The hitch on having cancer.

<< < (4/5) > >>

Julian (September 12, 2010, 12:46:58 PM):
Thanks, I thought it was something like that. This forum sure is educational at times.
Michael Meadon (September 12, 2010, 18:46:38 PM):
@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?
Mefiante (September 12, 2010, 19:43:22 PM):
@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?
Not just their posts. Teleological is the archetype pathological ignoramus concerning anything that does not conform to his archaic worldview. Nor is he in any way open to anything that challenges it. Nor is he able (or willing) to mount anything besides third-hand sophistry and incoherent contrivance in its support. Nor does he actually respect honest, open inquiry or the epistemological foundations of science, which, when applied in everyday practice, constitute the foundations of modern scepticism. Nor does he often respect the norms of debate such as answering legitimate questions. His only “defence” is unwarranted haughtiness disguised in transparent, agenda-laden, put-on, pseudo-penetrating questions lifted from the writings of far more prominent minds (or the slick clichés appearing as space fillers at the end of Reader’s Digest articles – take your pick). All he wants, in brief, is a soapbox, not the truth. The following are illustrative cases in point:
I am still trying to figure out the logic behind a person that shouts and moans and swears at something they believe does not exist.
Looks at the world around me, sees people who tries to speak of entities that they don't believe in in an irreverent, impious manner. Asks for the logic behind it... can't get a logical answer. Waits...
These are the inane questions of one who hasn’t spent even a minute in earnest contemplation of the issues at hand.

I have little but disdainful chuckles and an occasional ad hominem for such ongoing pretence and artifice. He knows the conditions for civilised debate. They have been put to him often enough here, as they have elsewhere.

Teleological (September 13, 2010, 07:41:02 AM):
@Teleological: Fail to understand the posts of others, much?

No, not really. Though I fail to see you or any other person person providing a rational reason for having a blasphemy event. Oh well, there is hope.

@ muffles, shame, and you accuse others of wanting a soapbox while running your sad little personal soapbox. Get over it, get over me and try to be a bit more positive and constructive. How about you spend a little earnest contemplation about the issue at hand. So far... trolling (which you admit to many times, shamelessly at that as well), hand waving and ad hominems are all you have. Unimpressive really. Perhaps saying nothing is better than trolling for you?
Mefiante (September 13, 2010, 08:17:38 AM):
There, you see what I mean? Instead of actually addressing what few points I made in my previous post, Teleological immediately scrabbles to the top of his soapbox and shouts a churlishly petulant, “Tu quoque!”

What else is new?



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page