Re: politics

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 14:07:11 +0000, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:08:43 +0000
Martin Harran <martinharran@gmail.com> wrote:
>

On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 12:32:09 +0000, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
 

On Mon, 09 Dec 2024 12:02:23 -0500
jillery <69jpil69@gmail.com> wrote:

>
[]

>
Also Martin Harran is reviving some historical debate about how Galileo was treated.

 
In regard to ID/Creationism/Religion v Science generally, I'd  happily
bet that nothing new has been added in the last 5-10 years, it is
*all* old stuff revisited.
 

I guess so.

Your guess is incorrect.

Anyway, as previously pointed out to you, reading these threads is not
compulsory and, if you don't think they are worthwhile fare for TO,
you could always post something else yourself.
 

>
Sure. but I'm mostly here as an observer; I don't have a Great New
Theory to promote. Sorry.
>

>

given before.  I suppose that's better than mindless trolls from J***
enablers, but not by much.
 

>
But responding to JTEM *is* enabling it, pshurely?

The comment above is in response to a comment from jillery, and not
from the poster to whom Kerr-Mudd's post addresses.  Since Kerr-Mudd
commented here, jillery responds to his comment below:

Not sure how any reasonable person considers documenting willful
stupidity as enabling, "pshurely" or otherwise.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge