Keep your posts limited to one point.So how are posters supposed to debate if they are not allowed to cite relationships and convergences between pieces of evidence? Clearly no such meaningful debate is possible, and that is the intention behind the rule: to shield CODOH from true debate.
Voluminous, lengthy, and redundant posts are not welcomed.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Shielding CODOH From Debate
CODOH Rules state:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Their approach is ahistorical and anti-scientific, because history and, in large part, science works through convergence of evidence. CODOH forum insists on divergence of evidence.
But if someone like Kues publishes an article listing 20 'anomalies', Hargis (or one of his lackeys) will post it in full and claim that there is a convergence between the anomalies.
The hypocrisy is easy to see. "Revisionist" posters can get away with personal attacks, dodging, off-topic material, etc...but "believers" can do nothing of the sort, not even in response to the "revisionist" attacks.
Also, I was taken to task for using the word "denier", but how many times does one see references to "believers"?
Post a Comment