Prayer Studies

[Heywood]

I'm not splitting hairs here. "Logically invalid" is not the same thing as "rationally justified in believing it".....it is not even close to being the same thing. There is no quibbling. There is only you moving the goal post....and you pull crap like this all time.

Quibbling? My ass....you are just attempting to obfuscate your errors.

And when I specifically explained what I meant the post after you asked me to, that didn't give you any hints as to what I was saying?

Your point was this:

You're not saying anything new here, is my point. We already know how theists will scrabble to turn their own claims into vague, intangible messes.

What theist will do has nothing to do with the scientific validity of prayer studies. By talking about what theist might do...you are merely shifting the goal post. You're very articulate but in the final analysis your argumentation sucks.