Please stop me when you get it through your thick subjectivist psuedoscientist skull:
Is this like:
1) Ties between Iraq and Al-Qaeda?
2) Active Iraqi Nuclear munitions programs?
3) That Iraq was 6 months to a year away from a nuke?
4) That Iraq had an active WMD program?
5) That Iraq could deploy Chemical munitions within days or hours?
6) That Iraq was seeking to purchase refined uranium from Niger?
7) That Iraq was harboring and collaborating with Al-Qaeda operatives?
8) That Iraq shipped said WMD, WMD programs, Nuclear program and Nuclear materials to Syria while half the spy-sats in the world were watching?
I could go on but why bother.
The only difference between you and your ilk and yeti-worshipping UFOlogists is, well, nothing.
You believe what you feel like believing, from abortion, to Iraq and on to global warming. You have NEVER proven your point when challenged, and you frankly lack the cognitive hardware to do so. (case in point, taking such exception to being called a wacko on flame) The notion of you as a reserved empiricist waiting for a decisive datapoint is about as stupid as the notion that the necon core is into 'compassionate' conservatism.
Davin L.
Flame » in reply to re: I did call you a whacko
"People who say a theory is a fact when it has not been proven because it fits their political views are wrong."
The whole thread (66 posts)
- When there is little difference.......
- Humans are pack animals
- The drool from a wide variety of sources.
- I understand the anger and frustration.
- and it matters not what a thread is about
- Do candidates get what they deserve?
- No kidding. It's like being in a roomful of second graders.
- re: Admit it Tony: You want to join the dark side.
- I used to think
- Hi Dav.
- LOL (n/t)
- Same old . . .
- Insulting is...
- Hi Dav.
- Been thinking the same for a few days.
