I shouldn't have to try so hard

[Brian37]

Yes I do, someone who sells crap pretending it is worth something.

Apologists are NOT required in the age of modern science. 

There is no holy writing required in a lab. 

If you are going to argue for an old bronze age deity, sorry, I won't fall for it anymore than you buy claims of Ra, Isis or Horus.

When the Ancient Egyptians made up a sun god, they had more to point at than your invisible sky wizard.

It still doesn't appear that you know what apologists means.  However I find that most do try to address questions posed with a coherent explanation.   I prefer this, rather than you going off in all directions, with the same spiel no matter what the conversation and concerning things that I don't say or believe.  Most of your reasons (which is what I asked)  just seem to be fluff and fallacies.

Your reading comprehension SUCKS, because you are using a word stemming from outdated Greek Philosophy. The word stems from Plato's APOLOGY. So chop chop, start worshiping his gods.

It is just a fancy word for salesperson. Just like escargot means SNAIL.

If you have something valid as a claim, you don't have to make an apology for it DUMBASS, you can actually test and falsify it.

I can make an argument for an invisible pink Lamborghini too. SO THE FUCK WHAT.

"I am dating Angelina Jolie". My apology? She is real and I am real, so therefor it is true.

You are simply pulling shit out of your ass, and hiding behind big words and pseudo science. 

Those websites are APOLOGIES as much as you want your sky wizard to be real, and those websites have as much evidence through a dead philosophy as you have for yours, which is ZERO.

Get it in a neutral lab outside your bias, and if those in that neutral lab beyond your control, confirm your data, then you have something. There will be NO apology needed in that setting.

BUT if you think you are any different than any other religion, you are a fool.

[RoadRunner79]

It still doesn't appear that you know what apologists means.  However I find that most do try to address questions posed with a coherent explanation.   I prefer this, rather than you going off in all directions, with the same spiel no matter what the conversation and concerning things that I don't say or believe.  Most of your reasons (which is what I asked)  just seem to be fluff and fallacies.

Your reading comprehension SUCKS, because you are using a word stemming from outdated Greek Philosophy. The word stems from Plato's APOLOGY. So chop chop, start worshiping his gods.

It is just a fancy word for salesperson. Just like escargot means SNAIL.

If you have something valid as a claim, you don't have to make an apology for it DUMBASS, you can actually test and falsify it.

I can make an argument for an invisible pink Lamborghini too. SO THE FUCK WHAT.

"I am dating Angelina Jolie". My apology? She is real and I am real, so therefor it is true.

You are simply pulling shit out of your ass, and hiding behind big words and pseudo science. 

Those websites are APOLOGIES as much as you want your sky wizard to be real, and those websites have as much evidence through a dead philosophy as you have for yours, which is ZERO.

Get it in a neutral lab outside your bias, and if those in that neutral lab beyond your control, confirm your data, then you have something. There will be NO apology needed in that setting.

BUT if you think you are any different than any other religion, you are a fool.

Keep going... you are only showing your foolishness.

[Brian37]

Your reading comprehension SUCKS, because you are using a word stemming from outdated Greek Philosophy. The word stems from Plato's APOLOGY. So chop chop, start worshiping his gods.

It is just a fancy word for salesperson. Just like escargot means SNAIL.

If you have something valid as a claim, you don't have to make an apology for it DUMBASS, you can actually test and falsify it.

I can make an argument for an invisible pink Lamborghini too. SO THE FUCK WHAT.

"I am dating Angelina Jolie". My apology? She is real and I am real, so therefor it is true.

You are simply pulling shit out of your ass, and hiding behind big words and pseudo science. 

Those websites are APOLOGIES as much as you want your sky wizard to be real, and those websites have as much evidence through a dead philosophy as you have for yours, which is ZERO.

Get it in a neutral lab outside your bias, and if those in that neutral lab beyond your control, confirm your data, then you have something. There will be NO apology needed in that setting.

BUT if you think you are any different than any other religion, you are a fool.

Keep going... you are only showing your foolishness.

Said the idiot who believes in magic babies with super powers.

I know the plot of that play DUMBASS, and it was not an argument from "evidence" it was an story about upsetting the apple cart. Create a hero by vilifying everyone else. Plato if alive today would have written "How To Win Friends And Influence People". What Plato DID NOT have benefit of was modern method in control groups and testing and falsification and peer review. The DUMBASS got the idea of questioning right, but had nothing to go on to insure what he was arguing was right. He also came up with the idea of "essence" in that all you had to do is think long enough about that thing, and you'd find that "perfect" whatever. Like "essence of rabbit" or essence of "chair". The dumbass popularized the chase for utopias.

[RoadRunner79]

Keep going... you are only showing your foolishness.

Said the idiot who believes in magic babies with super powers.

I know the plot of that play DUMBASS, and it was not an argument from "evidence" it was an story about upsetting the apple cart. Create a hero by vilifying everyone else. Plato if alive today would have written "How To Win Friends And Influence People". What Plato DID NOT have benefit of was modern method in control groups and testing and falsification and peer review. The DUMBASS got the idea of questioning right, but had nothing to go on to insure what he was arguing was right. He also came up with the idea of "essence" in that all you had to do is think long enough about that thing, and you'd find that "perfect" whatever. Like "essence of rabbit" or essence of "chair". The dumbass popularized the chase for utopias.

I was referring to your allusion to apologetics as being an apology (as in saying sorry) as showing ignorance. However, that you think a control group is apppropoate is also rather foolish. By all means keep going. So far, your not even addressing what I believe, let alone answering the question of why you believe these things. It’s not about me!