I like your scientific approach to your opposition. It's what makes you stand out.
Thank you.
If you followed the link to Fox News, you'd see who wrote the material. Are you accusing Bill of being on meth?
No, please work on your reading comprehension -- I'm accusing *you* of being delusional for *your* linkage of O'Reilly's point with (*gasp*) the defense of evolutionary biology (and other sciences). That was all *your* fantasy, O'Reilly made no such connection, most likely because he's *not* a paranoid maniac on the topic of evolution, unlike some people I could name.
Are we clear now, son?
You're too easy...
Clearly, you're a legend in your own mind.
which is another reason your "debate" with Johnson doesn't ring true.
Let me get this straight -- you think it's somehow wildly beyond credibility that when Phillip Johnson dropped into talk.origins a few times in the early 1990's (established fact) when I was posting there during the same period (also an easily established fact), I managed to exchange posts with him on the subject of the newsgroup?
I repeat -- step *away* from the drugs, and attempt to *think* before you post, lest you continue to make a fool of yourself.
Now it's devolved from a debate to an "exchange of posts." Ok. I can imagine you possibly submitting a question but I can't really imagine Johnson responding unless-- once upon a time-- you were civil (and that does take some imagination).