[ArGee]

1. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
2. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
3. You can go back and reread the original argument if you didn't understand the summary. It was quite lengthy.
4. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
5. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
6. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
7. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
8. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
9. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
10. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
11. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
12. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.
13. You can go back and reread the original argument if you didn't understand the summary. It was quite lengthy.
14. You recognize the objectivity - thanks.

OK, so out of 14 arguments you recognized that 12 were objective statements. I didn't say you agreed with them, just that they represented objective points of view that can be debated. (Remember, someone can be objective and still be wrong.) There were 2 you did not understand from the summary.

You did not speak to any of them amounting to "might makes right."

I consider that you retract your attack on my argument style. Since I made most of those arguments over several posts, I'll let you select which one (if any) you'd like to debate further first. If you want to stand by the fact that we disagree, that's OK too. I'm sure you have other things to do.

Shalom.

[tdadams]

OK, so out of 14 arguments you recognized that 12 were objective statements.

OK, now I'm sincerely convinced you simply don't know the definition of objective. Either that or you've simply made up a definition of your own which happens to be exactly the opposite of the actual definition of objective.