Oh oh, I want to play too. You forgot one which is a variation of options 3 a,d & i. Call the person an "emote" and infer they are letting their emotions hinder their perspective on "facts."
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Here is a script that Gruss follows for every thread he participates in: > > 1. Make claims and offer no proof. > > 2. When challenged and asked for proof (pick one): > a. Tell person to 'try Google' > b. Supply many links to sites that kind of touch on the subject at > hand, but do not really support my position. > c. Go off on a tangent and offer completely useless and > non-sensical analogies. > > 3. When the tactics in #2 are foiled and offered a reasonable reply > (pick one or more) > a. Insult the person's intelligence. > b. Re-assert my original claims > c. Go off on a tangent and offer completely useless and > non-sensical analogies > d. Insult the person's intelligence. > e. Throw the healthcare crisis in there to make it seem like I am > really smart > f. Re-assert my original claims > g. Tell the person that they do not understand the issue and that > the point they are making is not important. > h. Tell the person about the time I worked in the industry which we > are talking about. > i. Insult the person's intelligence > > Gruss, you made a, somewhat outlandish, statement that 'global energy > demands are growing exponentially'. This is the fact I am asking for > 'proof' of. I never once denied there was a looming energy crisis or > that we will be fucked if we continue along the same path. Just > trying to understand where you got that one tidbit of information. > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Gruss Gott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Scott wrote: > >> Typical Gruss smoke and mirrors. None of those links offer any support > >> to your claim that global energy demand is growing 'exponentially'. > >> > > > > I think you need to ask yourself a different question: who do you > > think would prove this to you? > > > > In other words, let's say I provided you a magic link to researchers > > in 5 fields of study: global economic trends, geology, energy policy, > > energy production and distribution, population. > > > > And let's say the sum total of all of their work - totally and > > completely based on educated guesses - said that, yes, global energy > > would increase exponentially. > > > > What would that mean to you? What I'm telling you is that it doesn't > > mean much to me. Why? > > > > Because true or not, we're going to hit peak oil WAY before that. > > > > And that should mean something to you. > > > > But based on your line of reasoning, it assures me that our country > > will go into crisis because you're probably one of the smarter people > > in US and you're more interested in swinging dicks than in being > > concerned about real problems. > > > > This is economic crisis part deux. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:310528 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
