PaulK writes:
I an sorry, but Peter Borger is an arrogant liar who substitutes imagination for knowledge. It is really hard to answer such a person without making highly critical remarks concerning his conduct.
I understand how you feel.
The moderator guidelines prohibit moderation of threads in which one participates, and since I'm participating in this discussion as Percy I am powerless here, so I only issued a general admonition.
In debates, some opponents pose bigger puzzles than others. Peter Borger appears to be a puzzle that evolutionists have not yet deciphered, and he makes decipherment more difficult because some of his very effective debating techniques cause distracting frustrations and require time-consuming replowing of old arguments.
If Peter Borger's views are incorrect then nailing this down is going to require more than simply calling him a liar. You're going to have to keep track of which points he's successfully made and which he hasn't. You're going to have to carefully note for him where he hasn't addressed the arguments. You're going to have to explain when his arguments do not make sense. You're going to have to point out when he has made unsupported assertions. And you're going to have to stay focused on a particular point until it is settled. In other words, it requires discipline. And I hope Peter Borger holds you, me Scott and everyone else to the same standards.
Did anyone think this was supposed to be fun?

I'm not claiming to have all the debate answers, but whether you find the above suggestions useful or not, I *do* think increased discipline is required.
------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator