Before I get to your post I'd like to respond to something you posted a few messages further on in Message 169
Faith in Message 169 writes:
Phat, you should close this thread too. And suspend me indefinitely please. I can't take this place any more and I don't want to keep being tempted to respond.
About asking Phat to close the thread, that's not your call, nor anyone's at present because no one is moderating the thread. Phat is a participant.
About suspending you indefinitely, forum policy is "warn, then act." Phat, Modulous and myself are participants and would have to recuse ourselves for a couple days before we could announce that we're changing to a moderator status. Adminnemooseus or AdminNosy could moderate the thread if they so choose.
That said, it is apparent, to everyone including yourself, that you've again lost your self control and are attempting an analog to "suicide by cop." I don't see why forum moderation should oblige. It does remind me of an old joke: "A masochist says to a sadist, "Beat me!" The sadist replies, 'No.'" Anyway, I expect you'll recover your self control at some point, and in the meantime it isn't like your current misbehavior is something we're unfamiliar with.
Responding now to the current message:
You're accusing me of being a liar as usual. Some Admin.
I think this must be your own guilt talking, because I didn't call you liar. I did say that you'd made a silly mistake.
You can't rebut the objection to the historical sciences because it is true that they cannot be tested and proved the way the hard sciences can. Rebut away, you're just blowing hot air.
Well, you didn't respond to anything I said, you simply repeated your familiar errors, and this isn't the topic anyway, so moving on...
You, like everybody else here, don't know what giving the benefit of the doubt even means. Once you know what an ideology teaches what benefit of the doubt can there be? It teaches what it teaches.
So in other words I was right, you're not extending Muslims and Catholics the benefit of the doubt, because you already know what those ideologies teach.
Just another Liberal Nazi. And here's an attempt at a definition of that: someone who accuses someone else of some kind of personal immorality instead of dealing with facts. All the Politically Correct smears. That's SOP at EvC. And especially someone who won't understand what this means.
I just wonder if it should be Liberal Nazi or Nazi Liberal or Leftist Nazi or Nazi Leftist. Decisions decisions.
That's right, get it all out of your system.
You didn't comment on the on-topic portion of my post, so I'll just repeat what I said before. YEC subordination of science to the Bible is a path of ignorance and denial that guarantees YEC will not decline. You're providing an excellent example right here in this thread. You're ignoring the topic (and in fact drawing attention away from it with your distracting behavior), threatening to ignore some participants, denying facts, and are still largely ignorant of evolution and geology, and probably huge swatches of the rest of science, too.
Edited by Percy, : Improve a word.