Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (230883)	4/27/2005 5:23:32 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573901

You start from two Christians apparently ducking an argument, or losing one, and extrapolate that to a SOP to duck arguments of a certain type, and extend that to an assertion that the basic argument isn't very defensible. Its was four, not two and it was done so smoothly that it suggested they had lots of practice doing it. You have very flimsy support for your actual conclusion. Flimsy? The fact that the issue is so rarely discussed that few Christians and non Christians know of its controversy. The fact that its implication is significant to the lives of roughly a billion people on the planet. You think that is flimsy evidence of a possible cover up? Excuse me, if I disagree with you. The fact that an atheist might win a particular argument with a Christian or two doesn't say anything about Christianity. No, of course not.....that was not my point. However, the fact that the religious leaders in question would not go near an atheist's assertion that runs counter to their beliefs speaks a library. I've won arguments with liberals before does that mean that liberalism has to be false or "not very defensible"? You've won arguments with liberals because you wear them down........and that's a whole other topic. <g> ted