Replies

Thanks, its been a nice waste of time. You discount credible evidence by refusing to read it. You have spent more time talking about the form of your arguments than you have creating any kind of substance to your argument. You've typed pages of yap yap about logical fallacies, debate strategies, and the like.

So, the study of argumentation is yap yap, eh? Your comment reminds me of an ancient eastern proverb: "A man is an enemy of what he doesn't understand."

Yet to this point you've pointed to one twins study to support your argument, yet scripter promptly proved the flaws in your post. You deflected and refocused on something else.

Not really. A claim was made about what I cited, but no evidence was provided. Thus, I deferred judgement until I have the time to examine the study in question.

I'll be around.

Truly, I'm shaking in my boots. The last few days I have not been able to sleep, because I feared that you might be in this thread. Apparantly, my suffering (that no human has ever had to endure) is going to be prolonged.

FYI to those I've pinged.

Not really. A claim was made about what I cited, but no evidence was provided.

You provided references to two studies but you've never taken the time to read either study. I have along with many more. Go ahead and read the study now that you're familiar with the snowball effect.

Not a single study supports your position that genes play a huge role. Not one. What's really sad are the only times such claims are made is when they are made by those who did not understand the study or are misrepresenting the study, many times to push an agenda.

Some studies, such as the one you referenced, demonstrate a blatant disregard for scientific principles. What's worse is this study got referenced somewhere, picked up by you and displayed as supporting evidence for something it doesn't at all support.

There are no studies to support your statement that genes play a huge role.

I find this comment of yours quite educational:

I'm weighing the time that it will cost me to provide support for what I said against the chances that the person has the slightest idea of what he's talking about (and thus might be able to contest what I said). ¹⁸¹

That tells me you play games and waste time. From what you've said about purposely irritating people you'll apparently say anything to detract from the real issue. Here at FreeRepublic we don't appreciate somebody wasting our time. You call it fun but we call it trolling and it will get you banned. In that same post you said you don't have an infinite amount of time and neither do we. Please don't waste our time. We only have so much of it and want to spend it wisely.

So, the study of argumentation is yap yap, eh? Your comment reminds me of an ancient eastern proverb: "A man is an enemy of what he doesn't understand."

The study of argumentation is not necessarily yap yap, but in the midst of this thread it is b/c it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Like I said, you spend more time defending the style and semantics of your arguments rather than the substance. So in the context of this thread, it is indeed yap yap.

Not really. A claim was made about what I cited, but no evidence was provided. Thus, I deferred judgement until I have the time to examine the study in question.Scripter, no doubt, has access to articles that support the assertions that he made re: the study you cited. I think it is clear to most people here that you would discount those as well, b/c you seem to believe that you are omniscient.

Truly, I'm shaking in my boots. The last few days I have not been able to sleep, because I feared that you might be in this thread. Apparently, my suffering (that no human has ever had to endure) is going to be prolonged.

I'm certain you realize that "I'll be around" was not in any way a threat considering I have not said anything that is close to threatening. Your response was juvenile and a waste of time.

Your comment reminds me of an ancient eastern proverb: "A man is an enemy of what he doesn't understand."

Thats fine, your comments remind me of someone who is arrogant beyond belief. Because the conversation you engaged in does not belong in this thread does not mean I'm ignorant of argumentation or scared of it or an enemy of it. Your commments also remind me of someone that would respond better to a few swift kicks, and maybe a hook and a cross. I tend to think that you will take delight in that b/c you think that since I referred to physicality that you "got me", but I can't help what things remind me of.