You and Pat are then by you own definition trying to use that very same technique.
Patrick, whines and complains that anyone who disagrees with him is not debating fairly. He definitions are not the reason he doen't win the debate, he simply cannot win the debate because he doesn't know what he is arguing about nor who to make persuasive arguments stating his case. This mostly because he does not posses an open enough mind to understand the opposing view. It's tough to win the battle when you don't know what you are battling against. He resorts to name-calling every time he is faced with an argument he cannot win and then cries to his Evo friends about how evil the opposition is. If he can get beyond his preconceptions and biases and thoughtfully considers the opposing view he might actually learn something new, different and possible even better.
Regards,
Boiler Plate
First of all Gould was no biologist, he was a paleontologist. His totally moronic 'punk-eek' which is in no way science and in no way supported by any evidence (in fact it is just an excuse for the lack of evidence of Darwinian evolution in the fossil record) is a total fraud specifically designed to make money out of a theory he knew was a fraud. He is just one more in the long line of liars of evolution.