XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, alt.christnet   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 18-September-2014 3:28 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
      
   > I'd also point out that I don't care what he has to say, as   
   > long as he doesn't insist *in a sci group* that it's   
   > supported by evidence. But he doesn't like me pointing out   
   > that, in science, it's *not* supported by evidence.   
      
   wrong! as I have REPEATEDLY told you now.. my problem with you is that   
   you wont accept that the broad definition of evidence applies in regards   
   to religious beliefs, as it applies to anything in fact. you may demand   
   as much scientific evidence as you like, it wont change anything   
      
   >   
   > Anyway, thanks for the support, which I'm reasonably sure   
   > he'll fail to understand, and will dismiss as merely   
   > self-serving rhetoric.   
      
   talk about the pot calling the kettle black..   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)