Joined: July 2006
|Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 11 2007,07:14)|
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ April 11 2007,07:05)|
|Sal mutters: |
| Are the Darwinists afraid to debate us?|
Not at all, Sal, "Darwinists" debated "you" in Dover, in Ohio, in Kansas, and in Georgia. In COURT, where it really counted. Where "you" could present any evidence or witnesses that you wanted, where "you" could put all the "darwinists" in your big bad vise and ask them any hard tough questions you wanted.
"You" lost every time.
"You" shot your load. "You" lost. "You" have nothing new to add.
"You" aren't worth bothering with any more.
Not only that, but traditionally taking part in a debate *might* lead you to changing your mind about something (you know, learning something new and changing your position because of it, that kind of thing).
However Sal et al simply cannot change their mind about any part of their position ever. To do so would lead them to consider the rest of their "positions" also and they might find the basement is really full of sand. And shifting. Or they end up crazed (JAD?) with the cognative dissonance of it all!
These "debates" are not really debates at all, might as well call them book readings. The audience is only there to get their preexisting beliefs reconfirmed. Hardly "debate" is it?
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand