The Role of the Unrepentant Skeptic

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Interesting that you chose to ignore the meat of my post. You also provided no answers whatsoever, just deflective questions.

Ask me a question and I will answer it, which part of your post do you feel I have ignored?

On the other hand I have asked you direct questions that you have ignored.

Originally posted by dj2becker

Ask me a question and I will answer it, which part of your post do you feel I have ignored?

Okay. Why were you deceptive in your switching of accounts?

Originally posted by dj2becker
So the same guys who stole the body also got the body to pretend to be alive and appear to 500 eyewitnesses and bamboozle them all, sounds very likely.

What "500 eyewitnesses"?

Show me where I can read 10% of these eyewitness accounts.

50 will be enough. I don't need, for now, all 500.

Originally posted by FMF
What "500 eyewitnesses"?

Show me where I can read 10% of these eyewitness accounts.

50 will be enough. I don't need, for now, all 500.

Have you decided that 50 witnesses would be sufficient or this just one of your realizations? You have obviously made up your mind, so even 5000 accounts would be a waste of time.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Okay. Why were you deceptive in your switching of accounts?

Because I hadn't posted on the old account for a few years and felt like a new account.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Have you decided that 50 witnesses would be sufficient or this just one of your realizations? You have obviously made up your mind, so even 5000 accounts would be a waste of time.

This issue is what evidence you are claiming to have. How many of these "500 eyewitness" accounts can you show me?

Originally posted by FMF
This issue is what evidence you are claiming to have. How many of these "500 eyewitness" accounts can you show me?

What then in your book would suffice as sufficient evidence?

Ghost of a Duke: Okay. Why were you deceptive in your switching of accounts?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Because I hadn't posted on the old account for a few years and felt like a new account.

Tell me, why did you trot out exactly the same set of arguments/assertions to me ~ on pages 8 to 14 on this thread ~ under a different account name as if we hadn't had the same conversation a few months ago?

Originally posted by dj2becker
What then in your book would suffice as sufficient evidence?

Do you have the eye witness accounts, or not? It seems you don't. Why did you imply that you did?

Originally posted by FMF
Tell me, why did you trot out exactly the same set of arguments/assertions to me ~ on pages 8 to 14 on this thread ~ under a different account name as if we hadn't had the same conversation a few months ago?

Why am I not allowed to use the same argument if I am in fact the same person?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Why am I not allowed to use the same argument if I am in fact the same person?

You were pretending to be a different person.

Originally posted by FMF
You were pretending to be a different person.

You are also someone different in real life, or is your real name FMF?

Originally posted by dj2becker
You are also someone different in real life, or is your real name FMF?

When you posted with the screen name dj2becker you were pretending to be a different person to the one who posted using the screen name Fetchmyjunk.

Originally posted by dj2becker
You are also someone different in real life, or is your real name FMF?

By the way, I think you are being dishonest. And I don't think you are funny. So, if you are trying to be funny by being comically dishonest, you are failing, as far as I am concerned.

§Originally posted by FMF
When you posted with the screen name dj2becker you were pretending to be a different person to the one who posted using the screen name Fetchmyjunk.

Actually if the intention was to pretend to be a different person I would have used a different style and obvious denied that I knew anything about Fetchmyjunk.