[Condorman]

Exhibit A:

Part A1: Your problem is that you are too arrogant and think you know what God's purpose is.
Part A2: [The above] is a statement of fact which cannot be denied

Exhibit B:

Part B1: So you're punting...You have a long-winded way of saying it...You're still proclaiming [my argument] as discredited.
Part B2: The misinterpretation seems to be mine. I apologize for a long blind alley, unintentional on my part.

Of the above two exhibits, one is statements made by an evolutionist to an anti-evolutionist, and one is statements made by an anti-evolutionist to an evolutionist. Question for the board, if you were to guess without knowing, which way would you choose?

[PatrickHenry]

Of the above two exhibits, one is statements made by an evolutionist to an anti-evolutionist, and one is statements made by an anti-evolutionist to an evolutionist. Question for the board, if you were to guess without knowing, which way would you choose?

In my long history in these threads, I can't remember a definite example of a creo ever admitting an error. When a creo is clearly shown to be wrong, the usual response is one of the following:

1. Ignore it and bring the error up again later.
2. Insult the bearer of the correct information.
3. Change the subject to an argument about some nit-picking irrelevancy.
4. Claim that the evidence is fraudulent "just like Piltdown Man." 5. Hit the abuse button.