dimreepr

I'd rather you didn't, what else can we discuss?

So let them cheat... Isn't that a level playing field???

OK, let's unpack this "silly side discussion": You'll note in my reply, I don't disagree with you "Sometimes one has to search through the shit to get the answer", I even included a smiley wink... Yet you chose, without due diligence, to tar me with the same brush, and accuse me of an unsubstantiated claim rather than seek clarification... You're showing your bias here, instead of asking for clarity, you chose to try and belittle me. As in a recent thread of mine, where you implied I was stoned rather than offer an argument... Which is very pertinent to the first paragraph of the OP, or do you doubt that corruption by the wealthy makes a mockery of democracy? No where do I deny the OP is largely talking bollox, I just thought this one point was worthy of discussion.

Citation needed... It's a two way street...

I'm sorry too, I didn't explain it well enough; did you?

I did try to explain...

You may as well suggest, Bolt is to tall to run... The only fair playing field, is level for all; drugs included... Winning a sport can only be an arbitery measure of being...

indeed, but not exclusive...

It's easy to be trapped by knowledge, what we know to be true and while scientists aren't immune to bias/the trap; it's easier for them to overcome because they're aware of the trap, they understand the limits of our perception because they've been taught by someone who does understand. That doesn't mean the knowledge written in the bible is useless, it just means that understanding the bible is that much more difficult, because your teacher doesn't understand. IOW don't go looking for miracles to explain a metaphor.

Blanche them first...

There are no accidents... It's no accident that a termite mound favour's a termite...

Why? Who designed a termite mound?

I thought it was common knowledge and I thought I'd linked to https://www.wycliffe.co.uk/terms-conditions/#:~:text=2.4 Wycliffe is a registered,regulated by the Charity Commission. in my reply. As to the point... I don't think this part is unsubstantiated (I haven't read the rest), my post was an attempt to show how corruption can turn a virtue bad. I think the founding father's of the USA, tried to write a virtuous and corruption proof set of rules; and as much as making the education of the poor a charity is virtuous; charity itself is corrupted when it benefits the wealthy. What else is there to discuss?

Do you understand this paper?

Charity, is more than evidence, I feel much beter,,,

Wycliffe college, for instance is a charity... While Maidenhill is a state school.

Do you, 100% agree with me?

Sometimes one has to search through the shit to get the answer, for instance, public/private/privileged school's, in Britain are charities... 😉

And irony, since this thread has been resurrected twice...

That's a whole heaping of irony... 🤣😇

Some time's in life we have to consider, the battery life...

You don't seem to understand the difference between a reason and an excuse...

For an optomistic estimate, read a guarantee; in politic speak...

Understanding exist's, on the boundary of knowledge...

Good point, but the counter arguement is, it dissuades other's; at some point the balance favours the brave politician...