rationalskepticism.org

dogsgod wrote:

Stein wrote:

dogsgod wrote:

Stein wrote:

And some of the wannabees even had followers who had pitched battles with Roman battalions(!), yet Philo isn't found referencing those either. Why not? Again, mythers seem incapable of understanding such a thing as an analogy.

Stein

Are you here to contribute anything to the discussion or is your only interest in taking pot shots at what you call "mythers"?

I've contributed plenty here: detailed analysis on point after point throughout this thread. I find it rich that you, Proudfootz and others like you, are now using the debate tactic of "When are you going to provide detailed analysis" against posters like Byron, myself, and/or GakuseiDon, when that's precisely what we've done extensively before posters like Proudfootz were even on the scene. It's very convenient for posters like Proudfootz to ignore the Search engine and not read up on the detailed contributions we've been providing for hundreds of pages. A Proudfootz, or whoever, will trot out tired nonsense that we've already analyzed in depth long ago. They think they're contributing something new. They aren't. They're just providing hand-me-down incantations from the mythers handbook with which we're all too familiar and that have been soundly debunked in depth, pages and pages before.

Stein

No one asked you "When are you going to provide detailed analysis", you were asked if you here to contribute anything to the discussion or is your only interest in taking pot shots at what you call "mythers".

Your so called "mythers handbook" is just another potshot, you love to dish out but can't take any criticism in return evidenced by your petulance and your squealing to the moderators should anyone call you a believer. You claimed to have debunked something, perhaps in your own mind you have but obviously the rational skeptics here remain skeptical.