Runtu wrote:..Generally when this happens, high-fives are exchanged, "bullseyes" pronounced, and skeptics are lambasted for not finding the bullseyes particularly compelling.
..And several posters come right out and say she is an idiot.
..But the bullseye here is a hell of a lot more solid than almost any of the bullseyes I can think of that have been touted on that board.
I see what you mean, Runtu. If these clowns don't agree with someone, they attempt to T-bone their qualifications to make them appear as one that can't draw a legitimate conclusion or generate a thoughful opinion -for example:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
I suspect that you don't know enough to have that opinion, B23.
Hours on the internet do not a scholar make.
What have you actually read?
As you know, this is simply a diversion tactic of these prophets, seers and revelators of apologetics.
B-23 brought commentary to the thread and Peterson wasn't confident enough to challenge his remarks head-on, so he does what the big fat bully did in the schoolyard when we were kids. Generally they'll cut others down to build themselves up. It's a lot of posturing till someone finally stands up to them.
The hypocracy that has already been pointed out is quite revealing as well. What kind of life does this guy have outside the internet with the amount of hours he spends berating others here and other places?
