Bart- Slanderous behavior
Mar 24, 2006 03:59 AM
"The fact that you were using straw man arguments, mainly."
Strawman arguments against who or what? I wasn't arguing against
Darwin. I was arguing against those psuedo-students of Darwin who
merely misrepresent him. I have never argued against Darwin
anywhere in this thread or forum as you slanderously assert.
What I specifically said was that I don't believe that humans
evolved from apes. From that point onward, you ignorantly assumed
that I was arguing against Darwin (when I actually am more in
agreement with Darwin himself, namely that apes and humans each
evolved from a common ancestor). Nonetheless, you instantly
projected your anti-sentiment against anything that doesn't sound
strictly Darwinian to you.
"That was in reference to your saying that you like to make
outrageous comments to stir things up. If you make an outrageous
comment with the intent of backing it up, that is discussion. Making
outrageous statements that you cannot back up, and not representing
them as such, is, BY DEFINITION, being a troll."
I'll feel free to say alot of outrageous things, and I'll back them
up too. The problem is that you had veered off seeking for an
actual basis for any statements of mine that you were offended by,
rather declaring my statements as ignorant and absurd in a
derogatory context of accusation and condescension, in order to
pounce upon some imagined enemy that you created in your own head.
If you make an accusation with the intent of backing it up, then
that is a prosecution. Making accusatory statements that you cannot
back up, is by DEFINITION, being a slanderer.
"Well, you did. You argue against Darwinian theory using claims that
are not made by Darwinians."
Slander on your part. I was never arguing against Darwinian
theory. You simply assumed that I was.
Darwin taught that apes and humans evolved from an identical
ancestor, which I fully believe, and have always believed. My
particular reference was that I don't believe that humans evolved
from apes, which is a theory that was presented to me by pseudo-
"You are the one who started indicting and condescending."
You're displaying selective attention with the exact quotes of yours
that I've offered you in post #31598. You seem to have a hard time
with accountability, but I'm going to hold you to it all the way
nonetheless. I quoted your statements directly to you concerning
your accusation and condescension, but you were too cowardly to
acknowledge them. I am now accusing you of slander as well. Let's
follow these allegations and counter-allegations through to their
I will again provide for you your statements in direct quotes (as
opposed to your many loose paraphrases and misrepresentations of
mine) that I had offered to you previously. I do this graciously
for you, despite the cowardice of your selective memory.
You've made accusatory statements such as:
"Then you should be prepared to back it up. Otherwise, you are being
a troll." (post #31465)
"You set up a series of straw men, and then proceeded to knock them
down." (post #31463)
And condescending statements such as:
"I am not going to teach you evolutionary theory from the ground
up." (post #31410)
"Maybe because the only people making that claim are those who are
disputing it? This, and...
...demonstrate that you know little about evolutionary theory."
Show some authority. You're not cutting it right now.
--- In email@example.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@...> wrote:
> Vincent wrote:
> > What precisely offended you in my statement that prompted your
> > condescening remarks?
> The fact that you were using straw man arguments, mainly.
> > "Then you should be prepared to back it up. Otherwise, you are
> > a troll." (post #31465)
> That was in reference to your saying that you like to make
> comments to stir things up. If you make an outrageous comment with
> intent of backing it up, that is discussion. Making outrageous
> statements that you cannot back up, and not representing them as
> is, BY DEFINITION, being a troll.
> > "You set up a series of straw men, and then proceeded to knock
> > down." (post #31463)
> Well, you did. You argue against Darwinian theory using
claims that are
> not made by Darwinians.
> > So another question for you: Are you here to discuss? (sure
> > seem like it) Or are you here to indict and condescend?
> You are the one who started indicting and condescending.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application