Lies more lies and Trollish behaviour

Its evident from his responses

 

Faulty evidence that you are presenting. Perhaps his reason was simply that he did not care to respond to what was stated.????? Hmmmmm?

 

A.K.A. he didnt read what was posted.

 

AKA you are displaying an ignorance of the subject matter when you cannot provide an answer that can be tested when you simply say "He didn't read what was posted." Where is the evidence to support that claim?

 

It would be nice if you drop your lawyer stance BS persona once inawhile and used common sense now and then.

 

Why would you suggest that I am using "lawyer stance BS" when you seemingly prefer 'common sense'. "Lawyer stance BS" is a professional language and I don't particularly see where I have implemented any legalese within my previous postings on this thread? BTW: can you precisely define the terms "common sense"?

 

Only a lawyer would ask for evidence in your last post.

Also: "BTW: can you precisely define the terms "common sense"?"

Only a lawyer would ask such a question.

 

Are all the people on this forum who ask for evidence lawyers? No? Then you are placing error ridden statements into the record of this thread.

Even though a lawyer could conceivably ask the question "can you precisely define the terms "common sense"?" does not necessarily restrict that question from being asked by a lay person in society. Actually, I think a lot of pseudo-scientists also ask the same or similar questions pertaining to a request for evidence. Have you ever requested that someone provide evidence for something that they have stated?

 

Just like Neutral, you cant get it either.

All you do is ask for definition after definition after definition. If you're not asking for definitions, then you are asking for evidence, and this is for the most mundane things.

If your job is too try to keep the young from veering off the path of Christ (which is what you have claimed in the past), then you are doing a poor job my friend. You are way too busy posting definitions and asking for worthless evidence.

Piece Brother. I'm done with these games.

 

I have, but when all I get are excuse factories for people who walk around calling Christians and others delusional and pretending that this is civil?

How many times do you think I have left commentary about something in a civil and respectful manner only to have one of your brothers come in and say, "You are a delusional moron! (or something to that effect)?"

You shoudl perhaps understand that I have had atheists, right here on this forum, demand that I and others, should kill ourselves, that we are hate filled bigots, terrible human beings, rapists, genocidal maniacs, and now we are even criminally insane for saying ... many, many times, "The evidence for God, in scientific terms alone, is inconclusive. There is however, a preponderance of evidenc that is strongly suggestive but there is indeed a requirement of faith."

Genocidal maniac, huh?

Rapist, huh?

Criminally insane, huh?

And how many times are you baited like this before you are allowed to confront such people and quite accurately mind you, point out that such people are not using logical, but rather emotional, arguementation, and quite frankly their arguementation is deliberately devisive and rude? Its kinda retarded to continuously respond with these kinds of hyperbolic charges - but it happens to EVERY single Christian who comes down here and is exposed to atheists.

No offense brother, but when we get tired of being called ... criminally insane, and say, "Enough!", we get the same victim excuse over and over ... well, you used the term athtarded?

Well, perhaps you could also refer to the repeated claims where I make it clear that I will happily stop using such prejorative terms - but that is a two way street.

If atheists are going to call us delusional morons and refuse to engage in a civil debate while demanding moderator actions to remove the inducer of wailing on their side? I will insist on referring to such behavior as athtarded.

It is indeed not civil, but only one side seems capable of acknowledging that. The point, with one word, athtarded, has been made ...

... but genocidal maniac, criminally insane, liar, bigot, delusional, rapist, etc. could not make the same point?

Teh gentler approach, as we see again, of referring to the format of rational and civil discourse has not engendered so much as a honorable mention from atheists. Why is that?

I will happily stop using prejoratives - unfortunately, I will fight on a level playing field, and I find it studiously ironic that I am branded a troll for staying within the forum rules and treating others EXACTLY as they me - and many others. Civility is a two way street brother.