[scripter]

*You* were attacking a straw man, namely that my statement that it is partly 'genetic' means that a single gene is responsible for this condititoon, and that no credible evidence can be found about a single gene.

I'd ask you to provide a post number to support the above statement but you cannot.

The statement to which you refer was made as a general comment in post 32. And from there you've been pushing obfuscation.

[LtdGovt]

I'd ask you to provide a post number to support the above statement but you cannot. The statement to which you refer was made as a general comment in post 32.

You were responding to one of the comments I have made, in which I stated that I believe that it is partly genetic and partly environmental. Therefore, you were attacking a strawman.

And from there you've been pushing obfuscation.

And you have been pushing the word 'obfuscation'.

Apparently you're more interested in pushing obfuscation and not talking about anything specific.

If you do come forward with something specific, I'll respond to it. Interested in becoming a part of my bet with the gentlewoman on this thread?

Please don't freepmail me. If you have questions then ask them here.

My, my, you really dislike me, don't you? My question was what 'agenda' I'm supposedly pushing. You really believe that, or are you merely using it as a means to discredit people who don't agree with you?