On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:54:58 -0500, John Drayton wrote
(in message <ce43f6e.0402161457.66921c11@posting.google.com>):
> bitbucket55@hotmail.com (John Drayton) wrote in message
> news:<ce43f6e.0402160338.5397d8e4@posting.google.com>...
>> Patrick James <patjames@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>> news:<0001HW.BC55668A007AE939F02845B0@enews.newsguy.com>...
>>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 16:12:10 -0500, AC wrote
>>> (in message <slrnc2voad.1b0.mightymartianca@namibia.tandem>):
>
> <snip>
>
>> I read his little story about the Russian translator as
>> an admission that he thinks the "lieing for God" that
>> Phillip Johnson indulges in is acceptable because it
>> counters the even greater "lie" of evolution.
>>
>> I could be wrong, but I can see no other purpose or point
>> to the story otherwise.
>>
>> He could just come out and and say where he stands:
>> whether he thinks it is acceptable for a creationist to
>> lie if the lie is in the service of discrediting evolution.
>>
>> I suspect he's too slippery and slimy to actually confirm
>> or deny this, though.
>
> I take this back, and quote from Davey himself:
>
> Me:
> > Is it OK to selectively quote from people to make them appear
> > to support a position that the in fact do not support?
> >
> Uncle Davey:
> Yes, because anyone who reads the authors for themselves can
> soon see whether they support it or not.
>
> The whole message is here: http://tinyurl.com/2duvw
>
> Unlike Jason, he's at least been honest about *this*
Like I said: he _knows_ that he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
--
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
|