They never came on FR because YOU BACKED OUT OF THE DEBATE.
Just admit you pussed-out and be done with this silly exercise. The more you try to deny the obvious, and the more you falsely accuse me of being a liar, the more I am going to rub your face in the HARD EVIDENCE that you turned-tail and ran.
Moreover my last response, both in January and then again in June when your baseless accusation resurfaced, was ‘present the data and I will engage it’; showing a perfect willingness to debate DATA not CONSPIRACY.
So what exactly did you tell Dr. Duesburg after his confused little e-mail to you about not knowing what FR was?
Did you say.......”he said he wanted to debate data and wasn't interested in debating someone who was going to say all scientific evidence he sourced was the result of fraud.”...possibly?
And then Dr. Duesburg said what?....”Well if he denies that it is a conspiracy there is no reason for ME to debate him”???????
How exactly did that one go down. I am interested! Did Dr. Duesburg follow the line that you are apparently following that because I said I am not interested in debating a conspiracy theorist that this meant I was not interested in debating Dr. Duesburg? Thus making Dr. Duesburg nothing more than a conspiracy theorist.
I know you have problems with logic so let me lay it out for you.
A) I say I WILL debate, but am not interested in debating a conspiracy theorist.
B) You conclude I am backing out of the debate because in your consideration Dr. Duesburg is a conspiracy theorist and “it is fraud” is the only tactic he will employ during the “debate”.