[Uncle Chip]

When you guys account frankly for your previous distortions

And that previous distortion is what? the bones under St Peter's basilica turning out to be those of a woman, horse, mouse, chicken and a man with all those extra leg bones that don't match that famous skull on display for centuries at St John's Lateran??? LOL

Well, maybe there is another skull somewhere that can match those bones, and the magisterium is operating on the assumption that: "two heads, or skulls in this case, are better than one". And a few extra tibias and fibulas would of course, give their bone find "a leg up on the competition".

Yeh, you're smart not to try to explain away that Dominus Flevit discovery. Those in the RCC who want to keep their integrity intact ignore it and just hope that it will go away. But it won't.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

educational not educations. lol.

[Mad Dawg]

And that previous distortion is what? Can you say "ethnos"? Do you know the difference between the label on a box and the contents? Do you know the difference between a claim and a proven fact? I have no reason to think that you do. That leads to uncomfortable conclusions.

A makes a claim. B researches it and finds it at least dubious or flat out false. A make another claim. B researches it and finds it dubious or flat out false. A makes yet another claim. B refuses to play. A says that B's afraid he'll lose the argument and that's why he won't follow up the third claim. The more B declines, the more offensive A gets. IN my background, that's about A liking to get B do to A's bidding, not unlike a physician who aggressively tries to convert a sick and drugged patient.

More than once I trusted you enough to research your claims. I don't want to be made a fool of again. You will not make your point any more credible by abusing or taunting me.