API tools faq
paste
Advertisement
Tidgemo

Do you have a PhD?

Tidgemo
Sep 15th, 2014
252
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 25.33 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LGm0iWPC80
  2.  
  3. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 month ago
  4.  
  5. Ok am I the only one who after seeing this thinks Alister McGrath is a fucking idiotic imbecile?
  6. Reply · 4
  7. Hide replies
  8.  
  9. LactatingManatee1 month ago
  10.  
  11. Yes
  12. Reply · 5
  13.  
  14. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 month ago
  15.  
  16. +LactatingManatee You don't think he is an imbecile? 
  17. Reply ·
  18.  
  19. LactatingManatee1 month ago
  20.  
  21. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol He has a PhD in molecular biophysics from Oxford. Just because his religious views differ from your own does not make him a "fucking idiotic imbecile." That's a very ignorant way of thinking. Between his research published on molecular biophysics and textbooks authored on theology he has contributed more to academia than you ever will.
  22. Reply · 10
  23.  
  24. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 month ago
  25.  
  26. +LactatingManatee Ok. Let me get this straight. Because he has a PhD he can't be a fucking idiotic imbecile? Is that really what you want to argue? You don't know anything about me! I could have a PhD and more scientific publications than him! So how do you know that's not the case?
  27. Reply ·
  28.  
  29. LactatingManatee1 month ago
  30.  
  31. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol
  32. I just think you're a very reactionary atheist. McGrath is a smart guy, make what you will of his religious views but an idiotic imbecile he is not
  33. Reply · 2
  34.  
  35. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 month ago
  36.  
  37. +LactatingManatee Answer my question. How do you know I don't also have a PhD and have MORE scientific publications than McGrath? Yes, he is a fucking imbecile. Have you even watched the video, you idiot?
  38. Reply · 1
  39.  
  40. Aaron Lopez1 month ago
  41.  
  42. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Because if you did have more scientific credentials, you wouldn't be acting like an an A-class knob on Youtube. Though if you had a PhD in Youtube knobbery, we wouldn't disbelieve you.
  43.  
  44. Just accept you dug yourself a hole when you called a published scientific professional your silly choice of words. 
  45. Show less
  46. Reply · 6
  47.  
  48. Ekenedilichukwu Abol3 weeks ago
  49.  
  50. +Aaron Lopez Hi there, asshole. Ok so just because I call Mr. Retard and Mr. More Retarded out on their ridiculous shit, that means I don't have PhD and more scientific publications than Mc Grath? Why not?
  51. Reply ·
  52.  
  53. Aaron Lopez3 weeks ago
  54.  
  55. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Why not? Don't make me repeat myself: if you did have more scientific credentials, you wouldn't be acting like an A-class knob on Youtube.
  56.  
  57. Because when you are a published academic, you "call people out" with well reasoned arguments, since you've written a multi-thousand word academic thesis or two and don't have the time to be a douchebag. And you back it up your arguments with your publicised bibliography as a matter of authority.
  58.  
  59. If you're a super academic professional, you generally don't have a comment thread that goes on for 9 replies name calling and finger pointing like you have. Just state your name and your bibliography, and you will have shut all your naysayers up for good. Even I would apologise.
  60.  
  61. But you won't do that, because you aren't a professional academic, and you don't have any published material. You'll continue to name call and finger point, and give all sorts of excuses for why you will remain silent on being an academic professional.
  62.  
  63. It's okay mate. We've all pretended to be someone we're not on Youtube at least once in our lives.
  64. Show less
  65. Reply · 6
  66.  
  67. LactatingManatee3 weeks ago
  68.  
  69. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. I would expect an atheist, of all people, to know this.
  70. Reply · 2
  71.  
  72. david3 weeks ago
  73.  
  74. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Based on your idiotic statements and juvenile attitude is is very unlikely you have contributed anything to science. 
  75. Reply · 1
  76.  
  77. Ekenedilichukwu Abol3 weeks ago
  78.  
  79. +Aaron Lopez Hi idiot. Ok I will humor you for a while.. :)
  80.  
  81. Mc Grath has 3 scientific publications. I have more than that. Most serious scientists do.
  82. His collective citations total 9 as of today -- mine total 38 as of today.
  83. So judging by those metrics, yes, I have clearly contributed much more than him. Also, I am much younger than he is, so the comparison is biased in HIS FAVOUR.
  84. His last paper, “Lipid Asymmetry, Clustering and Molecular Motion in Biological Membranes and Their Models” does not even show up on Pubmed. He is not a scientist. He is a theologian. Which means he is a retard. Theology has done NOTHING for anyone for thousands of years. It is based 100% on speculation.
  85.  
  86. Reasoned arguments? Sure. Almost everything he said in this video (and others) is retarded. Like I said in my original comment. But I will be specific. For example from min 38-52 RD asks him if God specifically chose specific children to live in the Tsunami and he danced for like 15 min before admitting "YES". That is fucking retarded.
  87.  
  88. No I will not give you my name on You Tube. You have not answered my question. Why not? I view vids and comment on my free time for kicks. Does that mean I am not a published doctor in science? NO. So please just answer the question.
  89.  
  90. I went on for 9 replies because you and Mr. More Retarded posted retarded shit.
  91.  
  92. So, I guess this is the part where you apologise?
  93.  
  94. But since you were so self-inflated let’s take a look at you. How many publications do you have?
  95. Show less
  96. Reply · 1
  97.  
  98. Ekenedilichukwu Abol3 weeks ago
  99.  
  100. +LactatingManatee Yeah. You said I don't have a PhD and more scientific publications than Mc Grath. How do you know?
  101. Reply ·
  102.  
  103. Ekenedilichukwu Abol3 weeks ago
  104.  
  105. +david See reply to +Aaron Lopez.
  106. Reply ·
  107.  
  108. TheCarlredwood2 weeks ago
  109.  
  110. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol You have made a statement (That you are more qualified than McGrath) yet we have no evidence. Are we suppose to just have faith that you are right? Not that I am commenting on Mr McGraths arguments and their validity as I do disagree with him regularly throughout this interview but the way you are so quick to call him 'retarded' does not strike me as the words of a fellow scientist. Richard Dawkins in this interview shows signs of respect due to the fact that the man he is speaking to is highly qualified. If you genuinely are a published author I can't understand why you would not use your name on you tube, people may even research and purchase your work? I'm going to go.... LIE
  111. Show less
  112. Reply · 1
  113.  
  114. Peter Castle2 weeks ago
  115.  
  116. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol show us your credentials for the sake of the discussion
  117. Reply ·
  118.  
  119. Ekenedilichukwu Abol2 weeks ago
  120.  
  121. +TheCarlredwood McGrath is a retard. No he is not highly qualified. He has only three scientific publications totalling 9 citations. If you are a scientist you would know that is not much. All his other work is retarded shit about God. I have ABSOLUTELY no respect for him.
  122.  
  123. Whether I have a PhD and more scientific publications than McGrath is actually irrelevant. I was just responding the two retarded assholes, +LactatingManatee and +Aaron Lopez since THEY made the positive claim I didn't. Which of course, they failed to sustain because they obviously don't know if I do or don't.
  124.  
  125. ??? Why would I publicise my research on youtube. It's already published in the scientific literature---do you actually know what science is and how it works?
  126. Show less
  127. Reply ·
  128.  
  129. Ekenedilichukwu Abol2 weeks ago (edited)
  130.  
  131. +Peter Castle --see reply to +TheCarlredwood . . 
  132. Reply ·
  133.  
  134. Peter Castle2 weeks ago
  135.  
  136. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Your reply says :
  137.  
  138. "Why would I publicise my research on youtube. It's already published in the scientific literature---do you actually know what science is and how it works?"
  139.  
  140. You are not publicising your research. Publicity is when you don't want but others give you advertisement and offers, but you didn't ask for it, for example the tv comertials, no one wants them, no one ask for them.
  141.  
  142. This case is very very different. We are indeed asking for evidence that you have a PHD. We need that evidence to continue the discussion. If you are going to use the fact of having a PhD as an argument, then you have to be prepared to show it to us. Having a Phd shouldn't be an embarrasment, so don't be afraid.
  143.  
  144. If you don't have a PhD and you are making up everything, then you have been caught by me!
  145.  
  146. Note: I'm an atheist, i came to this video to attack god and religion. I think you think the same as me. I'm attacking your phd lie for fun.
  147. Show less
  148. Reply · 1
  149.  
  150. TheCarlredwood2 weeks ago
  151.  
  152. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Not asking you to 'publicise' your work on you tube. As I see this you have made a statement yet provided no evidence this is fact. I am not a scientist but I was under the assumption science is based on evidence and as far as your qualifications and statements go we have none... That was my point. Show us some evidence or you are as bad as anyone you are debating religion with, you cannot make a statement without backing it up! If someone decided to argue the existence of god you would turn around and say there is no evidence for this. You seem a hypocritical not providing evidence for your statements do you not think?
  153. Show less
  154. Reply ·
  155.  
  156. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 week ago
  157.  
  158. +Peter Castle Ok, you illiterate, I am only going to say this one last time. +LactatingManatee made the positive claim (or at least implied it) that I did not have a PhD and more scientific publications that McGrath. He said that without knowing if I had one or not. You don't know I don't have one either. Why do you say I lied about my PhD? How do you know I don't have one?
  159. Reply ·
  160.  
  161. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 week ago
  162.  
  163. +TheCarlredwood See reply to +Peter Castle 
  164. Reply ·
  165.  
  166. Peter Castle1 week ago
  167.  
  168. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol "See reply to: " that's your response to people? You are a obvious troll: and you lost the game, because i catched you.
  169. Reply ·
  170.  
  171. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 week ago
  172.  
  173. +Peter Castle No I just say that to avoid repeating. Nope I am not a troll. It's I "caught" you, you fucking unlettered asshole. Learn the fucking English language before you type. And you no you didn't catch me. You just wrote a bunch of retarded shit and claimed a totally fabricated victory.
  174. Reply ·
  175.  
  176. Peter Castle1 week ago
  177.  
  178. You came here to prove there is no god because there was no evidence, you supported your claim with your supposed PhD, and you gave no evidence to prove it. Also, how many languages do you know how to speak? I know 3, english, spanish and italian. I hope you understand how much smart than you mr fake phd. Maybe I have mistakes on the verbs, but it's a minor problem, since one does not have to be very smart to be smarter than "EKEnedilichukwu Abol". You totally lost this one pal. Also, i keep winning because every comment you answer is like "I have a phd, trust me, please" no bitch, we don't trust you.
  179. Show less
  180. Reply ·
  181.  
  182. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 week ago
  183.  
  184. +Peter Castle No, you fucking unlettered asshole, I didn't. You have not understood anything in this conversation. For the MILLIONTH time: +LactatingManatee and +Aaron Lopez made the postitive claim that I DO NOT have a PhD and more scientific publications than McGrath. They FAILED to prove it because of course, they had no evidence to sustain it. Do you understand that point, or do I have to keep repeating it to you like you're a fucking moron? That is not my point anyway--my original point was simply that Mc Grath is a total retard .
  185.  
  186. Ok now to the languages.
  187. 1. I speak 4 languages. Boohoo......
  188. 2. Speaking lots of languages does not make you intelligent. What makes you intelligent is your emotional perceptiveness, your knowledge and your ability to use your knowledge to solve practical problems.
  189. 3. Your English is shit. The mistakes you made like "catched" is a very very basic mistake. So saying you speak English is a little stretch. Here is a good idea.. learn some fucking English with your time instead of humiliating yourself on here, moron .
  190. Show less
  191. Reply ·
  192.  
  193. Peter Castle6 days ago
  194.  
  195. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol "I speak 4 languages" Yes, i believe that you speak four languages, i believe you, (no i don't) If you really spoke 4, first you said 4 because is greater than 3 and you wanted to win (catched]) second, you didn't list the languages, so that's because you are making up (it's hard to invent 4 languages that seem credible to a smarter being like me, with a small mind like yours).
  196. Fourth: It's obvious that you don't have a PHD. You didn't gave evidence of having it. So you don't fucking have it. Sorry.
  197. Fifth: You are a fucking asshole, your mom is a dickhead, your dad is an asshole and your third uncle from the mom side is a really good person. And Seventh: Can you spot a troll when you see it? Eight: By this point you may be thinking (i hang myself or i cut my penis? If you choose cutting your penis, get a magnifier to be able to find it.
  198. Show less
  199. Reply ·
  200.  
  201. LactatingManatee6 days ago
  202.  
  203. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol My god, you were just playing a little semantics game with my comment. You just wanted to pick out one little negative claim I made and then dance around it going "How do you know this? You cant prove it !!" All this because you were so mad that I didn't agree with you that McGrath is a "fucking idiotic imbecile." The real irony of all this is that you're an atheist and applying the same logic that Christians use to say that you can't disprove the existence of God. Just replace "God" with your "PhD." And stop telling people to work on their English grammar over the internet, YouTube is used by people of all nations so stop acting so entitled and like English is the official language of the internet.
  204. Show less
  205. Reply ·
  206.  
  207. Peter Castle6 days ago
  208.  
  209. +LactatingManatee I'm agree wih you!!! About the phd and about that he's triying to fight us saying our grammar is bad, when you are from other countries! Good luck.
  210. Reply ·
  211.  
  212. Ekenedilichukwu Abol6 days ago
  213.  
  214. +Peter Castle English, French, Spanish and German.
  215. Reply ·
  216.  
  217. Ekenedilichukwu Abol6 days ago
  218.  
  219. +LactatingManatee No. You made a positive claim that I do NOT have a PhD and more scientific publications than McGrath. How do you know? You don't. You made that claim up without evidence. You're a fucking moron.
  220. Reply ·
  221.  
  222. LactatingManatee6 days ago
  223.  
  224. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol The addition of the particle "not" makes something a negative claim, silly. The burden of proof is on you to prove that my assertion is false. Using your own logic I could ask you "Is God real?" and when you respond with "No" my reply would be "How do you know? You don't. You made that claim up without evidence. You're a fucking moron." I think your time would be better spent reading some actual philosophy instead of watching videos like this to reaffirm your own confirmation bias.
  225. Show less
  226. Reply ·
  227.  
  228. Ekenedilichukwu Abol6 days ago
  229.  
  230. +LactatingManatee No. The burden of proof is on you to prove I don't have a PhD and more scientific publications that McGrath. That was what you claimed.
  231. Reply ·
  232.  
  233. LactatingManatee5 days ago
  234.  
  235. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol If you want to play these semantics games, fine. Go read my original reply to you again. I never "claimed" anything. I said that McGrath has "contributed more to academia than you ever will." The key word is WILL. If you want to prove me wrong then you'll have to produce these academic publications. I never said anything about you having a PhD. That's just a strawman you came up with.
  236. Reply ·
  237.  
  238. Peter Castle5 days ago
  239.  
  240. Don't worry Manatee, he lost the debate against you and me. He doesn't have a phd.
  241. Reply ·
  242.  
  243. Ekenedilichukwu Abol5 days ago
  244.  
  245. +LactatingManatee Yes, you are insinuating, with that comment, that I don't have a PhD and more scientific publications/citations (that is how you measure contribution to academia) than McGrath. Where is your evidence for that claim?
  246. Reply ·
  247.  
  248. Ekenedilichukwu Abol5 days ago
  249.  
  250. +Peter Castle You said "He doesn't have a phd." How do you know?
  251. Reply ·
  252.  
  253. Peter Castle5 days ago
  254.  
  255. You said (or you think) "There isn't a god" How do you know?
  256.  
  257. See, it's the same.
  258.  
  259. Also, very few people have a phd. I bet you don't have one. What's your phd about?
  260. Reply ·
  261.  
  262. Ekenedilichukwu Abol5 days ago
  263.  
  264. +Peter Castle No, I didn't say there isn't a God. I said McGrath is a fucking moron. The evidence is this video (and several others...) in which he says retarded shit and gets caught out on it--which was what I said originally.
  265.  
  266. So, what is your evidence for your claim that I do not have a PhD?
  267.  
  268. My PhD is in biology.
  269. Show less
  270. Reply ·
  271.  
  272. Peter Castle5 days ago
  273.  
  274. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Show me you have it! The doctorates in my university are published in the university page. Yours must be someway on the web surely.
  275. Reply ·
  276.  
  277. LactatingManatee5 days ago (edited)
  278.  
  279. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol I wasn't claiming anything. This is what you don't get and I can't believe how hard you have been strawmanning in this comment thread. Nowhere did I insinuate that you DON'T have any academic publications. I was just suggesting that: Based on the current number of papers published by McGrath in the academic world, it is LIKELY that he has contributed more to academia than you ever WILL. What is my reasoning for this? The fact that I have never seen a publication under the name "Ekenedilichukwu Abol." I never said, implied or insinuated that you didn't have a PhD, so stop saying that. I highly suggest you take a course in philosophy or at least study modal logic to some degree as you have no clue at all how to form logical arguments.
  280.  
  281. Also, in your second reply to me, you said, "I could have a PhD and more scientific publications than him!" From the very beginning the burden of proof has been on you.
  282. Show less
  283. Reply ·
  284.  
  285. Ekenedilichukwu Abol2 days ago (edited)
  286.  
  287. +LactatingManatee You did -- you implied/insinuated with that comment that he contributed more to academia than me and that I did not have a PhD. What is your evidence? That's the point. You criticised me without knowing. Also without realising that my qualifications are not the relevant factor -- what is relevant is what MCGATH says. That is evidence. YOU are the one who needs to take more philosophy lessons, you fucking idiot.
  288. Show less
  289. Reply ·
  290.  
  291. Ekenedilichukwu Abol2 days ago
  292.  
  293. +Peter Castle No. I don't want to give my real name. That's not the point. The point is, like I said about 6 times now, that +LactatingManatee and the other unlettered twat made the POSITIVE claim I did NOT have a PhD and more scientific publications than McGrath. And they have no evidence at all for it. Do you understand that? Or do I have to keep repeating it to you?
  294. Reply ·
  295.  
  296. LactatingManatee2 days ago (edited)
  297.  
  298. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Prove: You have less academic publications than Mcgrath (We'll call this P)
  299. Assume: You have more Academic publications than McGrath (This is Q)
  300. If we assume that Q is true then the most logical course of action would be to show your publications and end the argument. Because this did not happen, we must assume that Q is false and P is true.
  301.  
  302. You do not have more publications than McGrath and I say this with certainty. You're a sad little boy raging at a God that you don't believe in, consoling yourself as you prepare to indulge in the same, tired old dance that you've done a million times now. And that's all you'll ever be...
  303.  
  304. You are truly a sad person, I'll be sure to pray for you. :^)
  305.  
  306. (What's your evidence for your claim that McGrath is a "fucking idiotic imbecile?" Empirical evidence if possible, please. No subjective opinions.)
  307. Show less
  308. Reply · 1
  309.  
  310. Peter Castle2 days ago
  311.  
  312. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol You were owned by me and by lactating manatee, bitch!
  313. Reply ·
  314.  
  315. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 day ago
  316.  
  317. +LactatingManatee Hahahahaha!
  318.  
  319. No, you unlettered moron. You are making the positive claim that I do not have a PhD and more publications. You have to provide evidence for this claim. You didn't.
  320.  
  321. But I'll teach you how science actually works because you're a fucking uneducated cretin. Actually what you said is bullshit. The null hypothesis H0 and the hypothesis H1 are actually interchangeable depending on the context of your experiment and what you assume to be true. This was actually an issue for example when people had to prove smoking caused cancer. Should the assumption H0 be that smoking did not cause cancer or that it did?? People decided, and rightly so that people claiming cancer caused cancer had to provide proof. This was satisfied when we found tobacco smoke had carcinogens and statistically enriched mutations in smokers' DNA. But we could have just as well made the H0 that smoking does cause cancer and less people would have died that way.
  322.  
  323. Evidence for your claim that McGrath is a "fucking idiotic imbecile?" THIS VIDEO. And others. Read my comment above!! How many times have I repeated this ??? Are you fucking illiterate as well as retarded?? Read what I'm writing!!
  324.  
  325. YOU are a sad person. You know NOTHING about actual science and you post stupid nonsense!
  326. Show less
  327. Reply ·
  328.  
  329. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 day ago
  330.  
  331. +Peter Castle No. You and him were owned by me. You are just too fucking stupid to see it. See Dunning Kruger effect.
  332. Reply ·
  333.  
  334. Peter Castle1 day ago
  335.  
  336. You say there is no god, there aren't proofs (you didn't said in the comments, but you believe in that) Now you say "i have a phd" but there are no proofs. That's lame.
  337. Reply ·
  338.  
  339. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 day ago
  340.  
  341. +Peter Castle I will only say this ONE LAST TIME. +LactatingManatee said I DIDN'T have one and that I had NOT contributed to science etc more than McGrath. And HE has no proof. Do you understand?
  342. Reply ·
  343.  
  344. LactatingManatee1 day ago
  345.  
  346. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol Oh my god, you can't even differentiate between a positive and negative claim. Face it, McGrath has more academic credentials than you and you're a sad little atheist boy that has resigned himself to making angry comments on videos about a god that you don't even believe in.
  347.  
  348. Here's another proof for you:
  349. Premise: If you have more academic credentials than McGrath then we would observe you critiquing McGrath with well-reasoned arguments and not resorting to ad hominem attacks.
  350. Premise: We do not observe you critiquing McGrath with well-reasoned arguments. We observe you resorting to ad hominem attacks.
  351. Conclusion: You do not have more academic credentials than McGarth.
  352.  
  353. This is a valid pattern for proving a negative claims, all you have to do is verify that the premises are true: in this case they are.
  354. Show less
  355. Reply · 2
  356.  
  357. Paul O'Brien19 hours ago
  358.  
  359. Nope. He's a moron alright.
  360. Reply · 1
  361.  
  362. Ekenedilichukwu Abol1 hour ago
  363.  
  364. +LactatingManatee ?????????? Of course I can differentiate between a positive and negative claim. YOU are the one who keeps asserting your claim with no evidence and therefore doesn't understand that the claimant has the burden of proof. God, you really are a fucking idiot.
  365.  
  366. HAHAHAHA! That's your proof??? It's fucking retarded. But thanks for FINALLY getting off your ass and providing a proof (even though it's fucking lame).
  367.  
  368. 1. Premise 1 is wrong in principle. Say I only critiqued McGrath's intellect. It does not mean that I don't have a PhD. It could be that my critique of his person is a conclusion I made from realising his arguments are crap. Or maybe I simply chose not to leave comments on them.
  369.  
  370. 2. Premise 1 is actually false. Read my reply above to +Aaron Lopez :
  371.  
  372. "Mc Grath has 3 scientific publications. I have more than that. Most serious scientists do.
  373. His collective citations total 9 as of today -- mine total 38 as of today.
  374. So judging by those metrics, yes, I have clearly contributed much more than him. Also, I am much younger than he is, so the comparison is biased in HIS FAVOUR.
  375. His last paper, “Lipid Asymmetry, Clustering and Molecular Motion in Biological Membranes and Their Models” does not even show up on Pubmed. He is not a scientist. He is a theologian. Which means he is a retard. Theology has done NOTHING for anyone for thousands of years. It is based 100% on speculation.
  376.  
  377. Reasoned arguments? Sure. Almost everything he said in this video (and others) is retarded. Like I said in my original comment. But I will be specific. For example from min 38-52 RD asks him if God specifically chose specific children to live in the Tsunami and he danced for like 15 min before admitting "YES". That is fucking retarded."
  378.  
  379. What happened??? Did you just omit to read those comments? 
  380. Show less
  381. Reply ·
  382.  
  383. LactatingManatee26 minutes ago
  384.  
  385. +Ekenedilichukwu Abol "mine total 38 as of today."
  386. Can you provide evidence for this claim?
  387.  
  388. "He is not a scientist. He is a theologian. Which means he is a retard."
  389. This is a pretty extreme statement, not to mention a blatant ad hominem attack because you're mentally incapable of providing a real argument other than, "Wow, you believe in a god? You're a fucking moron."
  390.  
  391. "Of course I can differentiate between a positive and negative claim."-You, 1 hour ago
  392. =>"You made a positive claim that I do NOT have a PhD and more scientific publications than McGrath." -You, 2 days ago. I already explained to you that the presence of the particle "not" makes something a negative claim, not positive.(Not to mention I never actually claimed this if you read my original comment). Please, understand this. All you have done in this comment thread is swear and name-call when you can't provide actual criticism.This is not the critical thinking of a scientist; this is the rationality of a keyboard warrior atheist.
  393. Show less
  394. Reply ·
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement
Public Pastes
Advertisement
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!