I`ve always admired the old-timers here for their endless patience and tenacity. No sooner do they explain an allegation away (and at some considerable length), than the fool factory sends a new generation here with the same idiotic claim. The mind-set of the invader isn`t to learn, but to defeat the evilutionist with impeccable logic. And with god`s backing, how can he/she fail? How is she/he to know the ammunition is flawed. After all it SOUNDS right. Even the title of our forum speaks of confrontation--evolution VERSUS creation. So they come here not to learn, but to slay the dragon. And when the plan comes apart, they predictably use the fall-back line--'You`ll go to hell'. Or variations of it.
Judo teaches us not to oppose force with force (although I wish a few Black Belts would remember that), but to use your opponent's strength against himself. Maybe, instead of resisting fundies with the full majesty of our righteous knowledge, we should agree with them, then suggest we improve their argument by making it impregnable by tidying up the weak points. On the journey, we can white-ant his/her beliefs until the penny drops. Or not, as the case may be. :D
I tried that with Percy and Nosy. Let em state their case, even agree with the correct points, and then ask the question which exposes the weak link and point of tension. But they only became confused and wished it away.
Depends whether you used Nagewaza or Katamewaza. Very subtle difference, not usually mastered by round-eyes. :-p
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein. Take comments to the Moderation Thread. AdminPD