You sure have not learned how to think rationally. I stated that your claim was irrational, and explained exactly what was wrong with your argument. There is a formal name for it called the fallacy of the antecedent. Just because someone was wrong in the past does not mean they are wrong now. The issue on whether Iran is close to having a nuke depends on current facts, not whether someone was or was not right in the distant past. Rather than addressing this point, you go off on an irrational tangent about inductive reasoning and the scientific method -- issues I never mentioned. There is a name for this logical foul as well, it is called raising a strawman argument. Maybe when you learn how to string two thoughts together logically you can learn how to make a coherent argument. Until then, your arguments are not very entertaining for those of us who do understand the rules of rational argument.
i have come across this line of argument before
i live in an area where the view that the apocalypse is almost upon us and obama is the antichrist is by no means fringe
and if you point out that previous predictions of apocalypse and identifications of the antichrist have a long history of having been wrong they will respond with your argument
they will say that the previous failures do not matter, what matters is considering whether or not the bible applies to current circumstances
Switching the subject matter yet again? Is that what they teach you kids these days? After you make an irrational argument and it is pointed out to you, instead of learning from your mistake, just spout off with some other idiocy and hope nobody notices that you have not a single rational thought in your head? It's not working with me. Perhaps with children and the uneducated, but it does not impress anyone with an education.
So, now you are saying because people who raise irrational arguments repeatedly may also rely on the fallacy of the antecedent, that somehow it makes your reasoning sound? Haven't you ever heard that two wrongs do not make a right? You cannot excuse your irrational argument by referring to others who also make irrational arguments. A rational argument depends on reason and evidence. That was my point from the beginning. A point that has gone completely over your head.