Change in Moderation?

Schraf,Sy is an absolute peach, he is creationistic ignorance in a microcosm, & then adds some more for effect.Only a creationist could ask for support for an argument, which Quetzal & Mammuthus supplied in abundance, & then accuse them of lawyering & trickery by producing "paperwork". Known to the the rest of us as "relevant reading material", by the way. And the fact he partially reads material & then claims to get intended meanings in context when clearly the author is saying exactly the opposite. That's just a sophisticated (I use the word advisedly) misquote that we're all familiar with from creationists.But since I'm on a thread about moderation, I do believe a little too much slack has been given to Syamsu "I've-said-it-so-it-must-be-true". And I say that admitting I've probably got away with more than I should of on occasions (frustration gets the better of me, sadly).Mark

---

"Physical Reality of Matchette’s EVOLUTIONARY zero-atom-unit in a transcendental c/e illusion" - Brad McFall

Syamsu, Yeah, but I've read him & you haven't. Who do you think has the most authoritative argument? Who is most likely to be misrepresenting?I post to you for the comedy value, Syamsu, nothing more.Mark