[nicmarlo]

But you don't get it. From the outset, my post #112, in answer to a direct question addressed to me, personally, at post #105, and though repeated in numerous posts in various ways, should have sufficed the normal person to see that I am not, and never was, interested in stating my specific beliefs concerning evolution or "debating" it, or "proving" it or addressing anything else as pertains to my thoughts concerning evolution/theory/ideas/opinions on these threads, regardless of whether or not you or anyone else agree with my reasoning not to do so....and that you still "don't get."

[highball]

I'm not talking about your opinions or beliefs. I'm talking about this statement that you made in post #252:

Your opinions are that the HUNDREDS of names/links to various scientists' dissenting opinions and studies, posted on FR on what must be thousands of posts and on a multitude of threads, which put forth dissenting theories/opinions/arguments/conclusions than the ones your and those in your "ping list/group" (i.e., FR evolutionarians) hold, are NOT CREDIBLE.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1525629/posts?page=252#252

I'm asking you to defend the statement that there are HUNDREDS of links to various dissenting opinions and studies that do not rely on either creationism or other forms of pseudoscience.

You have consistently refused to provide any evidence whatsoever to support this assertion.

Make snarky remarks all you like, my friend. Won't change the fact that you have been revealed.