View Single Post

Default 

December 18th, 2013, 18:06
Originally Posted by zahratustra View Post
LOL ok, he is having a bad day but he has also mentioned "detect"
Personally, I find the blind certainty and condescending attitudes of both sides of this debate (more the broader argument than this specific thread) to be ridiculous and annoying, so since we're already wallowing in Loopy Land, allow me to throw some mineral spirits on the fire.

On its face, the following is completely asinine and I'm taking some liberties with the strict definition of "conspiracy". Give the underlying parallel a little thought, if you will, as the point is more about the foundation than the silly building I've put on it. How would you prove that either side is wrong?

"Those religious twits are working together, I tell ya. They peddle invisible fairies and silly stories and the only support they've got is 'cuz they say so'. After all, who wrote those books anyway? Convenient that you're the sole source of the only evidence you've got. I think it's really about money and prestige. Convince the sheep and they'll follow you anywhere."

"Those scientific twits are working together, I tell ya. They peddle invisible particles and silly theories and the only support they've got is 'cuz they say so'. After all, who built those machines anyway? Convenient that they're the sole source of the only evidence they've got. I think it's really about money and prestige. Convince the sheep and they'll follow you anywhere."

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is online now

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#276

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,340