Re: An Unexplained Mystery

On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 20:47:16 -0600, "[M]adman" <grat@xxxxxxxxxx>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:

unrestrained_hand@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 3, 1:18 pm, "[M]adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
[snip]
The only evidence you have offered are your posts, which are evidence
that you cannot understand or comprehend what you read, you disdain
reality, hold academic achievement in contempt, and wallow in self-
deception.

Dishonesty, and laziness, and arrogance coupled with ignorance, are
not considered admirable traits.

I and several others have provided links. Have you followed any of
them? You cannot intelligently ask questions if you haven't gone so
far as reading a few articles. It would be polite to actually read a
whole book first. When you cannot even describe at a high school level
what evolution theory is, is it simply pathetic to pretend that you
have problematic questions.

Why do you trust in things that will fade away with time?

Your misshapen ideas, formed from ignorance and self-absorption, are
not bright and shiny hymns of truth.

Kermit

How would you know?

He just needs to read your posts.

--
Bob.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dances With Dead
    ... |>|>so they can continue to wallow in their seventh century ignorance. ... Except they are wallowing in Bronze and Iron Age ignorance. ... But they are very cafeteria. ... You can't follow the religion ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: Is a Crystal-clear Theory Preferable to Dogmatic Riddles?
    ... "Simpletons! ... How long will you wallow in ignorance? ... Cynics! ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Creation scientifically Proven
    ... They wallow in ignorance as proof of something ... Darwin extinctoids themselves! ... Let them fester. ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Is a Crystal-clear Theory Preferable to Dogmatic Riddles?
    ... "Simpletons! ... How long will you wallow in ignorance? ... Cynics! ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: OT - BoB
    ... when some poor contestant makes a mistake and is very contemptuous of maths ... and science. ... For a contemptuous "host", you have to go a long way to get worse than Paxman on University Challenge: he is extremely contemptuous of ignorance of the subject _he_ knows about, knowledge if subjects he considers beneath him. ... (For such an intelligent man - and he is, I was very impressed by his speech to the tellysoc - I can't understand his contempt, both for certain kinds of knowledge and ignorance, and for the importance of correct pronunciation.) ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)