Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Playing dumb again are we.Really?
Playing dumb again are we.
Go to the search key type in "crook" by member A1611VET and use Everywhere.
You are not doing yourself any favours with this dishonest account of events.How about I go there and type in "crook for supporting the case of Pluto being demoted"?
Or maybe just ...
"Crook for supporting ..."?
Here ... I'll give you something to help your case:
Post One Five Four
Hypocrisy and integrity don't coexiist.You are not doing yourself any favours with this dishonest account of events.
Recall this post and were you not suspended for doubling down on accusing me of being a crook in a public forum.
It shows what a hypocrite you are for declaring of being tolerant of individuals whose POV differs from your own.
Your ongoing vilification of scientists is another example of your hypocrisy.
You are not doing yourself any favours with this dishonest account of events.
Recall this post and were you not suspended for doubling down on accusing me of being a crook in a public forum.
It shows what a hypocrite you are for declaring of being tolerant of individuals whose POV differs from your own.
Your ongoing vilification of scientists is another example of your hypocrisy.
This has got to one of dumbest attempts at diversion I have ever come across.And you're entitled to your opinion.
No.
Not that I recall anyway.
And YOU are the one who called YOURSELF a crook.
Then challenged me to justify it.
So I did.
Post 137
Be careful what you ask for; you just might get it.
Ya ... ya ...
Welp ... here goes this thread.
I am not an astronomer let alone a member of the IAU and my reasons for demoting Pluto were not the same according to the revised IAU guidelines defining a planet, yet by your 'logic' I am a crook.
By your same 'logic' an astronomer who voted to demote Pluto for technical reasons must also be a crook.
Here are three questions for you?
(1) Why is an astronomer who voted to demote Pluto is automatically labelled a crook?
(2) If the vote was based purely on technical reasons for both the yes and no cases how is the vote rigged?
(3) If the vote was not rigged then explain the why the voting population which constituted 4-5% of the total population who could vote is not considered to be statistically valid to represent the views of the total population?
AV16111VET;
I got time off for this, and we're not going over this again.
Down here, if someone isn't looking too well you say 'You're looking a little crook.' Are you feeling a little crook?This has got to one of dumbest attempts at diversion I have ever come across.
Do you think you given your marching orders by the moderators because I called myself a crook?
The Pluto Issue
Here a three questions for you?I got time off for this, and we're not going over this again.www.christianforums.com
I should try this experiment by calling myself a crook and see if I can get you suspended again.
I was feeling a little crook at the time (that doesn't sound right) by someone up there using the word crook in a libelous context.Down here, if someone isn't looking too well you say 'You're looking a little crook.' Are you feeling a little crook?
I was feeling a little crook at the time (that doesn't sound right) by someone up there using the word crook in a libelous context.
Worth the tryThis has got to one of dumbest attempts at diversion I have ever come across.
Do you think you given your marching orders by the moderators because I called myself a crook?
The Pluto Issue
Here a three questions for you?I got time off for this, and we're not going over this again.www.christianforums.com
I should try this experiment by calling myself a crook and see if I can get you suspended again.
sjastro said:In a hypothetical world if I had the opportunity of voting I would have demoted Pluto's planetary status.
I should try this experiment by calling myself a crook and see if I can get you suspended again.
Worth the try.
You still want to go down this line.............Be careful what you ask for.
You even resorted to a "hypothetical situation" to ask for it.
AV1611VET said:
sjastro said this:
If sjastro wants to inject himself behind those closed doors back then and tell me he would have voted against Pluto ... which was done in violation of their own bylaws ... then sjastro is no better than anyone else behind those doors who did the same thing.
And if I think those others who did that are crooks, then I'm going to think the same thing of sjastro too.
Why thank you.Good question and fair!
No; I am admittedly bias towards the word of God and there is no room for evolutionary theory there, IMO.
I'd be very fascinated by the principles and theories in question, but I am very dubious that they dubunk the theory of evolution.However, I did formally study biology and neuroscience and evolution is definitely viewed as an archaic theory which has been mostly debunked by modern science for a variety of reasons.I could show you lots of alternate theories but the research I came across is behind paywalls which I had access to during active study and of which I am no longer apart of.
I have no idea what you are talking about so it's best I bow out since this conversation has taken a weird turn.You omitted any comment on your having
made up something nonsensical and false about me.
A school where they teach that ToE is somehow archaic,
false, disproved or whatever it was is a crap excase
for a school.
The theory has not been disproven.
That is a fact which is immune to bias.
Though those who will may go with denial and
deceive themselves
Why did you make up something about me?
Make sure you look at all evidence and not just those that support your theory of evolution. Otherwise, you are not admitting you have a bias and will only see and find the research that supports your bias i.e. confirmation bias.Why thank you.
In a literal reading of genesis, sure. There is neither enough time for evolution to have occurred and the Bible describes a chain of events different to the scientifically accepted evolutionary scenarios.
The problem is that is according to one specific literal interpretation.
Another literal interpretation is taken by some of the Flat Earth Creationists found on this forum who think the Bible disproves the existence of space and gravity.
I'd be very fascinated by the principles and theories in question, but I am very dubious that they dubunk the theory of evolution.
A number of very well funded and well motivated anti evolution organisations exist and have been unable to present any coherent scientific evidence against the theory of evolution.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?