“Could that not be construed as being a disruptor?”
No, it cannot. However, persisting in demanding an answer when one has been given on another thread, reposted here by you, and then explained to you by yet another poster can be construed as stalking. Surely you can see the difference.
As long as we’re rehashing history, here are a few more posts from that thread over which you’re apparently losing sleep:
You to me:
I’m making no contention at all, you made a statement and I asked, “how so?”
I’m not trying to twist an arm, I just want to know what your thinking is on the matter that produced the statement.
And I’m not asking for some complicated answer, just
“how so”.
Me to you:
Then I find your question disingenuous. If you are making no such contention, then there is no inconsistency.
I think my characterization of disingenuity is apt, and your persistence here confirms that.
I disagree. But I'll tell you what, you stop showing up on every (o.k., almost every) thread about creation and the Bible with the slogan, ‘Christanity and evolution is perfectly compatible’, and I'll stop asking how so.
Now what could be more reasonable than that?