QUOTE
It would be far more interesting to have a discussion, with you, if you knew what you were talking about!....don't you think?
...
I think you are playing to impress the audience, rather than, having a discussion, finding consistency, with the theories you quote....and trying to make it appear true. I think you could do a little better than that, at least in admitting that some theories pick up, where others leave off, or at least, conflict with each other, at certain points
UNQUOTE

What you mean by the second part of that, I can't work out, without insulting you by saying that perhaps you just want to me confess that you are the only with with logical arguments and correct ideas?

It wasn't me that used the old arguments beloved of fanatical close minded small thinkers out to destroy and ridicule Science, so as to cement their position of political and social power.

If you can't win an argument, then just insult the opponent, eh? They what they did too. If you act like them, you may be mistaken for them. I've refrained from the other threads along these topics cause I thought little positive would come out of them - now this thread has reached that point too.

I'm not the one putting forward arguments in which semantic terms are muddled, and many other logical fallacies committed.

I have nothing to prove.