Replies

I can understand remaining anonymous. But if you're going to criticize someone for hiding behind a pseudonym: 1) you should not be doing so, yourself, 2) the other person should be doing so, himself.

The contradictions in that person's position on the anonymity issue are quite apparent. Not the first time he's been inconsistent (or wildly elliptical), I might add:

Of course he was a creationist. If he was a Christian he believed in a Creator.
There are no creationists. [but see above]
You [PatrickHenry] have been suspended several times.
The-Earth-is-old-and-Henry-Morris-is-right.
Wildly elliptical.
1⁷²⁰.
Nobel Prize for biology.
All discoveries disprove evolution.
DNA disproves evolution.
The fossil record disproves evolution.
Nobel Prize for creationism.
Genetic variation has nothing to do with evolution.

I got tired of all the dodges, the persisent amnesia for every previous thread, and having his slop bucket dumped over my head whenever he's cornered and having an attack of Holy Warrior Syndrome, that feeling of cognitive dissonance that says,

"He wouldn't let me down, so why is this happening? There's some reason I'm not wrong, but I need to cover with some kind of distracting barrage while I figure out what it is."

I try to swear off answering him but sometimes I just have to whack him with the ol' 2 x 4.