.  Lastly, there is NO reason for thinking there was only ONE creator.  Whose to say that there aren&#039;t hundreds, millions, or trillions of uncreated creators.  If you are willing to make the &#039;jump&#039; to one, there is no reason to deny the existence of many.

Hope this helps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now that&#8217;s a question!</p>
<p>Religious people make the very common mistake of thinking that a &#8216;supreme being&#8217; (viz., god) is needed in order to explain something from nothing (i.e., how the first particle came from nothing).  First off, we can ALWAYS rule god out as an explanation of ANYTHING.  I will re-state this:  GOD IS NEVER AN EXPLANATION OF ANYTHING.  It doesn&#8217;t matter what it is, god NEVER explains it.  Why?  Because god is an infinitely COMPLEX being.  This means that to invoke god as an explanation is to do the OPPOSITE of explain anything.  In order to explain something, you must describe X in simpler terms.  God is ALWAYS more complex than ANYTHING you are trying to explain (by virtue of him being infinitely complex) therefore making it impossible to explain anything in terms of god.  The simplest EXPLANATION of anything is to explain something in terms of nothing.  the only thing simpler than one particle is zero.  The CERN is attempting to prove this very theory and we should soon know how to get &#8216;something from nothing&#8217;.</p>
<p>Next, if you needed an &#8216;uncreated creator&#8217;, there is NO reason to think such a creator is god.  The creator need NOT be omnipotent, only sufficiently powerful; it need NOT be omniscient, only sufficiently knowlegable; it need NOT be omnibenevolent, in fact, it could be PERFECTLY EVIL.  This means that the &#8216;creator&#8217; argument does nothing for thinking god exists, and actually makes it MORE likely that he doesn&#8217;t.  Lastly, there is NO reason for thinking there was only ONE creator.  Whose to say that there aren&#8217;t hundreds, millions, or trillions of uncreated creators.  If you are willing to make the &#8216;jump&#8217; to one, there is no reason to deny the existence of many.</p>
<p>Hope this helps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by CumminsCowboy</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-243</link>
		<dc:creator>CumminsCowboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 19:48:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-243</guid>
		<description>Well, I understand the basics of evolution.  And no I have never studied in great depth about it, because I really don&#039;t care about how we have evolved.  But I do agree with the basic concepts that we do adapt to environmental changes.  My specific question is how the very first atom came into existence without a supreme being creating that one particle.  If the big bang theory created our world, where did the matter come from in that explosion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I understand the basics of evolution.  And no I have never studied in great depth about it, because I really don&#8217;t care about how we have evolved.  But I do agree with the basic concepts that we do adapt to environmental changes.  My specific question is how the very first atom came into existence without a supreme being creating that one particle.  If the big bang theory created our world, where did the matter come from in that explosion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by D.Wiggs</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-242</link>
		<dc:creator>D.Wiggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 19:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-242</guid>
		<description>You seem to confuse disagreeing with defensiveness.  You also confuse annoyance with hypocracy with defensiveness.  This is the problem with religious people.  They are either unable or unwilling to argue their point of view mainly because you can&#039;t argue from falsehoods.

I cannot give you my thoughts on the beginning of time because I have no idea on what you want my thoughts.  I need more specifics.  It&#039;s like asking my thoughts on air; I need a specific question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You seem to confuse disagreeing with defensiveness.  You also confuse annoyance with hypocracy with defensiveness.  This is the problem with religious people.  They are either unable or unwilling to argue their point of view mainly because you can&#8217;t argue from falsehoods.</p>
<p>I cannot give you my thoughts on the beginning of time because I have no idea on what you want my thoughts.  I need more specifics.  It&#8217;s like asking my thoughts on air; I need a specific question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by CumminsCowboy</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-239</link>
		<dc:creator>CumminsCowboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 13:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-239</guid>
		<description>D.Wiggs, are you sure that you don&#039;t have a fifth point to make about my last comment?  It seems you get pretty defensive when someone questions your knowledge or competence.  I am not going to argue on any points that I may have, because that will get us no where.  You seem to be very well versed and educated in philosophy, so I would like to know what you think about the beginning of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>D.Wiggs, are you sure that you don&#8217;t have a fifth point to make about my last comment?  It seems you get pretty defensive when someone questions your knowledge or competence.  I am not going to argue on any points that I may have, because that will get us no where.  You seem to be very well versed and educated in philosophy, so I would like to know what you think about the beginning of time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by D.Wiggs</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>D.Wiggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-227</guid>
		<description>You are correct about the truth that everyone dies, yes.  The reason why WHAT we THINK we know is important is because it dictates how we live our lives and how it influences everyone on the planet.

Now, you might want to do a little more research before posting on things you are obviously ignorant about.  First, the Christian god is NOT Yahweh, that is the JEWISH god from the Old Testament.  Next, the Christian god is NOT compatible with Free Will.  No matter how much you may want it to be, it simply isn&#039;t.

The LAST argument you want to make is to say that any god is outside of time (i.e., atemporal).  This makes ABSOLUTELY SURE that you CANNOT have free will of any sort for if god is atemporal and sees everything simultaneously, then god has 100% control over everything that happens.  Given that god can make whatever he wants to happen occur, and given the fact that god, controlled by his 3-O qualities, must make the best world possible, god is automatically responsible for ANY and ALL evil that HAS occurred or will EVER occur throughout &#039;time&#039;.  This is completely incompatible with god being omnibenevolent meaning that god doesn&#039;t exist.  No competent theist would ever argue that god is atemporal; it&#039;s just plain stupid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are correct about the truth that everyone dies, yes.  The reason why WHAT we THINK we know is important is because it dictates how we live our lives and how it influences everyone on the planet.</p>
<p>Now, you might want to do a little more research before posting on things you are obviously ignorant about.  First, the Christian god is NOT Yahweh, that is the JEWISH god from the Old Testament.  Next, the Christian god is NOT compatible with Free Will.  No matter how much you may want it to be, it simply isn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>The LAST argument you want to make is to say that any god is outside of time (i.e., atemporal).  This makes ABSOLUTELY SURE that you CANNOT have free will of any sort for if god is atemporal and sees everything simultaneously, then god has 100% control over everything that happens.  Given that god can make whatever he wants to happen occur, and given the fact that god, controlled by his 3-O qualities, must make the best world possible, god is automatically responsible for ANY and ALL evil that HAS occurred or will EVER occur throughout &#8216;time&#8217;.  This is completely incompatible with god being omnibenevolent meaning that god doesn&#8217;t exist.  No competent theist would ever argue that god is atemporal; it&#8217;s just plain stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by D.Wiggs</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-226</link>
		<dc:creator>D.Wiggs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-226</guid>
		<description>First of all, you mean SPELLING not grammar.  Second, you mean GRAMMAR not &quot;grammer&quot;.  Third, you mean D.Wiggs not &quot;Dwiggs&quot;.  Fourth, you should check YOUR spelling before criticizing someone else&#039;s.

Now, on to what you &#039;pointed out&#039; in my post.  I made a typo, so what?  Whether or not I spell everything correctly when I am typing something out quickly has no bearing on the point the post is making.  To criticize a belief, I need NOT use perfect spelling; I need use perfect LOGIC.

I see the side of the fence on which you sit! LOL!

I suggest starting at 3rd grade and going from there.  Good luck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, you mean SPELLING not grammar.  Second, you mean GRAMMAR not &#8220;grammer&#8221;.  Third, you mean D.Wiggs not &#8220;Dwiggs&#8221;.  Fourth, you should check YOUR spelling before criticizing someone else&#8217;s.</p>
<p>Now, on to what you &#8216;pointed out&#8217; in my post.  I made a typo, so what?  Whether or not I spell everything correctly when I am typing something out quickly has no bearing on the point the post is making.  To criticize a belief, I need NOT use perfect spelling; I need use perfect LOGIC.</p>
<p>I see the side of the fence on which you sit! LOL!</p>
<p>I suggest starting at 3rd grade and going from there.  Good luck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by CumminsCowboy</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-224</link>
		<dc:creator>CumminsCowboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-224</guid>
		<description>Dwiggs, you should work on your own grammer before criticizing others. For example your &quot;Please Pray For&quot; post contains &quot;More importantly, why would such a person think that they no better than god!&quot;  I am pretty sure that is meant to be &quot;know&quot; and not &quot;no&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dwiggs, you should work on your own grammer before criticizing others. For example your &#8220;Please Pray For&#8221; post contains &#8220;More importantly, why would such a person think that they no better than god!&#8221;  I am pretty sure that is meant to be &#8220;know&#8221; and not &#8220;no&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This I Believe by Mad fat chick killer</title>
		<link>http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/this-i-believe/comment-page-1/#comment-197</link>
		<dc:creator>Mad fat chick killer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dwiggsgarage.com/?p=286#comment-197</guid>
		<description>Yo.
What does it matter what we think we know?  In the end, there is no denying the truth.
The truth is that we will all die.  

As for the argument that belief in God and free-will is incompatible, you do not understand the fact that the Christian God, Yahweh, is outside of time.  When you exist outside of time, you have quite a different perspective on things.  You see the beginning from the end.  You can see all the choices people make before they make them.  Therefore, a person can do whatever he or she wants, while Almighty Jah looks on from eternity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yo.<br />
What does it matter what we think we know?  In the end, there is no denying the truth.<br />
The truth is that we will all die.  </p>
<p>As for the argument that belief in God and free-will is incompatible, you do not understand the fact that the Christian God, Yahweh, is outside of time.  When you exist outside of time, you have quite a different perspective on things.  You see the beginning from the end.  You can see all the choices people make before they make them.  Therefore, a person can do whatever he or she wants, while Almighty Jah looks on from eternity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

