Posts: 955
Threads:276
Joined: May 2016
Reputation:
35
Stance Critic
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #20 Refuted.
(12-10-2016, 02:46 PM)Patrick C Wrote: (12-05-2016, 07:06 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: (12-10-2016, 02:46 PM)Patrick C Wrote: (12-05-2016, 07:06 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: You cannot point to a SINGLE example of a believer going head to head against someone reasonably knowledgeable on the evidence.
What a howler......how about the two years going head to head on a weekly basis with Hank, SVA and myslef Benny Boy and DVP from time to time...?
You don't half talk a load of tripe.
And as for "real debates" - you don't know the meaning of the word.....!
Point to a single "debate" where Henry, SVA, or yourself didn't run away... AND CITE FOR IT.
But you won't be able to. You and other believers end up running away all the time. Even this post illustrates your abject cowardice... I keep trying to get you to respond to Darryl Click or David Edmond Knapp, and all anyone sees is your cowardice...
Run Patrick... RUN!!!
Well Hank "debated" with you for many months Ben....that is hardly running away. Off and on over a year I would think.
That he and others gave up in the end is not cowardice, it is because dealing with your bizzare, cryptic and at times, non sensical meanderings is ultimately a waste of time.
I note for the record that you couldn't cite even a SINGLE "debate" where Henry, SVA, or you didn't run away...
Indeed, even on THIS forum, it's clear that you've run away time and time again... you simply cannot face the facts.
I've NEVER been in a 'debate' with a believer where the believer didn't simply shut up and run away... it happens EVERY SINGLE TIME.
And that fact tells the tale... doesn't it Patrick?
P.S. Nor will you EVER quote an example of a post that is "bizzare, cryptic and at times, non sensical"... you can't, you're simply lying again.