Rate this post:
|Treating subjects in an orderly fashion makes everything clearer.
That's OUR interest. Creationists try to make every subject as obscure as they can.
Since they don't like for things to get clarified, obfuscation suits them better.
Lester will mention his beloved "limits to variation" just about anywhere, except in the thread i started about it.
He'll stay as far away as he can from the thread "Definitions". It's like holy water for a demon (if water could be holy and demons existed, of course).
The Debater will try to bend the thread about "gaps in the fossil record" towards "gaps in the ToE".
I bet that, from now on, Lester will talk about "information" anywhere, except in the thread i started about it (where i wasn't fooled by his goalpost shifts and red herrings).
This thread doesn't address any particular subject regarding the ToE. This is the kind of post Lester gets more tempted to reply to. He's dying to write "I'm afraid that the obfuscation is all yours, wisp. I'm your reflection. Lalalala!". As little real content as he can.
Let's prompt creationists to start threads about every claim they toss.
They wouldn't toss them if they also had to support them.
This is the best way to make them face their delusions.
|Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread |
Scientists assert (by Lester):
Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?