What's interesting here is the fact that such
obvious nonsense as Rose's article got such a credulous reception.
At some point, you have to realize that many of the people «challenging» you
with obvious nonsense are just distractions, agents of the discredited attempting to occupy your time in an effort to keep you from taking the next step (i.e. Tom P).
The road from Being President to Being That Slightly Stupid Aunt on Facebook Who
Posts Obvious Nonsense As if It Fell From the Lips of David Attenborough Himself was never going to be a long one for Donald Trump.
So the real question is, or should be: how did such
obvious nonsense get published in the peer reviewed literature in the first place?]
You look even more stupid by supporting
his obvious nonsense.
I don't see any atheist clinging to
obvious nonsense.
This is
obvious nonsense.
Why would any thinking person believe
the obvious nonsense that has apparently snowed you under?
In order to believe
the obvious nonsense that is religious doctrine, you have to be brainwashed.
And all the above assumes all are available which is
an obvious nonsense.
My problem with the first article - complaining at «second and third generation immigrants» being counted as British rather than immigrants in immigration statistics - was that it was
an obvious nonsense, which the Mail acknowledges.
This is «
obvious nonsense», just like the right to buy your council house was all those years ago.
Claiming that solid rockets are necessary for a heavy - lift launcher is
obvious nonsense.
It's also pretty telling that you are more bothered about this than
the obvious nonsense I answered to.
Many people who are not convinced will just write it off as
obvious nonsense.
If you want me to acknowledge the good things Goddard supposedly does, then you take the responsibility of filtering out the lies and
obvious nonsense he publishes.