Prof. Brimley's comment, far from an insult, is the most cogent comment on fine-tuning arguments ever uttered by human tongue. The world isn't "just right" for us: we are right for the world, because evolution has naturally shaped us to conform to it. We are so in tune with the properties of our world that they look like prerequisites.
Response: Your problem seems to be with free speech/thought. Odd for someone who hangs around a message board.
Perhaps someone could help me understand how the response fits the prior post.
I believe I can help with that. I hypothesis that the point it to pick a fight. Therefore, it is not necessary or efficient to try to understand the deponent's evidence or the reasoning arising therefrom. Devoting intellectual resources to understanding an argument would be a mis-use of resources if the point is to sting and run until one of the stingee's can be pursuaded to ring the abuse bell.
The hallmark of this would be a constant bombardment of shallow, insulting patter, featuring a great deal of repetition, leveraging off of a tiny collection of actual cites, intended more for camoflage and crowing than for substantial evidence related to the subject at hand.