Search results

There are ways you can guarantee no transmission.

Your glasses fog up, eh? I guess that means potentially COVID-laced air is escaping from your mask. :chuckle:

:rotfl:

The virus was over months ago.

A lament for the days when Darwinists would have challenges.

From your own link: "No country knows the total number of people infected with COVID-19. All we know is the infection status of those who have been tested... This means that the counts of confirmed cases depend on how much a country actually tests. Without testing there is no data. Testing is...

Because you say so? Because the virus is scared of Taiwanese? No idea. Because you looked at a few raw numbers? Did you examine the testing regimes in place? The definitions of what constitutes a "case"? The conditions on which the government would require a test...

And yet it still arrived. There was a pilot walking around with it for two days before the state tracked him down. Hold on, sunshine. You're the one who thinks that the virus somehow did not spread much here. You "pray explain."

You're a special kind of stupid today, huh? Is reading your second language? Viruses aren't magic. This one has swept the world. If you think it avoided Taiwan, I want to hear how.

Anyone who believes that Taiwan was not affected by the virus in much the same way that every other nation was is a moron.

The virus was over months ago.

:rotfl: People walking into a store.

Show one video of this happening. I dare you.

Name one person who has said that this should happen. Provide the quote. I dare you.

"I don't like this tiger. He reads minds."

Oh. I'm not trying to make any strong distinction between philosophy and science. Yep. I think that the presuppositional approach is the best one, especially when it comes to helping people assess their own beliefs. Trying to flesh out what I was trying to express a bit better with those...

What's the difference? Just name five.

Is there something wrong with being too right? Perhaps you do not know what it is to be right. Like who?

Hmmm. Good question. It's difficult to express what I'm thinking with an example, which might mean I'm thinking about this too much. Let me think on it. Yeah. The rhetoric I was trying to get across is that they can be right on things that do not show them that they are wrong about God.

The conspiracy theorists who think Joebiden won the election will do anything to justify their insanity.