Warp wrote:
>   You always sound so arrogant, but in this case you are simply wrong,
> sorry, and this time I have quite clear references. For example:
> 
> http://amasci.com/weird/end.html

OK, so for 20 years they thought they'd have everything figured out. 
That's hardly stagnation.

>> You're so full of crap.
>   You are being unusually rude today.

You are correct. I am still feeling unwell. I apologise.

>   And that somehow disproves the claim that a large amount of scientists
> strongly opposed Eintein's and others' theories at first?

Sure, but clearly for less than 10 years. Obviously, scientific change 
*does* take some time, or it's just technology.

>   And why do you bring up religion into this?

Must be something about the thread.  Hmmm... Could be the creationist 
museum concept?

>   Where have I proposed that? Why do you insist in bringing religion
> into this?

I dunno. I look at the subject line, and when you say "I believe 
evolution is implausible", I have to believe it's because you prefer the 
religious explanation.

>> Like I said, illogical.
>   You certainly sound arrogant.

"Please explain to this man the difference between arrogance and 
competence."

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message