You just cannot admit you were wrong, can you? Too much pride.Ok Duckie
And yet you cannot find that post now, can you? Odd that. Almost like it does not exist.Actually, I did. You just didn't bother reading the post which was a direct response to you.
Did I say "almost"? I meant "exactly". Exactly like it does not exist. But you have to pretend it does because the alternative is swallowing your pride.
As opposed to conversing with someone who cannot accept he was wrong, even when presented with overwhelming evidence?What if I'm just saying that you're really making this a boring discussion, because the only thing I'm seeing is a kid who likes to play king of the sandbox, and it makes genuinely interesting conversation with you a tedious and pointless experience?
I have proved Ockham and Occam were the same person, and still you refuse to admit it. How can we possibly have a discussion if you are determined to cling to something that has been shown to be wrong? And that is an issue that is trivial; it is not like I am asking you to change your faith in anyway, just for you to accept that a guy long dead is known by two different names.
If you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge that, then discussion is out of the window. All that is left is exposing you for what you are, Steve.
It is a conclusion based on good evidence.Well, we already know that it's easier for you to jump to such conclusions, just so you can have the appearance of being justified.
- We know you were wrong about positrons - despite doing physics at university - and we know you have never admitted it.
- We know you were wrong about St Paul - despite doing Bible studies - and we know you have never admitted it.
- We know you were wrong about Ockham, and we know you have never admitted it.
Just to be clear, I have searched for posts you made with the words "positron", "saul" or "paul" to confirm you have not later admitted you were wrong, and I can see in this thread that you are still not doing to with Ockham, so I can be pretty confident that - despite your claims to the contrary - you have never admitted to be being wrong about any of these.
Given that evidence, I think "easier for a Christian to lie than to swallow his pride and admit an atheist was right" is a very reasonable conclusion. Certainly the best I have. How do you explain it, Steve?