Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: "rmacfarl" <rmacfarl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 2 Dec 2005 18:02:59 -0800
Jim McGinn wrote:
....
>
> With evolutionary theory it's easy to make bold statements. What's
> difficult is backing them up. What's good about you, Ross, is that you at
> least know your limitations. Look at poor Pete in that other thread. It
> always starts innocently. It starts with a little lie, pretending to
> possess some superior knowledge with which he can dismiss my point. I ask a
> questions or two to clarify his position. The lies deepen as he tries to
> dodge the issue. This generates more questions. He responds with more
> lies, pretty soon he realizes he's in a quandary. No way to save face. The
> only option is to not respond and hope nobody notices.
>
> Will y'all ever learn?
<Gag!> Are you enjoying this Mikey? :-)
Ross Macfarlane (LFTPM)'
> What's good about you, Ross, is that you at
> least know your limitations.
The Jimster, just this morning...
Come back, Algis! All is forgiven!
-- MClark, a few hours ago
> Your selectivity in picking and chossing [sic] the evidence you want
> to use shows your bias and your infection with the anti-AAH meme.
> Algis Kuliukas, 1-Oct-2005
.
- References:
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Paul Crowley
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: quercophile
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: quercophile
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: spiznet
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: rmacfarl
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: rmacfarl
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Prev by Date: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Next by Date: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Previous by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Next by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|