Re: Guide for anti-AATers

J. Moore (
Mon, 16 Oct 95 10:55:00 -0500

Ja> If you guys are really fed up with talking about AAT here, I'll agree to
Ja> shut up about it if you can convince me that the following three points
Ja> are irrelevant or can be better explained.

How about backing up your claims first? You offer no proof or
support for them.

1) The first claim (regarding tears) is BS, and I'm putting together
a post on it at present.
2) For this claim (marine food needed for brain growth) to be true,
people such as the !Kung (as only one of many examples), not to
mention many many others (most?) people in the world, could not
have had "normal, functioning brains". This is quite obviously
BS. This leaves you insisting that the people who populated the
interiors of the continents for thousands of years never
actually existed, or that they didn't have "normal, functioning
3) Well, "This one I know will not be accepted by you guys", but
you're gonna have to supply some support for your claim. Since
your first two claims are completely bogus (#2 especially
obviously), why should anyone be expected to accept your
unsupported third claim?

Ja> I think that these are the three most convincing points of AAT and if
Ja> you're going to falsify it here is where you should aim.
Ja> James Borrett.

So you're saying that the most convincing points of the AAT are
3 completely unsupported claims, two of them (at least) being
complete BS. Not too good.

Jim Moore (

* Q-Blue 2.0 *