Dan, love your arguments, you are blowing this guy out of the water. He's so disorganized, he's gotta use the shotgun approach to try to hit you...maybe if he uses 5 or 10 more responses per post, one might actually make sense (either that or you'll just get sick of dealing with all of the sub-threads, one of the two). Really. Whenever you have something substantive, he's got three responses, all of them extremely irrelevant. I wonder what would happen if you used a monkeys argument, statistically, do you think he'd respond, "Well, duh! Monkeys can't type!"?
Furrfu!
It might contribute just a
little bit more to this debate if, instead of attacking my character, you'd simply substantiate your earlier claim that I was wrong.
All that you need to do is to show where, specificly, I was wrong on this thread (and then be prepared to defend your claim).
But if you can't or won't be more specific about your charge, and if all that you can do is to attack my character, then surely you can hardly expect to be taken seriously.
So tell me, where was I wrong, specificly?