With all due respect, Enchante, you lie. You are right about one thing. Your words ARE reasonably clear;
(though I continue to affirm that I just don’t follow it all closely enough to reach any firm conclusion).
I say there is not sufficient reason(s) to believe Q is what he is claimed to be.
You may have said that, but you also said the above, which in and of itself as a stand-alone statement, disqualifies you from speaking on the topic with any authority. I repeat: You are debunked.
You really need a course in basic logic and reasoning.
Well, somebody does anyway.
I am just one-offing very casual thoughts and impressions.
One-offing,eh? Well, now know that your one-offing very casual thoughts are wind and not to be considered by serious scholars or lesser Oracles.
If I ever decide to go into some serious debunking of this crap you will truly never recover. ha ha...
Scary.
:)
You continue to lie. Or are you really illiterate?
(1) no sufficient reason(s) to accept that Q is what is claimed.
(2) that does not mean we know ***what Q really is***
Those two statements are perfectly compatible.
The fact that you cannot seem to grasp that (or wilfully ignore it) means that you are either incompetent or lying.