Re: Evolution Conclusively Disproved

Carl J Lydick (carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU)
15 Feb 1995 10:56:27 GMT

In article <>, (alan filipski) writes:
=In article <3hh10o$> (Derek Abbott) writes:
=-In article <3gikv2$> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
=-:Ah, yes. The mark of the sophomoric newbie. Had you been around for a few
=-:years, you'd realize that Derek actually believe the bullshit he posts. You
=-:missed, for example, the thread where he claimed that pi is a random number
=-:(and spent two months trying to defend that claim). Sorry, Derek IS,
=-:apparently, the moron he appears to be.
=-The newbie's have probably guessed that Carl loves to judge people by his own
=-standards. He's the king pin of projection.
=-Also it doesn't seem as if he has ever experienced being on a debating team
=-otherwise he would understand more about taking different positions and having
=-a bit of fun with it.
=I thought debating teams did research and came up with some well-reasoned
=argument to support a given position. Or do they now blurt out ill-informed
=statements and then gloat over the fact that their audience thinks them stupid?

Er, no, actually. When a debating team finds itself forced to defend an
insupportable position, one of the more common tactics is to simply invent, out
of thin air, sources alleged to support the teams position, in the hopes that
th other team won't challenge them. Derek's nose is out of joint because the
folks in sci.skeptic actually DID challenge his moronic bullshit.

Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.