On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 18:31:43 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper <email@example.com>:
>On Apr 9, 8:24 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote: >> >> Need I (ahem!) predict that the response will at some point >> involve the deity (or possibly weather .... > > >SPOT ON! > >Very impressive Bob, *I* give you 100% full marks for that precise >prediction about my above response (which was clearly not rigged BTW), >though no skeptic would!
Sure they would, given your recent posts. It's like "predicting" that water will remain wet.
>Swap 'deity' for 'daily' weather response and you literally broke >TRILLION:1 ODDS with such a specific prediciton!
Take your meds. --
"Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." - McNameless