[andysandmikesmom]

Good grief, what in the heck is your problem...I was civilly discussing something with someone else, and your blurt in with a lot of blathering...you need to calm down...

Where did I say that because of an argument over dogma or theology within different particular religions, that none of the Bible is true?...please point that out...oh, you cant...thought so...

What I said, was that different people of different faiths have different interpretations of the Bible...where in the world does that come down to saying that none of the Bible is true...are you projecting, that because someone may not believe your particular interpretation of the Bible, that somehow they cannot believe in any of the Bible...that is one lousy, illogical argument....

You have a problem understand what someone says, and you also have a problem, with twisting what they say,to suit your own purpose...thats just sad...

[CarolinaGuitarman]

I think he's losing it. Best to ignore the train wreck.

[bvw]

Literary context and subtext: where Darwinists get lost. You read what I wrote to be about you directly. It was not about you, sorry ma'am. It was a play off of your laments and complaints to get to the nexus, the Father of Darwinism. Charles the Foist.

Forgive me for forgeting my own robust theory, BVW's Law: Darwinists have great difficulty reading subtle context and subtext in literary text and in human interaction.