Apparently, Agreeing With A 97 Percent Scientific Consensus Makes Me A "Science Denier"
Does
Side Score: 3
|
Doesn't
Side Score: 17
|
|
|
|
No arguments found. Add one!
|
@Nomenclature No--but "Science Denier" is a somewhat appropriate label based on many of your other positions. Actually, it is more accurate to say that "you lack the depth of critical thought and/or education to see much Pseudo-Science for what it is & are credulous enough to fall for much "Scientific Mysticism" (i.e. essentially believing in Sci-Fi type material as a reality rather than fiction)" Side: Doesn't
2
points
You are correct mathfan. Nomenclature seems to be a notmathfan. He likes to jump on the religious, but he does not see that he is very religious. He believes in the epitimy of unicorns, leprechauns, spaghetti monsters, and a world where Muslims do not want to chop off our heads and make the whole world Islam. Side: Doesn't
0
points
No--but "Science Denier" is a somewhat appropriate label based on many of your other positions. You are a lying troll. I have never denied any form of science at any time on this website, which explains why you were unable to provide any examples to support your bitter personal attack. The opposite is in fact true (i.e. that you frequently deny science). This can be proven by, among other things, your claim that "The flow of time is an illusion". See:- http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ I am banning you for being pathetic. You cannot best me in fair debate and that is exactly why you lie so much. To be perfectly frank, you are a complete failure held together by nothing but ego. Side: Does
2
points
|