Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Gumlegs

[[versus a poster who has demonstrated slovenly thought, contempt for accuracy, and a distinct lack of reading ability.]]

Swell- bust out hte insults- ‘contempt for accuracy’? BS- you show me where I have ‘contempt for accuracy’ infact I DEMAND accuracy- somethign that is in short demand aroudn the campfires of Macroevolution

[[I didn’t mention it because you didn’t have to. That was the point of the link. Or didn’t you notice?)]]

I made it clear I didn’t- Now who’s not paying attention? Shall I accuse you now of slovenly htought?

[[By the way, your typing is greatly improved. Who’s doing it for you?]]

tee hee hee hardy har har- Thought I was conversing with a grown up- apparently not


595 posted on 01/05/2009 8:06:18 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 593 | View Replies ]


To: CottShop; betty boop
Swell- bust out hte insults- ‘contempt for accuracy’? BS- you show me where I have ‘contempt for accuracy’ infact I DEMAND accuracy- somethign that is in short demand aroudn the campfires of Macroevolution

I made it clear I didn’t- Now who’s not paying attention? Shall I accuse you now of slovenly htought?

Your two paragraphs quoted above should show anyone quite neatly that your “DEMAND” for accuracy has, to put it mildly, its limits. The bits I've bolded somehow don't quite seem to be the work of someone with a passion for accuracy.

The second, in which you respond to my comment that you weren’t paying attention illustrates that you are, in fact, not paying attention. Here’s the evidence:

Gumlegs (To betty boop): Here's a link to just a small part of the case that's already been presented right here on FR.

You'll have to go through several years of posts, but you'll find a case composed of facts, evidence, and links to professional, scientific journals if you keep at it.(post 501)

Cottshop (replying to 501): Your link goes to a selection of threads- which thread is it in? (post 507).

You somehow missed the part I wrote stating "you'll have to go through several years of posts ..." Or did you think that "several years of posts" were all in one thread?

Gumlegs: “The link goes to the results of a poster search. The poster is Ichneumon. He posts on a variety of topics, but he’s particularly good on evolution. He’s not terribly polite, but then, this is FR.” (post 586).

Cottshop: You didn’t mention we had to search for Ichneumon- Woops- My mistake- I thought it was a huge list of many different posters- I see now it’s all Icvhy’s posts- sorry for the confusion on my part- I thoguht your link went to a general forum site with different posters- (post 586)

Of course, if you’d looked at the posts in the link before you complained about it, you would not have complained that “we had to search for Ichneumon.” I should have added "lazy," too. After typing,"You didn’t mention we had to search for Ichneumon-" you then noticed it was wrong, but you couldn't be bothered to correct it. Or was it more important to get the complaint on record even if you had to retract it in the very next line?

I’ll try and be more accommodating if you tell me your computer doesn’t have any backspace or delete keys.

631 posted on 01/05/2009 8:52:37 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 595 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson