All Babies Go to Heaven

[kj]

>>>1. Is that really necessary in order to understand the distinction between a) contradictory rules dictated by people who claim to get their information from a book of conflicting stories written by dead people inspired by an invisible wishing zombie who lives in the sky and b) rules derived from observation of the workings of the world and the universe?

Maybe not, but we were discussing whether I know anything about science, if you look back. And if "a)" is your description of christianity, you demonstrated you have almost no knowledge how christianity works.

>>>2. Yes. And I think that you've made it clear that you haven't.

Odd that you would think you know better than I, what I've read. What have I said that could possibly make it that clear (we've hardly discussed philosophy of science)? I think you need to be more explicit if you want me to take you seriously.

>>>You seem to like pretending that I said certain things so that you can argue with your imagination instead of taking the time and effort to read and understand what I've written.

You seem to do the same. To start with, I said this:

"I don't see a lot of people on this forum dealing in undebatable facts. It's nearly all opinion."

You come up with this:

>>>What a great conversation that would be: "Hey!! LUX INTERIOR!! 2+2=4!! What? You agree? Okay... Hey!! LUX INTERIOR!! 2+2=4!! What? You agree? Okay... Hey!! LUX INTERIOR!! 2+2=4!! What? You agree? Okay... Hey!!..."

Now tell me where I said I wanted people to deal in undebatable facts, as you imply. My point was that yoregano doesn't have to identify his opinions as such, because nearly everything on this forum is opinion. How does your response have anything to do with my point?

You said in an earlier post that you wanted yoregano:

>>To be nice.

I think if you want people to be nice, you might get better results if you were nice yourself. kj.