re and another thing mangoe cs umd edu charley wingate writes keith ryan writes you will ignore any criticism of your logic or any possible incongruenties in your stance you will not answer any questions on the validity of any opinion and or facts you state when i have to start saying that s not what i said and the response is did so there s no reason to continue if someone is not going to argue with my version of my position then they cannot be argued with but of course your version of your position has been included in the charley challenges so your claim above is a flat out lie further only last week you claimed that you might not answer the challenges because you were turned off by included text so which is it do you want your context included in my articles or not come to think of it this contradiction has the makings of a new entry in the next challenges post by the way i ve kept every bloody thing that you ve written related to this thread and will be only too pleased to re post any of it to back my position you seem to have forgotten that you leave an electronic paper trail on the net this is the usual theist approach no matter how many times a certain argument has been disproven shown to be non applicable or non sequitur they keep cropping up time after time speaking of non sequiturs this has little to do with what i just said and have some sauce for the goose some of the disproof is fallacies repeated over and over such as the law of nature argument someone posted recently now now let s not change the subject wouldn t it be best to finish up the thread in question before you begin new ones dave wood
