Replies

[You left out all the lies and the false-science promoted by the anti-evolutionists.]

That's a pretty sweeping statement, WildTurkey.

So was RobRoy's.

Could you help me narrow it down a little bit? Just give me an example or two, and I'll go chase it (them) down. Then we can compare notes. If there's evil to be found there, why, we can just root it out together.

The same has been asked in response to RobRoy -- and it seems a very proper request, in my opinion -- yet he has been evasive and people have jumped to his defense about his being evasive.

So I have a couple of questions:

1. Would you give WildTurkey an equal amount of leeway for making a "pretty sweeping statement" then declining either support or retract it?

2. Do you feel that anyone making a "pretty sweeping statement" like that, alleging significant amounts of deception in a public institution, should support it instead of being a "hit-and-run" accuser? Are "hit-and-run" accusations on a public forum even ethical?

3. Do you feel that being a member of FreeRepublic for a certain period earns the member a license to make such unsupported allegations?

Are "hit-and-run" accusations on a public forum even ethical?.... Do you feel that being a member of FreeRepublic for a certain period earns the member a license to make such unsupported allegations?

Answers: No and No. But I do not see how these questions pertain to the case at hand....

...just to answer two points you raise for now, Ichneumenon. I'll have to look at the rest tomorrow, for now it's time for me to go to bed. Got another workday tomorrow, ya know.

Goodnight!

Thank you for your concerns, but I believe there may be a misunderstanding of what happened - i.e. the reason I posted in the first place.

The post to which I replied said this:

RobRoy: Not here. I prefer to fight each battle only once. Those who have been paying attention know exactly what I am talking about.

WildTurkey: It means you can't support your allegation.

I responded to the conclusion drawn that RobRoy's reply meant ipso facto that he "can't support" his allegation. That conclusion doesn't follow because RobRoy has been on the forum for 6.5 years. IOW, the length of time he has been on the forum is good reason to believe that he has in fact tired of fighting the same argument as he says.