XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic
XPost: alt.christnet

On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 10:56:28 -0700, Bob Casanova wussed horribly:

>On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 14:50:31 -0400, the following appeared
>in sci.skeptic, posted by mur@.not.:
>
>>When challenged directly and specifically about the supposed
>>evidence they think should exist...
>
>It's up to the claimant (that's you) to provide the evidence

    Then why isn't it up to the atheist to explain WHAT he thinks he's trying
to
talk about? For example why are you terrified to try to explain WHAT etc.....
evidence YOU think you're trying to talk about? Here's a clue for you: It IS up
to you, but you have no idea what you think you're trying to talk about.
Instead
all you're able to do is to wuss horribly, as ALL OF YOU have proven
consistently.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)