JohnnyGtar
Well-known member
I don’t even care about reading memes.
You may find this informative if you choose to view it. Have a good night.
Atheist Debates - What if science is wrong?!
I don’t even care about reading memes.
He seems to love treading the line.
Might want to double check that.Debunked decades ago by carbon dating.
Yes they are. They really areScience never stated that vaccinations would eradicate Covid.
Fuck me running mate, are you that thick?
Truly, you are the definition of an idiot.
Do you know what “Burden of Proof” means?
Have you heard of this before?
I feel stupider everytime I interact with you 3 or 4 retards on this forum. And I don’t mean that as an insult, but in the true sense of the word.
I almost feel bad for getting stuck into you guys here, but you indicate evidence that you can think and reason objectively, which is why it’s bizarre to see such fucked up posts from you ones.
But I’ve gotta say, there’s a pattern emerging which shows you must have areas in your brain which are missing neural connections. Possibly an injury?
Either way, you’re actually cognitively undeveloped. I’ll ease up.
There are literally hundreds of articles from reputable outlets on the subject.Might want to double check that.
Why would a temporary physical death mean anything to the author of life, who can give and take freely as they please?
Your god is a cunt. Got it.Why would a temporary physical death mean anything to the author of life, who can give and take freely as they please?
Blessings and good morning Donnie.
You've acknowledged he exists. Step 1.Your god is a cunt. Got it.
@ccn delivering the comedy yet again ?
Man you wish. Life is far more boring than all of that rubbish.

You've acknowledged he exists. Step 1.
It's stating more about yourself when you discuss someone or something using very foul language. No doubt there is some hurt or offense tied to the way you are talking.Fictional characters can be, and often are, cunts.
it was retested. When it was saved from the fire in the 12th or 13th century, it was damaged and repaired. In 88 when it was tested-they tested a sample from the repair. New results are different than what was stated back then. New and improved tech as well. It was retested a few years ago with some pretty amazing results.There are literally hundreds of articles from reputable outlets on the subject.
https://www.livescience.com/63093-shroud-of-turin-is-fake-bloodstains.html
Link please. I’ll actually read it.it was retested. When it was saved from the fire in the 12th or 13th century, it was damaged and repaired. In 88 when it was tested-they tested a sample from the repair. New results are different than what was stated back then. New and improved tech as well. It was retested a few years ago with some pretty amazing results.
Where’s the line between very foul and regular foul? Who defines it?It's stating more about yourself when you discuss someone or something using very foul language. No doubt there is some hurt or offense tied to the way you are talking.