"J McCoy" <mc...@sunset.net> wrote in messagenews:firstname.lastname@example.org...
> "Dana Tweedy" <twee...@cvn.net> wrote in message<news:b5gj0o$27olig$1@ID-35161.news.dfncis.de>...
Again, you ignore what I wrote, why is that? What do you fear?
Actually there is no need for me to "deal with the quotations". It's
> Actually, what you've done is sidestep the rea questions. You think by
already been well established that the quotes you stole from the other site
were taken out of context, and do not mean what you want them to. My point
is to show that by stealing the quotes in the first place, lying about where
they came from, and then trying to excuse your stealing and lying by
claiming "the ends justify the means" , you are behaving in a dishonest and
unChristian manner. That the quotes are themsevles lies is another matter
Again, there is no need to "choke off the pipeline of quotations". The
> You're trying to choke off the pipeline of quotations, as thus every
quotations are falsehoods. Lies of omission. I leave it to others to
demostrate how those quotes are dishonest. I am content to show that you
are dishonest in how you use them.
It's been amply shown by several posters that those quotes are indeed taken
> If a quotation is used, you:
> 1. Accuse of taking out of context
out of context.
> 2. PlagiarizingStealing another person's words without attribution is plagurizing. You
quoted from "Anointed one"'s site without making proper attribution.
Futhermore you implied that you made photocopies of the original sources.
That is another falsehood.
You never presented any "real questions". You cut and pasted a bunch of
> But you don't answer the real questions.
misquotes and lies of omission. You didn't present any real questions that
required an answer.
That has already been done, by several posters. Why should I re-invent the
> You never:
> 1. prove these to be out of context.
> 2. deal with the fact that a evolutionist has admitted a portion ofThose quotations were carefully taken out of context, to change the meaning.
> evolution to be fraudulent, hence the quotation.
The "evolutionist(s)" in those quotations was NOT admitting that "a portion
of evolution" was "fraudulent". That is the whole point of a "lie of
omission", to omit the part of the person's words that explains and
clarifies the person's position. Those quotes you stole are classic lies
of omission. They are false, and using them is perpetrating a falsehood.
This is beside the point that your use of them was at best dishonest, and at
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.