A bit ago I made another thread in which I asked about how to deal with hysterical idiots who even when shown why they are wrong continue to persist that they've 'proven' their point.

This particular creationist was hung up on a claim from one of the creationist sites about a scientist by the name of Eugene Koonin aka "Koonin EV" on his papers. Koonin is a respected scientist who does legitimate work, you can look him up if you're curious about it. In one of his papers Koonin used some language which creationists ceased upon and attempted to misrepresent.

Which of course the guy I was 'debating' with tried to use. Problem is however that this is kind of one of those things that I've seen over and over again: Oh look, it's the paper by Koonin EV again, the same one creationists always try to post, it's almost like they have a website that provides them these things and lies to them about what they say.

Showing the creationist the body of work by Koonin didn't help of course. You need only have looked at some of his other work to get the instant impression that the idea that he actually said 'evolution is wrong!' is a load of creationist nonsense. On the other hand in the past he was also shown an article from Christian Science Monitor:

https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0119/Creationists-have...

"...biologist Eugene V. Koonin was recently quoted by a program officer with the leading intelligent design organization (The Discovery Institute) as saying that the modern synthesis of evolution has “crumbled, apparently, beyond repair.” The implication was that Mr. Koonin would agree that there is a scientific debate over evolution that deserves to be taught in the schools.

But when I talked to Koonin, he told me this interpretation was simply wrong. Creationists, he said, “delight in claiming that whenever any aspect of ‘(neo)Darwinism’ is considered obsolete, evolution is denied. Nothing could be further from the truth.” Koonin explained that what is “crumbling” in his view is a half-century-old approach to thinking about evolution. Modern evolutionary theory is “a much broader, richer and ultimately more satisfactory constellation of data, concepts, and ideas.” Evolution is alive and well, while creationist understanding of it is apparently stuck in the Eisenhower era."

He was shown this article in the past but kept right on saying that he quoted 'directly from Koonin's paper', or rather the creationist site did but that's a moot point and I just kept referring him back to that article... The one where somebody went and asked Koonin about this and Koonin said the creationists were wrong about what he said.

When provided with just the quote from the article which he was linked to in the past without a link he cried 'plagiarism' and when provided with the link he cried 'spam' to get the responses removed all while ranting and screaming about how I was "lying" and it just an 'opinion piece' where he 'quoted Koonin directly'.