Knowledge does not mean that you cannot twist truth to your favor. Knowledge does not mean that you will automatically tell the truth either. Unless you would like to show me proof of every knowledgeable person never lying.



So you believe that one sided debates is the way to go when evolution is the one side that ignores the other?
And so you also believe that snide remarks, personal attacks, and as you demonstrate with your post, categorizations of people you don't know are in order to win a "scientific" debate?

You are no different from the rest, and it's why you defend your peers. So let me give you a better example so that you can understand.

Example of categorization: Since you are an evolutionist who basically is anti-creation and anti-God. Have you been to the Blasphemy Challenge page to pay homage to you ant-God beliefs? Have you been to the Rational Response Squad and given your donation to the cause yet?

Did you like being categorized with those people, or are you already a member?

See how it feels? So maybe since you guys think that flat earth and elvis lives is okay to use in the middle of every debate. That I will use this plus other past history, people, and event that are connected to evolution that will have the same effect. Sound fair? Or would you rather it stop here?

I can connect Hitler to evolution. I can connect Haeckel to Hitler and fraud. I can connect evolution to several communist leaders from the past who murdered millions. I can connect columbine shootings to evolution. As shown on this forum, Jeffery Domner (spelling) can also be connected to evolution for his actions as admitted by him. But should I use all this to win a debate? I don't think you would like it now would you?

And remember, I did not start it. I just refuse to put up with it.