Winning and Losing in the Debates

Curiously, I have been giving the issue of Winning and Losing in the Debates some thoughts recently.A recent post by edge on the The TRVE history of the Flood... thread impels me to start a thread on itIt seems to me that when someone acknowledges that they were wrong, that we have a winner -- not the person who corrected them, but the person who acknowledges their error wins.Losers are those who never admit nor recognize their errors.Most of us don't keep score ... or need to.Thoughts?EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

Agreed, a lack of evidence does not invalidate an hypotheses, however one must also remain skeptical when there is an absence of validating evidence.The rational conclusion is that we don't know and should wait for evidence.What does enter the fray in this situation is personal experience -- if I see something in the woods that nobody else has seen or sees, my personal experience leaves me with a greater inclination to believe what I experienced than not. You are doing well, your trials with recovery from your gambling addiction are giving you greater strength to continue, and I see personal growth occurring as well. I think you will win this battle. EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .Edited by RAZD, : .