::::::: To summarise, your first post in this section was not a direct response to what I posted, but I replied to your specific claims by showing them to be wrong. You tried disputing a few of them, but by and large ignored the actual refutations, opting instead for a sweeping dismissal of my rebuttals (I'm "arguing against logic"), and introducing a new, unfounded claim. When I question you on ''that'' claim, you introduce some ''new'' claims (new to ''this'' discussion), rather than address the specific claims you raised and I refuted. Changing the subject like this shows that you have no good argument. | ::::::: To summarise, your first post in this section was not a direct response to what I posted, but I replied to your specific claims by showing them to be wrong. You tried disputing a few of them, but by and large ignored the actual refutations, opting instead for a sweeping dismissal of my rebuttals (I'm "arguing against logic"), and introducing a new, unfounded claim. When I question you on ''that'' claim, you introduce some ''new'' claims (new to ''this'' discussion), rather than address the specific claims you raised and I refuted. Changing the subject like this shows that you have no good argument. |