Translation: "Their answers weren't the same as mine."
I hope the lurkers were able to understand the weaknesses of the materialist's presuppositions.
Translation: "I'm afraid people might think the opposition had some good points, so I'd better 'remind' you that I creamed them, really I did."
I also hope they were able to see just how this bunch of darwinists deal with tough questions-- name calling, subject changing and personal insults.
Translation: "Pay no attention to the places I accused them of being 'hypocritical', 'dishonest', 'biased', 'unscientific', 'illogical', 'manifest paranoia', 'superstitious', 'impervious to reason', 'no training in logic whatsoever', 'absurd', 'sophomoric', 'intellectually cowardly'... *They're* the ones who namecall and insult, really, surely you can see that!"
And speaking of changing the subject, I'd have to give the prize on this thread to the guy who decided to debate biological evolution by (the envelope please), WONDERING WHERE MATTER CAME FROM! Let's give a big hand to Dataman for his 14-billion-year change of subject -- he couldn't *possibly* get any farther away from evolution, timewise. That's gotta be some sort of record.
With that, I'm done waiting for an answer that will never come.
Translation: "I'm not dazzling them with my obvious brilliance, time to make my exit."
I see you have to translate me so the rest of the evos can understand. So much for "think for yourself."
You may be interested to know that a personal insult is exactly that, personal. Calling an argument lame is not a personal insult. Claiming that darwinists have difficulty with logic is not a personal insult.
Phaedrus, thanks for following this one. Did he answer the question?