George Hammond wrote:
>> So you in fact used to be an atheist before changing your mind. Swinging
>> back and forth like that wounds your credibility.
> Didn't seem to wound St. Paul's credibility.
Okay, everyone! GEORGE HAMMAND ADMITS BEING AN ATHEIST IN THE PAST. Draw the
right conclusions if you will...
>> > there *IS* a flaw in "Darwinian Evolution".... namely, there is a
>> > "Divine Selection" term that is missing in his theory. SPoG proves
>> > this. Christ!......... Darwin is actually WRONG!
>> No. That's a term you added. It's almost like shoving words in someone's
>> month and then attacking him/her.
> Hey.. your just giving us your loudmouth unsupported
> OPINION.... nobody is interested in opinions here,
Your reply suggests you are not able to give a proper answer.
> least of all yours. I've published a proof in the peer reviewed
> literature and it's posted on my website.
It doesn't mean anything. Stop saying 'peer-reviewed' and 'my website'. It
won't impress anybody.
>> > [Hammond]
>> > Nice to hear from you Roy.
>> Sure you like the attention.
> No, I enjory hearing bigshots like you squeal when I step
> on their toes with a scientific proof of God.
Let me clarify something: the only reason these George Hammand threads go on
and on is that people are tired of the s*** that comes up in sophisticated
newsgroups. If you had not replied to any single message, your name would
have faded by now, AND YOU KNOW IT.
Again I say what I said to you before: real scientists know how to use a