(September 5, 2018 at 1:41 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Neg has threatened to re-write post#1 many times, but has assiduously avoided doing so, ever.
A re-write of Part I of the OP was sent to you via post from page 19 #184 of this thread, which was a good while ago, so, your above is a mischaracterization...I did rewrite the Deity disproof portion; no more is requisite, until consensus can be reached among members whether or not Part I constitutes a prima facie viable disproof. I have proferred the possibility of putting the viability of the paper to a consensus vote, the same way science proceeds, however, I do not think there if enough interest for consensus, either way, to happen. If the disproof is deemed, by members, to have failed to rise to mere prima facie status, then, I'm outa here, away from all the psychological torture....Negatio.
