Replies

"No, as I said it before, it is simply stating that you are a liar. (furthermore, you are an idiot)"

Are you saying that if I stop for a little bit and then start up again, I have not really started up again? How would that be *recanting*? Even your hero Slick Willy wouldn't be dumb enough to think that. How come you do?

"Your posts are the evidence. Liar. Idiot."

In other words, you can't even begin to back up your claims. What a coward.

"Another of your lies."

Only in your dreams. :)

"Wow. Another bold-faced lie. I have not used Eliza to respond to you."

But you have broken any number of FR rules about posting etiquette. That makes you, not me, the liar.

"You have made an ironic group of statements. My observations about you are true."

Um, no. You are the one who attempted to scold me about breaking FR rules while breaking them as you said it. You are a hypocrite (or perhaps not intelligent enough to know.)

"I wouldn't know, since I have never attended your "meetings", though you are intimately familiar with them."

You are the the one who is the pathological liar, not me.

"Liar yourself. I told you about your stupid coaches long ago."

Um, no. You ridiculed my posts, but you had no idea I was using Eliza on one sentence a post. If I hadn't wanted you to know, you would have not figured out, even after years of posting. You simply aren't smart enough.

"Liar."

No. I fooled you, and you are too little to admit it.
I purposely put a grammatically messed up sentence for you to catch on. If I hadn't, a year or two from now when we are still posting on this thread (and we will be), you would still not know you had been had.

"I repeat, "I contend that Darwinism is also non-falsifiable.""

So I repeat, that goes against your claim that there is evidence against evolution that is being suppressed.

Without being supported by evidence one contention is no better than another. You act as if the fact that a contention doesn't have to be supported by evidence to be called a contention means that a contention doesn't need to be supported by evidence to be taken seriously.

Unfalsifiable claims cannot, by definition, have evidence that goes against them. Yet you claim that evolution is both unfalsifiable AND has evidence that goes against it (which is vigorously suppressed by a secret conspiracy of evolutionists). There is a deep logical contradiction in your position, and you are not man enough to admit it.

Are you saying that if I stop for a little bit and then start up again, I have not really started up again? How would that be *recanting*? Even your hero Slick Willy wouldn't be dumb enough to think that. How come you do?

I've answered you.

In other words, you can't even begin to back up your claims. What a coward.

I've answered you. You still remain a liar and an idiot.

But you have broken any number of FR rules about posting etiquette. That makes you, not me, the liar.

You still remain a liar and an idiot.

Um, no. You are the one who attempted to scold me about breaking FR rules while breaking them as you said it. You are a hypocrite (or perhaps not intelligent enough to know.)

You admitted your playing of games. Calling you what you are is not breaking the rules.

You are the the one who is the pathological liar, not me

Hiring back your 4-year old coach won't work.

Um, no. You ridiculed my posts, but you had no idea I was using Eliza on one sentence a post. If I hadn't wanted you to know, you would have not figured out, even after years of posting. You simply aren't smart enough.

"Liar."

No. I fooled you, and you are too little to admit it. I purposely put a grammatically messed up sentence for you to catch on. If I hadn't, a year or two from now when we are still posting on this thread (and we will be), you would still not know you had been had.

Sorry guy, you can't weasel out of your lies. You got caught. Despite your mewling, you didn't just turn yourself in.

I repeat, "I contend that Darwinism is also non-falsifiable."