[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>>>> I have been stupid in that regard.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> No counter to the fact that you have been lying about this issue since   
   >>>>>>> running from the quoted material.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What's the point when everything I have asked you to give an example   
   >>>>>> of, you have just ignored or handwaved away.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Just dodges to keep lying.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I asked you for an example of Biologos denying natural causes of   
   >>>>>> evolution. No example. (You eventually tried to weasel-word your way   
   >>>>>> out of it by saying you didn't claim they *literally* said it.)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This was unnecessary, and you know it because they were claiming that   
   >>>>> supernatural miracles were involved.  Supernatural miracles are not   
   >>>>> natural causes.  They are literally admitting that natural causes were   
   >>>>> not involved in their miracles.  Supernatural miracles are not natural   
   >>>>> causes.  You knew this because you ran from the quotes to start lying   
   >>>>> about the issue.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I asked you for an example of Biologos trying to force biological   
   >>>>>> evolution into conforming with their Biblical interpretation. No   
   >>>>>> example.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> They claimed that their Biblical literal interpretation made them   
   >>>>> believe that their god created man in his own image.  This is no   
   >>>>> different than Behe claiming that a designer was needed for his IC   
   >>>>> systems.  They even claimed supernatural miracles were involved.  How is   
   >>>>> that not forcing biological evolution into conforming to their Biblical   
   >>>>> interpretations?  "In his image" is a Biblical literalist interpretation.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I asked you to identify somebody in Biologos supporting tweaking like   
   >>>>>> Bhehe does. No example.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Why would this have ever been needed when we have the claims of Biologos   
   >>>>> to evaluate with no author listed?  Just another dishonest dodge to keep   
   >>>>> lying.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I asked you what science is contradicted by the miracle of Christs'   
   >>>>>> Resurrection. No example.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This isn't even relevant to what we are discussing.  Just another   
   >>>>> dishonest dodge to continue lying.  Why would miracles have to   
   >>>>> contradict science when supernatural miracles, by their very definition   
   >>>>> fall out side of nature and so outside of the ability of science to make   
   >>>>> any determination about them?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I asked you for a single example of any miracle claimed by Christians   
   >>>>>> that contradicts evolution. No example.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Again, just a dishonest dodge to keep lying.  Why would this be relevant   
   >>>>> to what you were lying about?  I don't even know why you would even   
   >>>>> think this was relevant.  It is even a stupid request.  All you need to   
   >>>>> understand is that the 7 days of creation were a series of miracles.   
   >>>>> There are obviously Christians that believe that evolution did not   
   >>>>> happen.  The Bible claims that land plants ere created before sea   
   >>>>> creatures, but we know that sea creatures evolved over a hundred million   
   >>>>> years before land plants evolved on this planet from fresh water algae,   
   >>>>> and that the angiosperms mentioned in the Bible did not evolve until   
   >>>>> after dinos became the dominant vertebrate tetrapod on land.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> There's no point in trying to continue a debate with you when you just   
   >>>>>> ignore contradictory evidence to your claims and call the person   
   >>>>>> presenting it a stupid liar. Do you think anyone takes your stupid   
   >>>>>> insults seriously.?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There is no reason to keep lying.  There is no contradictory evidence.   
   >>>>> You were given the quotes that you needed and you decided to start lying   
   >>>>> about reality instead of deal with reality.  You were a stupid liar.   
   >>>>> Your continued dodges would indicate that you have put considerable   
   >>>>> thought into lying about the issue, but what you came up with was   
   >>>>> irrelevant or did not support your lying.  You might call that being   
   stupid.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Making claims about me does nothing   
   >>>>>>> to change the fact that you understand that you have been lying.  What   
   >>>>>>> is the definition of supernatural miracles?  Natural mechanisms would   
   >>>>>>> not be responsible for what those supernatural miracles produced.  What   
   >>>>>>> Trump does has nothing to do with you lying about reality.  If you have   
   >>>>>>> some weird definition of supernatural miracles you should have   
   addressed   
   >>>>>>> it instead of running from the quotes and doing what you did.  You have   
   >>>>>>> been stupid and dishonest.  I can't change that.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The bullshit continue to fly. Sad really to see an intelligent guy   
   >>>> making such a fool of himself :(   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>> Just keep lying about it.  It seems to be all that you can do.  Why no   
   >>> counter except a stupid personal attack?  No more dishonest dodges to   
   >>> pull out of the air?  You should have just addressed reality instead of   
   >>> starting to lie about it.   
   >>   
   >> So you can call me stupid and a liar as much as you like but I cannot   
   >> respond to it. That ties in well with your self-centred approach to   
   >> this whole discussion - one rule for you, different rules for everyone   
   >> else.   
   >>   
   >   
   >I just stated what you were doing.   
      
   QED   
      
   >What you put up about me was your   
   >projection of what you have done to make a fool of yourself.  You could   
   >not respond in any other way.  If I had been the one that had just been   
   >demonstrated to have made a fool of himself, you would have been all   
   >over my response to demonstrate that.  It should have been easy to do   
   >because what I put up can easily be verified.  Nothing that I put up is   
   >not well understood.  Your "one rule for you, and different rules for   
   >everyone else." seems to be more projection of what you seem to be   
   >doing.  You should have faced the quotes when they were first put up.   
   >The reason for your denial of what they meant would have been exposed,   
   >and you would have had an opportunity to demonstrate that your reasoning   
   >was valid or invalid.  Just lying about the situation got you to where   
   >you are now.  You are in denial of what you did, and are trying to   
   >project your own foibles onto someone else.   
   >   
   >Ron Okimoto   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)