XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 11:52:54 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 07-November-2014 5:47 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:34:12 +0100, Chicken Runz squawked::   
   >> ..   
   >>> "felix_unger"  skrev i meddelelsen news:cbsvbqF6lrmU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>   
   >>> (snip)   
   >>>   
   >>>> and ppl believe that there may be a Loch Ness Monster, and UFO's exist,   
   >>>> because of the evidence for them. what is so difficult about this?   
   >>> I'll stick to 'the blob in sky in the photo' example. It can be interpreted   
   >>> as evidence of a million different things. UFO's, dust on the lense,   
   Belgian   
   >>> helicopter crashing, an eagle. A ghost! If it is possible evidence of   
   >>> anything, it's not evidence at all. Even if it turns out, by some other   
   >>> means, that the photo contains the image of a UFO, it still isn't evidence   
   >>> of the UFO.   
   >>      LOL!!! Hilarious!   
   >   
   >he's showing how ridiculous he is. not an ounce of common sense!   
      
       I'm glad you have come to the same conclusion. It seems that in the past   
   you   
   had a higher opinion of the cowardly idiot....much higher than he deserves.   
   Maybe like myself you tend to overestimate people? Even after I've learned to   
   think of someone as little better than a moron I STILL tend to overestimate   
   them   
   from time to time.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)