RE: Prayer
January 11, 2018 at 8:29 pm
(This post was last modified: January 11, 2018 at 8:55 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(January 11, 2018 at 2:00 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:(January 11, 2018 at 1:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Says the person who thinks he knows 'science' but literally didn't know the first step in the scientific method.
I understand the scientific method, ya dingleberry. I didn't understand your poorly worded question (indicated in the quote)
If someone asked you the first step of tying your shoes, you wouldn't respond "buy some shoes."
But you know this. This has been explained to you innumerable times. Yet you still trot out that quote (which you have saved), whenever I call you out for your breathtaking scientific illiteracy, as if it shows that I also have no understanding of science. You're misrepresenting what I said and the situation around the quote. You're being a cuck liar, and that's why you were banned from having a signature.
Is that clear enough for you?
Cuck huh?
(March 19, 2015 at 12:59 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:(March 19, 2015 at 12:57 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Just look at his sig: the last one (before he changed it to you because he's an ass) was just a simple error that he felt the need to crow about endlessly. Of course, he didn't include the very next part of the exchange, where Rhythm admitted he was wrong and changed his position, because that would be intellectually honest, and all Huggy really wants is to make fun of us for being wrong at all, because ha ha you're wrong.Huh, I didn't even realize he had changed his signature. Oh well, more name-advertising for me!
It's kinda like arguing with a toddler, where he'll constantly try to twist technicalities so that he's right no matter what, while turning your every honest error, even if you admit to it, into an opportunity to taunt you.
Hah, and he didn't even include the first sentence of my response in his signature.
But seriously, at what point is this kind of blatant dishonesty against the rules?
Yet who's the one that interprets a verbatim quote as "blatant dishonesty"? Lol you atheist just hate taking L's.
Btw the disabling of my sig was clear bias which I can prove, seeing how it broke no rules. However quoting another member in your signature has just recently been made a rule, yet I see Esquilax still has another member quoted in his sig.
It is what it is...