@westside-steve said:

Actually I can't imagine it's all that enjoyable constantly seething about the fact that a man who is much more educated and probably much more intelligent than you believes in a greater power and finds a measure of peace in that believe. It's truly hard to imagine that it's all that troubling in your life.

WSS

When have I ever done that? It is cool, I'll wait...

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=A0LEVvHy30xV4nUATKwPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--?qid=20101213014821AAeTpPp

Now look how the media went after every single detail about Bush, and

when they couldn't prove anything, they just stated falsehoods.

And look at how they refuse to eval anything about ObaMao.

@mld-woody said:

I can't even imagine what it is like to live in the box you reside in.

Actually I can't imagine it's all that enjoyable constantly seething about the fact that a man who is much more educated and probably much more intelligent than you believes in a greater power and finds a measure of peace in that believe. It's truly hard to imagine that it's all that troubling in your life.

WSS

@mld-woody said:

Bliss.

not smart. But watch libs go berserk, demanding, as always,

that they have a right to know every single thing about candidates

running for president...

referring to only conservatives.

More self-interest, hypocritical emotional knee jerk.

* must not think the Earth is 6,000 years old

@browns149 said:

Or DUBBYA!!!!!

Whose academic record was identical to J F Kerry so......

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Or DUBBYA!!!!!

now it's done

@mohican said:

Ben Carson is a brilliant man and a gifted surgeon - but that still doesn't qualify himself to be president.

"He gives good prayer" is not reason enough.

Well of course when compared to the likes of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?

WSS

"He gives good prayer" is not reason enough.

I typed something up explaining why you were wrong, after you continued to go on about it. If you call that a win, you're desperate for wins.

You basically said something Retarded, kept saying it, and are now making fun of the person correcting you...

Again, the whole reason this is believable is because you have shown in the past an inability to understand data.

@calfoxwc said:

Like I said, I (and he) got that you were joking first time. Then you kept on about it, and it started to seem like you were actually serious.

Oh, and, the maths is completely wrong. You're taking the ratio of two things that are incompatible.

Liberals don't know how to have fun, have no sense of humor, and reality bites them

and makes them cry.

Just like a pecker would. (hahahaha, another joke! ahahahahahaha). "sniff".

Okay, now i have to back to work.

"For me, I got that you were joking (or trying ) first time, then found it less funny when asking if there are any 'science deniers' out there - ironic humour aside - and then when you copied and pasted your previous post asking for someone to prove it wrong, I kinda felt you were actually being serious."

*************************************************

Yeah, when I throw silly stuff to goad woody into replying, I'm serious.

I only repeated it because it went ignored by the woody. I didn't think I'd get Chris, but I did get woody on his knee jerk. I had to bait him twice, but I caught the sucker. LOL

Ah, that was great.

What's funny, is the actual math is correct, just that the premise was silly. As soon as a looked at a graph where I could

get some kind of number close to 85, I went for it. Honestly, it took me about 2.5 minutes. I'm just disappointed I had to

repost to get woody to bite like a rabid vampire. Oh, that is great. I can go help a neighbor put in his lawn now, have to

disc and rototil it.

@mld-woody said:

Exactly Chris. I ignored it to start, and then he kept going on about it...

Nice of Chris to help you redeem yourself.

Stuart said:

@calfoxwc said:

Yes, what took you so long ? I was laughing at how quickly I could muster up

an 85 percent ! It took me about 2.5 minutes to manufacture.

Now, that is creativity that you are too young to understand.

Oh, that was fun. Want me to do it again?

For me, I got that you were joking (or trying ) first time, then found it less funny when asking if there are any 'science deniers' out there - ironic humour aside - and then when you copied and pasted your previous post asking for someone to prove it wrong, I kinda felt you were actually being serious.

So please, if you repeatedly ask someone about your 'joke' don't gloat when they think you're being serious. Your track record of quantitative ability isn't on your side...

@mld-woody said:

You have shown enough times on here that you don't grasp even some of the simplest concepts. You may have done that on purpose, but you don't deserve any benefit of the doubt. I fully believe you thought your calculations meant what you said. That you completely believed you were proving the 85% number correct. Your ineptitude for statistics and general reasoning since the day I started posted here cause me to think that.

Good night.

Haha...hook, line, and sinker.

Good night.