I noticed a snippet from pete that sums this up nicely.

He said in his last post that creationists believe in gravity. Now... I don't know how many creationists there are, or whether the default position for a sentient being is to be a creationist until decided otherwise, or not a creationist until decided otherwise, but to believe in gravity?

Do they believe in gravity because when they jump up, they come back down again? Do they believe that if you carry out calculations using Newtonian formulae they have a knack of being consistent? Do they believe the theory of gravitons?

How do you believe in an observable phenomenon that has had a word attached to it?

I do see where he is coming from. Descartes said, I think therefore I am. In other words, I have to believe in gravity for it to exist. Lots of people splattered on the ground at the foot of cliffs over the years, contesting for the Darwin awards.

We see the same silly notion here on Mudcat in other discussions too. We have some one who analyses every word you put and goes to see if he can find any corroboration or triangulation on dubious websites. Your position is subject to him believing it, and in that regard whether it fits with his prejudice. If he can't find it or indeed finds it and then spends time finding something to contradict it, he calls you a liar. Regardless of whether you were honest or not, it rather spoils the idea of debate, and is boorish. I am sure there are websites where you "debate" by playing top trumps with hyperlinks, but most on Mudcat do actually like to debate. Respect can be relative, but so can gravity. (See Newton's bucket for details.)

pete however does give good entertainment. Yes, his dishonesty is appalling when you think how many people abuse children by feeding them such rubbish, but he is at least willing to debate it.

Expect with me.

Or Jack.

Or Steve.

Or God.

(Not you Dave, sit down...)