(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: He is talking about a “paradox” and says “as strange as it may sound”, so it is obvious he is talking about science
Wait, what? As strange as it may sound means science? No, no, it doesn't, Stat. You are are obfuscating this debate . . . again.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Everyone else I have shown that quote to understands it immediately, even other atheists; you are just purposely dragging your feet on it.
I didn't misunderstand the quote, Stat. I pointed out its irrelevance and the uselessness of your snippet quoting in having an actual debate. Believe me, I would never drag my feet in a discussion with you. If I agreed with you, I would do it awful quick so I could get the fuck out of the mire.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I guess it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider Dawkins a reliable source.
I didn't say that. I said I do not read Dawkins and, therefore, his opinions mean nothing to me, either for or against. I'm just interested in why you want to use other people's opinions and quotes instead of arguing for yourself.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I never said you were ignoring my posts, I said you were ignoring the evidence I provided in them, which you have.
I can't ignore something that isn't there, Stat.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Trust me, you are hardly the pillar of patience on this board, there numerous posters on here with more patience.
I never said I was a pillar of patience. Fuck, you bounce around. I said, I am one of the few who has the patience to respond to you fully, which is absolutely true. Have you ever noticed the sheer mountain of one liners that border on "Look at this fucking idiot!" that are posted in reply to your walls of incomprehensible nonsense? I have. I give you more than that and I refrain from calling you an idiot, which is difficult when you basically respond in the same way as those you complain about.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: You see, this is what bothers me about you. You are just being dishonest, when I actually did go back and look at my original post; this is what I found…
Oh, look. You followed that with a bunch of selected quotes where you said modern science and not science. I was talking about you changing terms as the debate wears on. By the end of every one of your debates, your argument is not remotely like your op.
(August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: So you can accuse me of moving the goalposts all you want, the facts don’t lie though.
No, but you do, by quote mining, changing up terms and otherwise being disingenuous.
As for the rest of your post, I am not bothering. You are boring the shit out of me with your, "Look! It's a quote." "You're too stupid to get the quote." "You don't understand what these geniuses are saying." "Other atheists understand what I am saying, but not you, because you're stupid." Blah, blah, blah. I don't want quotes from other atheists, Stat. I am not a sheep. I understand that is a tough concept for you. However, that is who I am. I'm not like, "Dawkins said it?!?!?!?! Holy shit. It must be true. Stat is a genius!! *slurp*" In all of these months of talking, you are still feeding me this shit waiting for the day I find my shepherd amongst your obscure references. Sorry, dude. I prefer actual, personal thought. I would not object to quotes supported by statistics, facts, links between modern science and religion, but all I get are other people saying "Dude, modern science and religion are tight!" Not even any of them provided those links. This is exhausting and pointless. You wouldn't know how to provide evidence because you are willing to accept such dubious evidence as the Bible. I should have come to that conclusion a long time ago.
