Re: Suppose this frickin' nincompoop is proven to be correct and proves we're dead wrong?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Tom Clarke: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Previous message: Rohinton Collins: "Lumper or Splitter?"
• Maybe in reply to: Ed Conrad: "Suppose this frickin' nincompoop is proven to be correct and proves we're dead wrong?"
• Next in thread: /\/\ : "Re: Suppose this frickin' nincompoop is proven to be correct and proves we're dead wrong?"

Wow. I just discovered this newsgroup and saw all the "Ed Conrad"
references. I'd never heard of him. And, it seems, for good reason. I
followed the links to his web page and his "evidence". Pictures of rocks.
Fresh, new insights such as "The late, great Dr. Velikovsky", "Evolution
is only a theory", "Scientists are all evil".

Once again, showing how creationists start with a conclusion, and then go
looking for "evidence" to support that conclusion.

Why is it that crackpots always take the same pattern?
1. "Discovery" of something
2. Show it to real experts.
3. Get dismissed by above experts
4. Conclude that "I know more than the experts, therefore it's all an
evil conspiracy
to suppress my discovery".

Yes, the whole world is wrong and Ed Conrad must be right. That's it!

But you are right about one thing: It *is* entertaining!!

Dan

• Next message: Tom Clarke: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Previous message: Rohinton Collins: "Lumper or Splitter?"
• Maybe in reply to: Ed Conrad: "Suppose this frickin' nincompoop is proven to be correct and proves we're dead wrong?"
• Next in thread: /\/\ : "Re: Suppose this frickin' nincompoop is proven to be correct and proves we're dead wrong?"