Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Oh, okay. LOL You said I asked an authoritarian
> > question as you respond with snobbishness. It
> was
> > a simple question to make sure we were
> referring
> > to the same thing, and you respond by being a
> > jerk. Fine. I doubt you have the capacity to
> > debate the evidence anyway. So you're just
> close
> > minded, apathetic and incapable of separating
> the
> > wheat from the chaff. Got it. And here I
> thought
> > we were having a reasonable conversation.
> >
> > Debate 101 fail on your part. Thanks for
> playing,
> > though.
> Now you’re merely lying...
Can you please point out the "lie" in the comments above? Kristin's only statement of fact regarding what you said was:
"You said I asked an authoritarian question..."
Referring to your earlier comment to her:
"A question whose assumptions are authoritarian".
I fail to see where it is a lie or dishonest to characterize what you said to mean the question itself is authoritarian as it is hardly a stretch to say the question is authoritarian if it is based on authoritarian assumptions.
"...you respond with snobbishness."
An opinion, probably shared by others, not a lie.
"It was a simple question to make sure we were referring to the same thing..."
A statement of fact as seen by Kristin, you would agree it was a "simple question" would you not, and gives her reason for asking it which we have no reason to believe she is "lying" about that.
"...and you respond by being a jerk."
An opinion, probably shared by others, not a lie.
"I doubt you have the capacity to debate the evidence anyway."
An opinion, not a lie.
"So you're just close minded, apathetic and incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"So you're just close minded, apathetic and incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"Got it."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually "got it", though said sarcastically, a statement of fact.
"And here I thought we were having a reasonable conversation."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"Debate 101 fail on your part."
An opinion, not a lie.
"Thanks for playing, though."
Sarcasm understood to not be a "genuine" statement.
Where is the lie Martin?
> (and how quickly we’ve
> reached this point).
Because Kristin is a "liar"? Can you give examples that show this pattern of behavior in her where at some point in an argument or debate she reaches a point of needed to "lie"?
> So much for your principles.
Which are diminished in your view, perhaps a "lie" themselves, because you claim she is not only lying but implying is someone who lies.
> So much for your ability.
Did Kristin make claims about her own ability?
> Your failure to offer any reason at all why I
> should answer your questions is noted.
Unless you feel her question is improper in some way or unclear requiring an explanation as to why she is asking it, in polite society it is understood being asked a question is reason enough to answer it or at least acknowledge you have been addressed. You met her question with asking the question why should you answer her to specifically elicit no response knowing full well it is a question to be ignored. And when it is not answered you claim impropriety on her part because she did not answer it which in turn alleviates your responsibility to answer her earlier question because if she will not answer yours than why should you.
> It remains
> as it was in the first place entirely at my
> discretion if I do so or not.
True, but how is it a deception of some sort on Kristin's part to note you have not answered her questions when you yourself are admitting you did not?
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Oh, okay. LOL You said I asked an authoritarian
> > question as you respond with snobbishness. It
> was
> > a simple question to make sure we were
> referring
> > to the same thing, and you respond by being a
> > jerk. Fine. I doubt you have the capacity to
> > debate the evidence anyway. So you're just
> close
> > minded, apathetic and incapable of separating
> the
> > wheat from the chaff. Got it. And here I
> thought
> > we were having a reasonable conversation.
> >
> > Debate 101 fail on your part. Thanks for
> playing,
> > though.
> Now you’re merely lying...
Can you please point out the "lie" in the comments above? Kristin's only statement of fact regarding what you said was:
"You said I asked an authoritarian question..."
Referring to your earlier comment to her:
"A question whose assumptions are authoritarian".
I fail to see where it is a lie or dishonest to characterize what you said to mean the question itself is authoritarian as it is hardly a stretch to say the question is authoritarian if it is based on authoritarian assumptions.
"...you respond with snobbishness."
An opinion, probably shared by others, not a lie.
"It was a simple question to make sure we were referring to the same thing..."
A statement of fact as seen by Kristin, you would agree it was a "simple question" would you not, and gives her reason for asking it which we have no reason to believe she is "lying" about that.
"...and you respond by being a jerk."
An opinion, probably shared by others, not a lie.
"I doubt you have the capacity to debate the evidence anyway."
An opinion, not a lie.
"So you're just close minded, apathetic and incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"So you're just close minded, apathetic and incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"Got it."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually "got it", though said sarcastically, a statement of fact.
"And here I thought we were having a reasonable conversation."
Unless you are claiming she does not actually believe this statement but is saying it anyways, an opinion, not a lie.
"Debate 101 fail on your part."
An opinion, not a lie.
"Thanks for playing, though."
Sarcasm understood to not be a "genuine" statement.
Where is the lie Martin?
> (and how quickly we’ve
> reached this point).
Because Kristin is a "liar"? Can you give examples that show this pattern of behavior in her where at some point in an argument or debate she reaches a point of needed to "lie"?
> So much for your principles.
Which are diminished in your view, perhaps a "lie" themselves, because you claim she is not only lying but implying is someone who lies.
> So much for your ability.
Did Kristin make claims about her own ability?
> Your failure to offer any reason at all why I
> should answer your questions is noted.
Unless you feel her question is improper in some way or unclear requiring an explanation as to why she is asking it, in polite society it is understood being asked a question is reason enough to answer it or at least acknowledge you have been addressed. You met her question with asking the question why should you answer her to specifically elicit no response knowing full well it is a question to be ignored. And when it is not answered you claim impropriety on her part because she did not answer it which in turn alleviates your responsibility to answer her earlier question because if she will not answer yours than why should you.
> It remains
> as it was in the first place entirely at my
> discretion if I do so or not.
True, but how is it a deception of some sort on Kristin's part to note you have not answered her questions when you yourself are admitting you did not?
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.