Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
HH: I really don't give a flying rip. My questions are retorical and your not answering them directly only bolsters my argument. Your questions are accusatory and a side issue besides and cannot be answered in good faith.
Brian, I assume good faith on your part. Please afford me the same respect. Why can you not answer my questions in good faith? What is accusatory about them? That makes no sense. There is no need to get testy.
In an attempt to counter my claim that no critical analysis has been offered in this thread and that its purpose is simply to vilify Forester, you claimed that certain people have provided "good stuff". Is out of line for me to ask you which specific posts contain this "good stuff"? What prevents you from being able to provide these posts numbers in good faith?
PS, your last question I've already answered. At least twice.
Post number please. Or can you not provide this post number in good faith?
In what post have you identified a
specific conclusion that you think Forester reached from this experiment, using his actual words and a genuine effort to understand what he meant in the context in which they were written, that you think is not supported by the experiment?
Better yet, just tell me what you think that conclusion is.
All you have to do is complete the following sentence. The specific conclusion reached by Forester based on this experiment, though not actually supported by the experiment, is ...
Is that so out of line to ask of someone who strongly implies such a conclusion exists?
The fact that these pointed questions get you to be testy, and claim they've already been answered (without being able to cite where), only bolster my argument that all you're really interested in doing is vilifying Forester.
I am truly sorry I don't come to the same conclusion you did.
I don't know how to evaluate this, because your lack of specificity makes it impossible to know what conclusion you've reached, much less how you reached it, or which conclusion of mine you're saying yours is different from.
I am saddened that you cannot support your point of view with any sort of rational discussion and have to resort to silly ultimatums fit only for a grade school schoolyard.
Right. Asking you to get specific regarding your vague accusations is resorting to "silly ultimatums fit only for a grade school schoolyard".
Our discussion really can go on without you. Please, if you have nothing to contribute beyond a schoolboy's pout, just go away.
Give me a break. I'm simply trying to understand what
specifically your argument is.