If we agree about what sense words are being used in, we may avoid the fallacy/sin of equivocation.
Mamzelle: It's your list. It carries no weight, no authority. The spam is posted and reposted, when the evos are called on it, they say, "dispute the list."
What definitions do you think are incorrect? Why?
Mamzelle: Well, why should anyone bother?
To avoid the fallacy/sin of equivocation.
Mamzelle: We have dictionaries that say "Websters" and "American Heritage" and "Oxford English"--what do we need with a dictionary written by DC?
Because the dictionaries give every attested use of a word, whereas a specialized area like biology may use only one of them.
We aren't discussing theology, we're trying to discuss science. It is important that the terms be explicitly defined and agreed upon.
That is, if we're people of integrity who want to commumnicate clearly and avoid the fallacy/sin of equivocation.
The first thing you do with a a control freak is to refuse to let him control anything. This relentless spamming is the behavior of a controlling personality--post something thousands of times, maybe someone will even care? The Voice Spamming in the Wilderness. Isn't that what you have your own forum for?
Not only would it be foolish to accept The List From Nowhere, it's foolish to even take it seriously enough to read, much less dispute. It's just endless spam from obsessives from another forum.