On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:35:35 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com>:
>On Apr 9, 2:19 pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > 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 .... > >> Why do I get the feeling that went straight over his head? > >[BOB] >> There are enough >> available catastrophes that you should be able to post one >> next week for the following week. > >[BOB] * >> Need I (ahem!) predict that the response will at some point >> involve the daily weather ....
Nope: "deity". As in (your repeated statement) "GOD (or GOES) DOESN'T PLAY DICE!". Whatever relevance that has...
>[HERC] >How about a daily weather forecast while we're at it?
Already answered; still waiting for *any* verifiable prediction...
<snip irrelevantia> --
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." - McNameless
