Joined: April 2006
afdave: I would be glad to believe what you believe if I could be convinced of it by sound arguments ...
norm: Whoever instructed you in what a sound argument is lied to you. Please explain what you think a sound argument is.
It's plainly obvious from a cursory reading of a handful of afdave posts that his definition of "sound argument" is "any argument which purports to demonstrate, however lamely and illogically, that which I have already decided I believe." My question is, why give him the satisfaction of even responding to his crap, let alone participate in his delusion that he is engaging in debate? The best face I can put on his blithering idiocy here is that although he could never convince anyone here of anything (both because his arguments are unsupportable and because he wouldn't know how to construct them properly if they were), he imagines himself as a lone soldier bravely pinning down a superior enemy force and keeping it from being effective elsewhere. Why do you waste your time, and why do you give him the exposure? And don't start with the "for the benefit of the lurkers" saw; there would be no lurkers if people weren't moving his drivel over here from PT and putting his name in lights at the top of discussion topics. Just ignore him and he'll go away; as it is it looks like you're all hard at work trying to create the next Larry Fafarman.
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"