Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 164 (8125 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-29-2014 12:18 PM
89 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: AppleScratch
Post Volume:
Total: 735,006 Year: 20,847/28,606 Month: 1,344/2,774 Week: 227/238 Day: 21/38 Hour: 4/4

Internal Message Text
 
 
 
 
 
[qs]Quoting ID proponents to you even though they are every bit as learned in science as the evolutionists you admire, will not apparently move you one iota. Your verdict is through.[/qs]

Let's imagine that your stupid fantasies about me are right.

Let's suppose that quoting these learned scientists will not convince me in any way.

Heck, let's suppose it's raining naked women and candy sprinkles. Imagine what you please.

But I have challenged you to prove that these learned scientists who agree with your gibble-gabble <i>exist</i>. Name them. Cite them. Quote them.

In the magical fantasy world in your head, I won't believe what they're saying. This daydream must be a great consolation to you. But my challenge to you is to prove that they <i>exist</i>. They don't have to convince me. Probably they won't. If you quote a "learned scientist" saying that "all earth's creatures have 2 eyes", then of course I will <i>not</i> believe him, 'cos I know that this is bollocks.

But if you quoted a scientist saying that, then I <i>would</i> acknowledge that a scientist had said that.

But you can't quote a single scientist endorsing any of your stupid lies, can you?

You just believe, by faith, without proof, that somewhere out there there's some scientist who agrees with your stupid lies, although you can't name him or cite him or quote him.

It's fucking pathetic.

Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014