[Ben Holmes]

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

(12-10-2016, 03:41 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  I note for the record that you couldn't cite even a SINGLE "debate" where Henry, SVA, or you didn't run away...

Logical failure Holmes. I stated there were plenty of long debates between you and people like SVA and Henry that lasted for many months - if not a year or more.

That those debates ended was not because people "ran" away - it was because they defeated you and retired - wisely.

You're lying again, Patrick.

You can't cite ANY "long debates" that believers such as you or Henry, or whomever... didn't simply run from. Most "long debates" were no more than 3 or 4 posts...

You see, the evidence fails you, and you really have no-where to go against someone who knows the evidence better than you.

And... typical for believers... you keep making statements you cannot support with evidence.

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

(12-10-2016, 03:41 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  Indeed, even on THIS forum, it's clear that you've run away time and time again... you simply cannot face the facts.

Not running Ben, just not interested in "debating with you"....been there got the T shirt. It is a waste of time.

Of COURSE you're not "interested" in "debating" me... you can't.

You've NEVER been able to... You've always been the one to run... most often after only one or two rebuttals.

Even such a "luminary" as Prof. John McAdams ran away from the points I'd raised on the 6.5mm virtually round object... Had Vincent Bugliosi ever been Internet savvy, he'd have lost too.

Time and time again I defy you to produce any "debate" between knowledgeable opponents, and you can't do it. Believers are forced to run away time and time again. There's simply too much of the evidence widely available ... let's face it, you were viable in the 70's, when virtually all we had was the Warren Commission Report & volumes, now it's a losing battle - which explains your refusal to debate.

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

(12-10-2016, 03:41 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  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.

Tripe - you are deluded. You have had you ass kicked over and over. You believe in an idiotic consppiracy theory involving up to 5 gunmen and up to 7 shots. 

Enough said. That little belief system of yours speaks volumes. Your views on the Kennedy assassination are fantastical.

How can I be "deluded" when I'm merely mentioning a fact?

One that you can't refute?

What I "believe" is supported by the evidence... evidence so strong, in fact, that in some cases, you're willing to simply lie about it.

Such as your blatant lie that the witnesses DOCUMENTED in print in the first two days did not overwhelmingly point to the Grassy Knoll.

(Thought I'd forgotten that rather stupid lie on your part, didn't you?)

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

(12-10-2016, 03:41 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  And that fact tells the tale... doesn't it Patrick?

Yep, that you should not be taken seriously on the this subject.

The fact that YOU cannot provide supporting evidence for your assertions is reason not to take ME seriously???

ROTFLMAO!!!

(This is an excellent example of the rather poor logic that believers employ on a regular basis...)

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

(12-10-2016, 03:41 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  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.

Oh believe you me Holmes, I could have a field day doing that. Can I be bothered? Nope.

You're a gutless coward, aren't you Patrick?

The truth is, you simply CANNOT do it... it's not that you 'couldn't be bothered'...

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  And let me point out - my comment that your posts are often "bizzare, cryptic and at times, non sensical"
cannot be a lie. It is my assertion and therefore an opinion.

It's an "opinion" that would prove quite embarrassing indeed were you to try to support it with actual quotes.

That would allow all readers to see just what your intellectual capacity actually consists of... and you're understandably nervous about showing that.

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  That you even made that statement "you're simply lying again." merely demonstrates the point you are asking me to cite. The problem is of course is that you lack the intellectual accumen and rigour to stand up to knowledgeable, intelligent adversaries but unfortunately for you, you cannot appreciate that of course - palpably because you think people have "run" from you. They simply have not, they have run rings around you, probably got bored and left.

Gutless cowards frequently make this sort of argument. Sorta reminds me of the hoary "My dad can whip your dad" nonsense from youth.

I'd ask you to cite even one example where someone had "run rings" around me, but I know that you'd merely illustrate your vast cowardice again...

 

(12-11-2016, 12:56 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  I have reduced my time on your site to maybe 20 minutes per week approx. I do rather enjoy a bit of light entertainment.

Where are the other posters Ben.....have they run? Or maybe got bored....?

You rarely find believers where they cannot control the forum. You are one of the few exceptions, it seems that you don't mind looking silly. This is something I commented on... probably nearly a decade ago... about believers not willing to stand up to critics in forums they don't control.

Notice that you spent your "20 minutes" ... not on the evidence... not on refuting anything I've devastated Bugliosi on... but on a whining attempt to explain why you refuse to support your assertions.

Do you suppose that anyone is fooled?