Replies

Fantasywriter: "he posted to me a bald-faced lie."

It is a simple indisputable fact that you have no real interest in the subject of this thread, and instead have spent nearly 100% of your efforts in personal attacks on me.

On another thread you attacked others who disagreed with you, rather than address the issues raised.

So your statement in post #26 of this thread simply continues your pattern of personal attacks:

"I also encountered some evolutionists [on a thread related to it] that were as obnoxious & dishonest as anyone I have encountered anywhere on the Net.
It made an impression on me. A negative one."

And, that makes my response in post #27 totally accurate:

"Clearly, a lot of misunderstandings here, beginning with Fantasywriter's suggestion that those who disagree with her/him are "obnoxious & dishonest".
In fact, most of us try our best to be neither, regardless of provocations."

Of course your objective here is totally obvious, since you make no effort to hide it, ie., post #85 to mbj:

"I lost all interest in evolution-related threads after witnessing a simply extraordinary level of dishonesty on them."

So, truth of the matter is, nobody here has been dishonest, except you, in your consistant pattern of personal attacks on those who disagree.

Indeed, it appears to me you've studied your Alinsky Rules rather carefully, and are putting them into practice here on Free Republic.

Here is the original smear:

“Clearly, a lot of misunderstandings here, beginning with Fantasywriter’s suggestion that those who disagree with her/him are “obnoxious & dishonest”.

Here are the direct quotes in which I said or implied such a thing, that have been posted as evidence to support the original smear:

It looks like I’m going to have to spell this out after all. I really resent having to take this much time, & I am appalled that there are adults w such a piddle poor grasp of logic that they can’t figure it out on their own. Nevertheless, here we go.

In a discussion, there are four general possibilities:

(1) you can agree w me & do so in an honest, minimally courteous way.

(1) you can agree w me & do so in a dishonest & discourteous way.

(3) you can disagree w me & do so in an honest, minimally courteous way.

(4) you can disagree w me & do so in a dishonest & discourteous—in some cases even obnoxious—way.

Why should I have to make such a basic point of logic in an adult setting? It’s ludicrous that some people can’t figure this out on their own. Maybe only evolutionists have this problem?

For the record, I encountered evolutionists who exhibited wholesale dishonesty & gratuitous obnoxiousness. This had nothing to do w whether they agreed w me or not. It had everything to do w dishonesty & obnoxiousness as stand-alone categories.