Richard Crawford wrote:
> Uncle Davey wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Uncle Davey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>news:slrnc3cb6r.1hg.mightymartianca@namibia.tandem...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:10:36 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>Victor Eijkhout <see.sig@for.addy> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>news:1g9fnp3.dp73mj12lpsucN%see.sig@for.addy...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Uncle Davey <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>In my opinion, a Biblical kind is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What do you mean "in your opinion"? Shouldn't this sentence start "It
>>>>
>>>>is
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>one of the basic results of creation science that a biblical kind is
>>>>>>>>.." ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I mean, this question has come up before, why don't you guys have a
>>>>
>>>>nice
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>consensus answer by now?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>V.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Vic, for all I know there is one, and I just don't know about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm a freethinker, anyway, so consensus answers don't interest me
>>
>>much.
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Uncle Davey
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're not concerned with science, in other words.
>>>>>
>>>>>Only when he thinks he can bullshit the faithful with pseudo-science.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Was that nice?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Was it nice to flood us with sockpuppets, post sexual crudeness under
>>>your "Constance" avatar, and forge emails from Bible Bob?
>>
>>
>>No, that's why I said sorry and stopped.
>>
>>4 weeks of that seem to have given you 7 weeks of mileage.
>>
>>Is that altogether in proportion?
>>
>>Uncle Davey
>>
>>
>
>
> I tend to side with UD on this one. If he has stopped the behavior and
> apologized for his error there really is no need to keep bringing it
> back as it only distracts from the real discussion (and leads
> dangerously close to ad hominem argumentation).
>
Bullshit. He demonstrated himself, right in front of everyone, to be a
dishonest liar. If he wants to keep presenting himself here as a
paragon of godliness and holiness, then I will keep pointing out to
everyone that he is a demonstrated and unmistakable dishonest liar --
i.e., he is a hypocrite who lies for the Lord.
All of his religious ramblings boil down to one thing: "trust me". And
he has demonstrated conclusively that he is not worthy of trust.
If he doesn't like that, he has only himself to blame.
===============================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked:
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
DebunkCreation Email list:
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/DebunkCreation
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
|
| 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 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 |
|