RE: what is the point?
September 15, 2020 at 3:23 pm
(This post was last modified: September 15, 2020 at 4:39 pm by The Architect Of Fate.)
So much of Derptchs crap to refute so instead of using quotes i'll just cliff note my response and save myself the headache of wading through the ocean of stupid
1. By reference source you mean a wikipedia article and well as well as own vapid ramblings . Now i could play this same game with the dozen or so PDF's i have in my favorites showing Hitler hated atheism and considered it godless communism and Jewery . But that's really shoddy way of doing history .
2. As for your little rant about why the Christians left . Because Lady was nice doesn't she could handle criticism and i'm sorry it was more the one bad day and the response was justified, And no we don't need you. There have been plenty of good threads (i would say more good threads ) in your absence.
3. I have already read the paper you linked by noted creationist hack and discovery institute stooge Richard Weikart writer of pseudo history and creationist propaganda , And it fails as a refutation of Richard Roberts points and fails even harder to prove it's central thesis . It engages in Richard Weikart usual slippy misuse of quotes and "creative " interpretation of wording . I'm amazed this is still up on a university website truly embarrassing. If this was suppose to prove me wrong you failed miserably
4. What those who cry revisionist history really mean is "it doesn't suit my agenda "
Anyway once again responding to you has proven dull and pointless . I'm done .
1. By reference source you mean a wikipedia article and well as well as own vapid ramblings . Now i could play this same game with the dozen or so PDF's i have in my favorites showing Hitler hated atheism and considered it godless communism and Jewery . But that's really shoddy way of doing history .
2. As for your little rant about why the Christians left . Because Lady was nice doesn't she could handle criticism and i'm sorry it was more the one bad day and the response was justified, And no we don't need you. There have been plenty of good threads (i would say more good threads ) in your absence.
3. I have already read the paper you linked by noted creationist hack and discovery institute stooge Richard Weikart writer of pseudo history and creationist propaganda , And it fails as a refutation of Richard Roberts points and fails even harder to prove it's central thesis . It engages in Richard Weikart usual slippy misuse of quotes and "creative " interpretation of wording . I'm amazed this is still up on a university website truly embarrassing. If this was suppose to prove me wrong you failed miserably
4. What those who cry revisionist history really mean is "it doesn't suit my agenda "
Anyway once again responding to you has proven dull and pointless . I'm done .
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
