XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
      
   On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 10:56:28 -0700, Bob Casanova wussed horribly:   
      
   >On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 14:50:31 -0400, the following appeared   
   >in sci.skeptic, posted by mur@.not.:   
   >   
   >>When challenged directly and specifically about the supposed   
   >>evidence they think should exist...   
   >   
   >It's up to the claimant (that's you) to provide the evidence   
      
       Then why isn't it up to the atheist to explain WHAT he thinks he's trying   
   to   
   talk about? For example why are you terrified to try to explain WHAT etc.....   
   evidence YOU think you're trying to talk about? Here's a clue for you: It IS up   
   to you, but you have no idea what you think you're trying to talk about.   
   Instead   
   all you're able to do is to wuss horribly, as ALL OF YOU have proven   
   consistently.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)