I take it back. I checked my posting history, and I did indeed mention your name. But I didn’t misrepresent anything you said. So your point is moot. Moreover, why would you shy away from an accurate portrayal of what you said? If you are going to post on FR, expect to be referred to or otherwise quoted. That’s what message boards are for, don’t you know.
Yes, but previously you MISQUOTED me; stated that I said that a single nucleotide polymorphism in the GULO pseudogene that is common between all primates was ‘smoking gun’ evidence, when I only pointed out that ‘some say’ ERV data is ‘smoking gun’ evidence of common descent (I try to not use sensationalist language when speaking about data interpretation). At that time I asked you to please refrain from quoting me unless you were actually putting “ “ marks around something I had actually posted.
Now I find you saying that I said ‘evolutionists say...’; when I never used that word. If you wish to quote me please do so by actually quoting me (the aforementioned “ “ marks around something I have posted), not putting words in my mouth. Given your previous defense of quote-mining I would hope that you would quote me as fully and accurately as possible when you find it convenient to do so.
My point was not that you misrepresented my argument, this time you had that essentially correct as I pointed out. What I object to is you putting forth misquotations of what I say, that point stands. However much accolades you might earn for the improvement in not misrepresenting my argument while paraphrasing what you think I said this time, I reiterate my request that you not do so.