rationalskepticism.org

Thommo wrote:

Fallible wrote:You have disqualified yourself from participation in reasoned discourse; you have disqualified yourself from the right to demand explanations, evidence or anything else, due to your behaviour. Just in this post alone you cannot help yourself, and have begun fabricating my supposed position. I no longer have time or patience for that kind of tedious busy work. Your invitation for me to participate in your turgid fapathon is therefore declined.

I will be entirely unsurprised if Jayjay now criticises your unwillingness to provide specific citations, despite having just got done doing the exact same thing himself.

And just a page later, we get to see yet another example (there are so many) of what happens when someone does actually take the time to show that JJ is not telling the truth:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/creat ... l#p2722958

Response?

Silence.

But that silence will only last a couple of pages when JJ will reiterate the same falsehood; the post in question thereby having fallen back some way and therefore out of sight. At that point, responding with a link back again will once again produce silence, or at the very best JJ will have had time to think how to spin it so that he was right all along and Spearthrower was throwing out a smoke-screen, or somehow otherwise to fault, then silence.

JJ doesn't seem to recognize that one of those special aspects of H sapiens is there extensive ability to recognize patterns in the most abstract of places, such as discursive behavior in the written word.