Randman
Message 23I certainly did, and quite a few others have as well. There is a botany professor at NC State and quite a few other scientists who have looked at the evidence, and found evolutionism to be wanting.
CK - asks for name and papers submitted making the claims (and mentions one of his seeming pet peeves - the difference between the title professor in the states and UK)
Message 27Do you mean REAL professor or american "anyone who works in the place has a title of professor" professor*?
Can give us the name of this prof or the name of the papers he has submitted making those claims?
CK questions where issue was discussed
Message 55I don't see which of those 3 papers addresses the issue you have raised - can you identify it for us?
several posts by CK not replied to by randman...
CK
Message 70Have you got the papers yet?
certainly did, and quite a few others have as well. There is a botany professor at NC State and quite a few other scientists who have looked at the evidence, and found evolutionism to be wanting.
Support or retract
Randman paraphrases what was asked for and makes another assertion concerning the OP
Message 75Yawn. I said there was a botany professor that was a creationist, and you asked for his name, and I provided it.
...
Heck, you might as well have asked some Jews to join the SS back in the 30s in hopes they could make their case there.
CK states his opposition to the paraphrase
Message 76No you went further than than - you said:
i certainly did, and quite a few others have as well. There is a botany professor at NC State and quite a few other scientists who have looked at the evidence, and found evolutionism to be wanting.
Why lie - when it's plain to see for all?
I have quite reasonable asked to see the evidence, your reply is the following drivel: (randman's Jews and SS comment)
This exchange spirals downward from here.
Msg 80, Randman states he has sat through a presentation of evidence by this professor.
Msg 83, CK offers 100 pounds for someone to show the evidence in the prior post - states hearsay is not evidence
IMO Charles did NOT say randman was lying about seeing this teacher's presentation and the offer of 100 pounds was not for evidence that rand had seen it.
Charles said rand was lying concerning the paraphrase listed in msgs 75 and 76. The offer of 100 pounds was to anyone who could find evidence of what this professor presented (asked for in msg 76)
Rand responded with the claim that he had seen the presentation.
ARGH...this is ridiculous....Randman is suspended for 24 hours for seemingly deliberately misrepresenting what was said and CK suspended for 24 hours for the RANDMAN IS A LYING BULLSHITTER title
This thread closed for the same period of time. Please take any problems with this action to the appropriate thread in my signature box.
AbE - reopened thread due to comment here
Message 160
This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 07-30-2005 05:01 PM
AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com
™ Version 4.2
