rationalskepticism.org

PensivePenny wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

PensivePenny wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
You're missing the point. I meant you won't get away with it.

Thomas, no. You're missing the point. Ranting isn't a means to gain respect or an audience receptive to your remarks.

Q.E.D. more baseless accusations and projecting of emotions.
I haven't ranted in the slighest and I'm not interested in a popularity contest. All I am interested in is a rational discussion on the topic of this thread.
Something which you consistently fail to accomodate, instead opting for increasingly personalised flaming while pretending to be the reasonable party.

I've repeatedly asked you to drop this peurile derail and to get back to an honest and rational discussion.
All you've responded with is personalised comments and lies about not engaging with me anymore and not being interested in what I am saying anymore.

There's basically three ways you can go from here Penny:
1. Continue with your disengenuous flaming, thereby damaging the very respect and receptiveness you're referring to. Not to mention possible moderator intervention.
2. Keep your to your earlier claim and ignore me. Which won't prevent me from pointing out the flaws and other issues in your posts.
3. Start having an honest, rational and impersonal discussion on the topic of this thread with me.

Want us to call a cop for you? Is someone there holding a gun to your head and making you respond to this thread? Blink twice if yes.

I see you've chosen to continue with your peurile inflammatory derail.
All this will accomplish is demonstrate that you, not I, are unwilling to act reasonably.

PensivePenny wrote:Dude, I never said I was ignoring you. I said I was no longer going to respond to your comments.

'I never said I was hitting you. I said I was going to hit you.'
You didn't keep you word, you kept responding to me. Thereby also refuting your later claim that you weren't interested in what I post.

PensivePenny wrote: Which if you've noticed, I've not been addressing anything you've specifically posted for several pages.

Except that you have, again, in this very post and you're still responding to my posts.
More-over, ignoring valid questions and sound demonstrations of errors in your post, is irrational.

PensivePenny wrote:I don't sulk when verbally abused or bullied.

I don't drink coffee when I go for a swim.

PensivePenny wrote: I always hold my ground.

So what?

PensivePenny wrote: So, if you try any of those things, don't expect me to submit like a sad puppy with my tail between my legs. I got over my daddy issues a long time ago.

Physician heal thyself.
I'm not one who questioned the mental sanity of the person I'm responding to, you did.
I am not the person who asserts that his interlocutor can't add anything productive to the discussion, you are.
I am not the one who repeatedly projects all manner of nefarious motives onto my interlocutor, even after their motivation has been clearly presented. You are.
I am not the one who repeatedly projects emotions and behaviour onto my interlocutor, you are.

It's your perogative to ignore this and pretend you're the victim, but the record (ie your responses to me in this thread) demonstrate otherwise.