"D. T. Billings" the braying jackass

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

---"D. T. Billings" <tod@fermi.physics.ualr.edu> wrote:

>

> 

> TOD

> Since Jones doesn't speak the language of logic and only the

language of 

> ad hominem, I suppose I should address him on his own small little

level.

>  

> > JONES

> > >Tilly, I answered your imaginary problem about a

> > >dozen times now, but you either failed to see

> > >it or are pretending not to. 

> 

> TOD

> And no doubt your "answer" consisted of ad hominem attacks, I am

sure the 

> words "fool", "moron," etc. were generously peppered throughout your 

> answer.  Let me further hypothesize that you accused Till of not

being 

> able to reason well, and being ignorant of logic.  Next I am sure you 

> evaded every major point he made, and what you did respond to

consisted 

> of arbitrary and unsubstantiated assertions.  At least that is what I 

> have seen in the small amount of this thread that I have followed.  I 

> also note that this is your strategy with me.  One thing I can say

for 

> you, you are consistent in your strategy.


You're now a demonstrated fool, speaking when
you admit you have not the slightest idea of
what occurred.


> I am tempted to say that Till has stomped your ass on this one, but I 

> really can't say that.


No, you can't because Tilly has yet to make a
logical argument.


>  You see, in order for Till to defeat you, you 

> would have to confront him head to head.  You haven't "stood still"

long 

> enough for Till to make contact with a "blow."  


Tilly has not yet attempted to strike any blows,
not knowing how.


> You remind me of a mean little noisy poodle. 


You fuck a lot of those, do you?


> You make a lot of noise, 

> but when the attack is returned, you "run away," e.g. evade the

point.  

> I'll give you credit though, you sure are noisy and mean.  You have

no 

> substance however.  


I have no need for substance yet, since I've
encountered no substance to resist. I've never
evaded anything yet.


> > JONES

> > >Don't look now, Tilly, but I refuted logically

> > >your imaginary MM problem and I am not scurrying

> > >for cover. You're the one trying to dodge each

> > >logical grenade I lob your way.

> 

> TOD

> You wouldn't know logic if it hit you between the eyes and stuck

there 

> for a few days.  One word describes you, "clueless."


You're a fool, so you fit right in with the
other fools here.


> > JONES

> > >Tilly, you're a fool. The truth is not determined

> > >by rules of literary interpretation or by the rules

> > >of logic or by the laws of science.



> TOD

> That says it all right there.


It certainly does.


>  Damn the facts, damn the evidence, damn 

> logic, all Dickhead needs is an arbitary assertion and a little ad 

> hominem to convince himself of the "truth." 


You're a fool who now demonstrates he can't even
read. The facts are all I support unlike the fools
on this list who use only opinions, there is no
such thing as "evidence", and logic is only a 
silly game. I made NO assertions, arbitary or
otherwise, and I use a hell of a lot of ad hominem,
the only thing the fools on this list understand.
I need no "convincing" of the truth since I know
how to determine the truth. Obviously you don't.


> Till's correct, he isn't 

> worth anybody's time.


Tilly hasn't been correct yet, which is worst
than a stopped clock which is right twice a day.
==

Dick Jones, JD, MD
Physician-Attorney (retired)
Founder, Philosophy of Universalism
http://www.iland.net/~box191/phil2.htm

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

• Previous message: The Truth
• Next message: How about a Little Proof, Ron?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]