You start a debate, many posts ago, by first posting to me that I beg to differ. Now, after a debate with numerous back and forth exchanges, you post I refuse to ‘debate’ with people like you who are pro-NAU . . . , after we've been debating forever and after I said that I opposed any NAU.
Your penultimate post to me includes I have little time to post right now as it is,. . . Had I time to post, that would be yet another reason I wouldn’t expend it on you.
Then, just after your statement that I wouldn’t expend [time to post] on you, you reply to me again 11 minutes after my reply is posted. Not only did you reply when you said you wouldn't expend the time, but you did so within 11 minutes after saying you had "little time." If you can reply with 11 minutes when you have "little time," you would probably be really fast if you weren't so time-pressed.
Even though you last posted that you refuse to ‘debate’ with people like [me], I'm thinking that your flair for irony and self-contradiction will force you to continue the debate by responding again.
Then again, in case you prove my last judgment about you wrong by NOT posting again when you claim not to have the time or desire to do so, I'll thank you for the dialogue. It was fun. If you do respond, my reply might be delayed as I catch a flight on one of the below. :)
