run rampant in our culture... hopefully this will help remedy that. ttp://pulse.yahoo.com/_SU3L6O6MNAPXLBIG\\... jqb No he did not name any points that only work if the topic is evidence-based, and neither did you. ttp://pulse.yahoo.com/_SU3L6O6MNAPXLBIG\\... jqb "that the way demonstrated is the ideal way to have a discussion" That's not an unstated assumption. "You're not very good at this rebutting lark, are you?" Silly personal attack. Anonymous This is absolute bollocks. It"s OK down the third "yes", but after that it becomes merely an exercise in intellectual arrogance. There is an essential question missing: "Are you going to try to impose your own 'rules' on this discussion, and claim that I have cheated if I break them"? No -- then we can have a discussion. Yes -- this is not a discussion, it is merely a projection of your own fixed mindset. Halfwaytonowhere07 So it is okay to make truth claims without supporting evidence? So its okay to recycle old arguments that have been proven to be faulty? So its okay to move on to a separate issue when the current has yet to be resolved? So its okay to argue you don't need evidence to support your claims? I'm assuming you do not understand how science or logic work yet. Neither of these practices could work if you breached the above standards. As far a cheating -- yes. There is no point in trying to have a rational exchange with somebody who is clearly biased and using faulty methods. ttp://profile.yahoo.com/ZCM4Q3GHWU4JQDI\\... cliGK