[medved]

Note that on that old thread linked in 308 I did not merely sneer at medved's inadequate response, but came back to it and dissected it in detail.

A typical example of Reep dissecting one of my posts in detail may be seen here starting around post 203. It begins with this same sort of bellicose claim to have destroyed my case a year earlier, and ends up with Reep's position shattered, his source exposed as a total ignoramus, and Reep inviting lurkers to view a talk.origins smear sheet describing me as a kook or something and crying "Well, I may be full of $#!T, but it doesn't matter cause the other guy's an A$$#OLE!!"

You thoght I would have forgotten about that after a couple of days, Reep?

[oldcats]

Should you address the response that he made in the current thread instead of reaching into the past to find one that fits your needs?
Oldcats
Ooops...sorry, I forgot that you weren't speaking to me anymore. :)

[VadeRetro]

You know, I just looked at it again. There's no there there in your protest.

I told you that I'd answered your same exact post a year ago. I had.

I never at either time claimed that I was addressing your albedo argument, which is only one linchpin of medvedian Velikovskianism. Your standard spam post puts the albedo argument in exactly that context, the support for planetary ping-pong.

That's what I attacked as false and ridiculous. That's what I said I attacked.

Your claim to understand that I was advertising a destruction of your albedo argument looks from here like a distraction. I was calling you on your spamming, as I did again in 308 of this thread after your 303.