[kosta50]

Quix, I asked a question. That is not an invitation or an excuse to make your posts about me, my motives, my "pretend-scientific house of cards," "dishonesty" to myself, etc.

I don't delve into endless speculations why you appear to be the way you appear to be, what seems to drive you, your morals, thinking process, apparent (dis)honesty, state of salvation, etc.

Neither should you make it about me. Thank you.

[Quix]

It seems to me that the

genre

of the pseudo-super-rationalist

and the pseudo-super-rationalist’s typical

rationales, perspectives; inconsistencies etc. . .

of which yours just happen to be the present best example . . .

is a fitting topic in all this.

It’s certainly plausible to take such personally.

However, I’m making assertions about the broad genre of such folks. I happen to have had numerous such dialogues with a wide assortment of such pseudo-super-rationalists over at least 5 or so decades. I think I can spot one within 100 feet?

That post I was replying to did kind of seem to invite some specific observations. I guess I could work harder to be more careful about that.

However, I expect to continue to make assertions and observations triggered by your assertions about the genre of pseudo-super-rationalists and their absurdly inconsistent pontifications.

[getoffmylawn]

Wow, kosta... You must have really hit a nerve. That’s one of nastier attacks I’ve seen on the religious forums.