carlsonjok
Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006
|
| Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Mar. 28 2011,14:44) | i have a notion that trying to talk to this moron is the leading source of CSI. is mathgrrl getting frustrated? who knows, but gordon sure as hell is
how does this imbecile respond? not with any calculations! just over 1340 words. what a dolt. |
Actually, he cleverly setting mathgrrl up. In his response, he has started to take umbrage at her dismissal of his previous comments (bolding added):
| Quote | PLEASE, PLEASE PLEASE.
It is you who have maintained that the undersigned, specifically, as well as others, have been “meaningless” in speaking of CSI and FSCI. Until this issue is settled, no further progress is possible.
I have now any number of times pointed to Orgel and Wicken using the root of these abbreviations, and you have yet to accept that these men and others since, have been describing a significant aspect of reality, found inter alia in the living cell.
I think that the accusation of nonsense, takes priority over any further questions until it has been settled. And this, you know or should know.
Worse, you have made a materially false assertion. One that you have had every occasion to know is materially false.
For, I took up time to address the first question of the fur you posed above, probably the most important.
In so doing, I deconstructed the question, exposing the underlying issues that are begged and glided over with a glib “simple.”
In direct terms, MG, you have committed the fallacy of the complex, loaded question.
this is not the inquisition, and I am no suspect heretic confined to answer quesitons as asked, however poisonously loaded.
I have taken my privilege of intellectual liberty to analysie the quesiton, in te context of what it means to duplicate a gene.
The answer in that context points in precisely the opposite way to what you seem to wish.
Good day, madam.
Off to my next item for the day. |
Now, here is how it going to play out from here:
1. Mathgrrl will likely respond that he has poured forth another magnum opus without having even remotely addressed her question.
2. KF will shift into high dudgeon, claim she has slandered him and besmirched his honor, and demand that she apologize to him.
3. She will respond incredulously that she did not mean to offend him and apologizes if she did.
4. He will deem the apology insufficient and declare his imminent flounce out unless she apologizes correctly.
5. She will roll her eyes and move on.
6. Despite his claim that he will not engage with her until his honor has been restored, he won't concede the last word but, rather, will continue to bless the conversation with his voluminous posts that will never address the central question, but will always reference his unrequited sense of grievance.
Okay, so it isn't really clever. But, it is classic KF.
--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)
|
