> So you really do believe that it was actually unnecessary for him to have done any research at all.
That, of course, is a lie, and a rather obvious one. Read again what I wrote... and this time, with thinking.
550 posted on 10/03/2005 4:17:14 PM PDT by orionblamblam
("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
Maybe he considered it necessary to convince himself, but it certainly wasn't necessary for you to be convinced. You said yourself that the alternative explanation is a priori false. What left is there to prove?
551 posted on 10/03/2005 4:36:43 PM PDT by inquest
(FTAA delenda est)