My bad, I meant to come back to this point, and obviously forgot to.<quoted text>
"Skeptical Spectacles"]<quoted text>
Funding? You can't separate the money from"
>Could you make a complete sentence so that whatever it is you tried to say translates to something cognitive?
What I was trying to say is funding and process are two separate things. They have to be kept separate and legitimate scientific organizations do so to maintain objectivity. As soon as funding affects process you have a conflict of interest, and that's bad for science.
What did I twist around? You said:<quoted text>
I didn't say science rejects evidence, I Saidddd Science can and often IS done via means of contributions of religious institutional donations.
Could you please not twist and distort words just to try and suit your agenda, or whatever lamebrain motive you have?
Those are your words, not mine.<quoted text>
... And actually, one could hold beliefs in most anything, AND seek answers, AND reject and/or accept, with or without evidence."
I guess SP is right, you spew so much BS you can't even keep track of your own comments.