in article 15m4305c5n8jl0kfjmqcb99orat19kfksn@4ax.com, * at nospam@plz.com
wrote on 2/17/04 12:09 PM:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:41:50 GMT, Shaun Howell <SHOWELL2@satx.rr.com> wrote:

in article 989886.0402170217.3c1c2450@posting.google.com, Leonardo Been at
plato_world@yahoo.com wrote on 2/17/04 4:17 AM:

So you can go on and on with stating truth and submitting evidence
- but it is for them only a reason the more to deny it or to
invalidate it, and to more fiercely or more cleverly oppose and omit
what is true and relevant.

If by "truth", you mean "outlandish fantasies" and "evidence" you mean
"unsubstanciated hearsay", then I guess your little temper tantrum is
valid...

It's difficult for the paranoid to admit the truth and acknowledge the
evidence.

What truth? What evidence? Believers are prone to just throw out a series of
unsubstanciated stories, more often than not simply unscrutinized single
witness testimony, and whine when challenged. The proof of the pudding
regarding Believers is in how they react when a "Case Study" is conclusively
proven to be of a mundane explanation; ignoring the data or claiming
cover-up. Woo-woos aren't interested in debate or research, merely
unquestioning adherence to the Believers party line. By their deeds shall ye
know them...