To: Reuben Hick
I contend that I never read that document prior to it being posted here today.
You cut and pasted it without reading it? Why would you do that?
Actually I personally know the source of the information in question.
If true, this helps you how?
The document referenced here is borrowed from that.
Without attribution. Which was then falsely denied. Now you seem to be backpedaling.
posted on 12/04/2004 2:45:06 PM PST
(Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
To: VadeRetro; ThinkPlease; PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer; general_re; js1138; balrog666
**** ....and I believe that ThinkPlease was looking for any excuse to avoid having to debate the topic because ThinkPlease is intellectually incapable of forming a cogent argument. ****
Am I the only one here whose Irony Meter just blew up after reading the above statement?
He's accusing "ThinkPlease" of being "intellectually incapable of forming a cogent argument" while HE's the guy who cribbed HIS argument from someone else, WITHOUT GIVING ATTRIBUTION for it.
Now THAT sounds suspiciously like someone who is "incapable of forming make a cogent argument" of their own.
Looks like Creationists win by default. The opposition failed to show up. LOL!
Keep beating the drum of "plagiarizing". It is pointless, it isn't true, it doesn't address the issue.. hmmm seems like the classical evolutionist debate technique.
To: VadeRetro; ThinkPlease; PatrickHenry; longshadow
No, no - see, it's all okay because he and this other author both apparently lifted it without attribution from some third party. Or something.
posted on 12/04/2004 3:08:05 PM PST
("What's plausible to you is unimportant." - D'man)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson