RAZD, it would appear you know full well (since you posted definition #1) that the noun "lie" has more than one meaning. As per Dictionary.com a lie (noun) is defined as:

1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood
2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture
3. an inaccurate or false statement.
4. the charge or accusation of lying

By definition, the false statements you made about the purpose of this forum and the purpose of Russ' posts are, in fact, lies. Thus, I assert that I am correct in holding you accountable for posting lies.

If you want to split hairs and say you didn't post a lie, only a "falsehood", then perhaps I should point out to you that the word you chose is plainly another meaning, a synonym, for "an intentional untruth" or "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive." By your own choice of definitions, you can't escape the fact that you posted lies.

I'm not going to let you get away with doing one thing, yet calling it another. You obviously put much time and thought into preparing your posts (usually), and by your own actions, you hold other posters to quite high standards. It is only fair that you adhere to these standards yourself.

You say that the intent of your statements was not to deceive. However, many philosophers have cautioned man on knowing his own heart (i.e. his intentions) and being careful not to be self-deceived.

Only Yahweh (this is the name of God) knows a man's heart and the extent to which men are prone to self-deception, as the Bible truthfully states:



Since I, like others, cannot know your intentions (unless you clearly express them), we can only come to conclusions based on what you say.

Given the fact that you started your statements off with the sarcastic remark, "Hey Linda, don't be too surprised at Russ," I believe anyone would read the ensuing statements in the same disdainful tone and conclude that your intentions were of some level less than honorable. Let's not kid (deceive) ourselves, shall we?

Nevertheless, I accept your apologies and will also accept that, as you stated, your intent was not to deceive.

However, in regards to intentions and deception, I would like to make this point. While you may have thought it noble to delete your previous statements, I am disappointed that you did, as I am fully confident that anyone reading what you posted would have come to a correct and true conclusion upon reading my response.

It is important to let the record of events (i.e. posts made on these forums) reflect for itself, since in real life, there are no "do-overs." Now, by deleting what your previously posted, you have denied others the opportunity to reflect on your statements. The only way others on this forum can judge the value of a poster's content and, in essence, the very integrity of the poster himself/herself, is by reading the content someone posts and the manner in which it is posted.

Furthermore, by deleting your previously posted statements and denying others the opportunity to respond, you are, by your own actions, doing the very thing that other evolutionists are falsely accusing Russ of doing.

The discovery of hypocrisy is an opportunity for the eradication of self-deception.

I do hope that in the future, your posts about evolution will be made with more discernment and careful attention to researching the facts than that displayed in your post about Russ and this forum.