Replies

But it’s ok for you and the obots to talk directly about me—as has been done many times on this thread—impolitely and with no courtesy ping.

Nothing exceeds the hypocrisy and double standards of the left.

I was purposefully NOT talking about you, for the simple reason I don't want to engage you. I had a few exchanges with Nero and Zoltan about general documentation matters and the 6085 property while awaiting "rdcbn" to get back to me on why he thinks short forms are legally insufficient. I'm well too familiar with your "stray off topic, never answer any question, make trivial points out to be my main points, strawman argument" style of dialogue. I wasn't inviting more of that.

I know from experience I can hit you with logical points like this --

I've pointed out to you before that you've got no evidence of a pregnant S.A. anywhere . So that means either (1) she didn't give birth at all (which you're not claiming) or (2) it's quite possible to carry a pregnancy to term and have no extant witnesses to that 50 years later (which shoots down your supposed "point."). You had no answer to this logical deconstruction of your argument before; you have no answer now.

-- and you will just ignore, ignore, ignore. Then you and DL will join in your comic Dance of Dolts and try to pretend I'm the one ignoring points. It's humorous or tedious, depending on my mood.