Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Bob is all tone, no substance.

That's because you can't offer any substantive rebuke to Rimbaud's arguments - or that of science, in general.

The key principle of science is falsifyability. That is, in order to show something it true, you also have to show exactly what you'd need to do to prove that it's not true. This is why your references to the religion of climate change or of evolution are hilarious - there is literally no way to prove God exists - no way to disprove it, either. There are lots of ways to prove evolution.

You claim the trolls are disrupting good discussion - but we haven't even had any good discussion because you can't offer any substance to your argument.

If the science conflicts with your faith, that's fine. But realize that science is based on logic and reason. Faith is not. Hence, it's funny you find this discussion "unreasonable."

You believe name-calling and mocking are good discussion. I don't. Fine, we disagree. Which is why I sometimes engage in these discussions via e-mail and other avenues, but rarely do I try here. But, you and Foxton and the rest of your ilk can pat yourselves on the back for shouting down anyone who questions something that is imminmently questionable. But, such is the state of public discourse in America. Nice job.

 

[blockski]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

You believe name-calling and mocking are good discussion. I don't. Fine, we disagree. Which is why I sometimes engage in these discussions via e-mail and other avenues, but rarely do I try here. But, you and Foxton and the rest of your ilk can pat yourselves on the back for shouting down anyone who questions something that is imminmently questionable. But, such is the state of public discourse in America. Nice job.

All I want is for you to explain why evolution is questionable, instead of merely asserting that it is.

Put this in criminal terms. You've made the accusation and you've brought charges. What's your evidence? How are you going to convinve the jury?

 

[Foxton]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

You believe name-calling and mocking are good discussion. I don't. Fine, we disagree. Which is why I sometimes engage in these discussions via e-mail and other avenues, but rarely do I try here. But, you and Foxton and the rest of your ilk can pat yourselves on the back for shouting down anyone who questions something that is imminmently questionable. But, such is the state of public discourse in America. Nice job.

If it was imminently questionable you would have came up with questions for things that haven't already been rebuked decades ago or weren't outright lies and misrepresentations. You didn't even defend your use of quote mining that was either taken out of context to change the meaning entirely or was entirely made up.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

All I want is for you to explain why evolution is questionable, instead of merely asserting that it is.

Put this in criminal terms. You've made the accusation and you've brought charges. What's your evidence? How are you going to convinve the jury?

You and others couldn't even grasp that it is a question that could be asked. Why on earth would I bother trying to discuss a subject with people whose minds are already closed to the possibilty of discussion, and who in many cases openly insult and mock me. Get real.