.@oliverburkeman The link you give for my "derision" contains none--and refutes the rest of your review. Rather Freudian of you...
-
-
Replying to @SamHarrisOrg
@SamHarrisOrg Ha! You know, it was actually a link to wrong part of debate. I meant http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryQCoWXCnCQ … - will get it changed.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @oliverburkeman
.
@oliverburkeman Your remedy is to change the link? Amazing... Why not understand my actual definition of "science"?3 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @SamHarrisOrg
@SamHarrisOrg Well, obviously, I don't expect you to agree with me that your argument is deeply flawed!4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @oliverburkeman
@oliverburkeman And there is no "derision" at that point in the debate either. I greatly respect P.Singer. You are being quite misleading.
9:05 AM - 30 Aug 2013
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.