Why do I debate with creationists (not just on this forum)? Maybe because I want to understand the psychology of that point of view. I also tend to hope that any lurkers will be interested in any info I post. Maybe someone will learn something.

Do you think I think I'm "showing off" intellectually here? No. I am not so lacking in self-worth that I want people to think I am a brain box so that I can feel better about myself. I said I don't know the visitors here personally, but I do know they are better at science and logic than me. But I don't accuse them of trying to show off how smart they are.

I don't quote mine apart from the instance where I did it to SoSick to show her what a dishonest practice it is. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find an evolutionist who quote mines creationists. There is no need because there is plenty of actual evidence to refer to. Would you like to give me an example of where you think I did it?

My definition of regurgiposting is passing on creationist ideas from people like Morris and Hovind that have done the rounds and have already been refuted by scientists dozens of times. I can't honestly speak for what Bex is doing, maybe she really is reading what she is cutting and pasting, but many others go through that process without even reading what they are posting, and then expect someone to take the time to refute it all. I have to admit that a couple of my recent posts here have contained several quotes from other sources, but it's either because they explain it better than me, or because I'm getting tired and a little narked at being expected to respond to cut-and-paste lists of creationist claims that take a second to post. I think in future if I know of a good site that refutes the claim, I will simply link the poster there.

What am I hoping to achieve? I don't know. But I care about children and I'm angry that there are people who want to teach them pseudoscience in place of what we actually know about the world. Some of these children could grow up to be brilliant scientists who could make significant contributions to their chosen fields; instead they are taught it is all lies. The nation will be the poorer for it.

So no I’m not playing games, I mean what I am saying. I hope that would be obvious from the time I’ve taken to explain the scientific errors in the claims here.

What are the methods I’ve used that you feel are “incredible?” I haven’t insulted a single member of the forum, which is more than can be said for a few others here who continue to have a go at me in ways completely unrelated to the discussion. If you think I have behaved inappropriately then please explain.