Your post is being ignored
Yes, I know. You ignore most of what I write to you. I've been commenting on that for weeks.
I have problems in spotting points of disagreement………… so if I made a claim that you disagree with please quote my cliam and start your reply with “I disagree because….”
I've already responded to that. Let me guess - you ignored it:
"No, Leroy. You want too much, and it still wouldn't be enough. Don't forget that reading comprehension problem, much of which is due to that confirmation bias that you also have refused to acknowledge seeing much less acknowledge or rebut. You still don't understand what parsimony is. Nor what eyewitness testimony is."
The answer is still no, I won't do that. It would be a waste of my time and yours for reasons given. If you need help with written language, you might want to hire a tutor, or somebody to read for you and explain things to you in the way you require. You want others to go back and find your words. Do you not recall what you wrote or what it meant? I do, but not the precise language, just its meaning. So when you say something that means that supernaturalism is a parsimonious hypothesis or complexity barriers to evolution make eye evolution unlikely, you'll have to settle for me paraphrasing like that. That has to be good enough for you. The process you require is just too unwieldy and labor intensive, not to mention would be fruitless anyway.
So no to you dictating how I give my answers. I like lists. I like paraphrasing. And I don't like having to repeat myself or go find your posts to show you what you've said. You'll have to work with that.
I gave you a list of 5 points………….I just what to know which of these points do you think is wrong
Yeah, these:
1 I asked you to develop and explain with detail a spcific hypothesis, and expalin why is it better than “resurection”
2 you answered with a list of hypothesis (none of them where developed, just mentioned)
3 I replied by saying that, you didn’t answered to my demand , I was not asking for a list, I was asking for a well developed and well explained hypotheiss
4 I asked you multiple times to “develop and explain with detail a specific hypothesis, and explain why is it better than “resurection”
5 “You said that you already did”…… (you already provided the hypothesis according to my specifications)………. Which is a lie
I've already covered all of this. You failed to address it then. You don't get second chances any more, Leroy. Since you can't remember what you read my posts, you refuse to do a digital search to retrieve them, you can't find them manually, and since you won't keep notes, you get one chance to address the contents of my posts - when you first see them. When you let that go by, well, it's gone for you. Those are my rules. You can adapt to them and we can have a mature discussion without all of hand-holding and your special needs, or not.