Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndrewC
[In any case, does this mean that you're now retracting your original claim that, "Which, of course, makes my original statement, that a transistor was in a sense two diodes back-to-back, entirely correct"?]

Absolutely not.

Good, so you agree with me after all, despite your continued bitching about it for a WEEK now. And of course that doesn't stop you from then launching into a ridiculous tirade against me anyway:

Your transparent attempt at squirming out of your hypocritical and B.S. revision of the clear meaning of actuality does not work. I added another method of adjoining diodes since you cannot fathom soldering despite your alleged E.E. training. You could superglue the things togther if you like.

Blah blah blah.

Give it up, son. You're just making a monumental ass of yourself.

And your red herring attempt at changing the discussion to mating semiconductor layers won't work.

It's not a "change", or a "red herring", as you well know. It was the original context which you yourself were invoking when you said, and I quote you, "Which, of course, makes my original statement, that a transistor was in a sense two diodes back-to-back, entirely correct".

But then, of course, when I used that *same* fact to undercut a point you thought you were bolstering with it, suddenly it's time for you to spend a week prancing around distracting attention from your own statement by going off on a ridiculous tangent about "soldering leads together", which is a different thing altogether, as you well know. Well you're not fooling me, and I doubt you're fooling anyone else.

But then, that's your tactic, isn't it? On these threads I've repeatedly seen you treat any point you might be losing ground on as a red-hot fire poker -- your constant method of dealing with that is to divert the topic into some side issue or nitpicking subtopic, again and again as necessary to keep the argument running off in every direction but back to the issue(s) you'd rather not talk about. Getting you to stay on topic is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall: We want to talk about the capabilities of evolved circuits, so you want to talk about the accuracy of simulations. Okay, we'll talk about the accuracy of simulations, so you want to talk about "unterminated leads". Okay, we ask you to evaluate just how much/little the "unterminated lead" in that circuit is likely to affect its performance, so you want to talk about whether a transistor with base/collector wired together is a suitable subtitute for a diode. Fine, we point out that given the internal structure of a transistor, wiring a transistor that way reduces it *to* a diode. Rather than deal with that point, you about-face and begin to argue that contrary to your earlier claim of being "entirely correct" about transistors being back-to-back diodes internally, suddenly you want to confuse the point and switch to the straw man about diodes "soldered" together not forming a transistor (as if that had anything to do with the original point *YOU* were the first to raise). Fine, then we point out your shift of topic, and you spend the next week blustering about how *we're* the ones who tried to shift the topic, and you've managed to flog that dead horse so long that you don't even need to shift topic anymore, because you've become so devoid of actual substance that your namecalling is its own diversion.

My only regret is that I've allowed you to get away with it by playing your "chase the topic" game around in circles for so long.

But I note that this is pretty par for the course for creationists -- they seem to know they can't win on a head-to-head discussion of the evidence, so they constantly play either the "shift the topic repeatedly" troll game, or the "act like a bonehead on the most simple of points so that 1000 posts go by just trying to get them to admit that 2+2=4 after all" troll game.

It may be childish, but it often works. Not only does it disgust lurkers so much that they bail out early and never return, but it keeps the evolutionists so busy playing "whack-a-troll" that they spend far less time making posts presenting the actual evidence.

But it doesn't make it any less dishonest or childish.

1,718 posted on 05/21/2003 9:34:16 AM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1666 | View Replies ]


To: Ichneumon
Good, so you agree with me after all, despite your continued bitching about it for a WEEK now.

I made the original statement. It was you that started the argument about it by accusing me of being a troll in making the statement. Now you say we agree and further say this

Give it up, son. You're just making a monumental ass of yourself.

Your statement actually describes yourself.

1,723 posted on 05/21/2003 9:40:23 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1718 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson