On 16 January 2014 12:39, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Quentin, > > That's not the argument. As you stated it it isn't even in the form of the > logical sequence an argument requires. > > You are just stating your opinion on a part of my theory, not being able > to reference the specific argument in question you claim is invalid. >
Oh come on, everybody, this is obviously a canned response that Edgar just keeps coming out with like a stuck record. He is incapable of presenting a coherent argument, and when his arguments are demolished he falls back on saying that wasn't what he was saying, or that his position is so obvious how could we miss it, etc etc. If he had a modicum of sense, or pride, he would respond with carefully thought out, patient explanations, but it's just the same old accusations and insults over and over. So although the "troll" theory is tempting, because that is exactly how trolls behave, I'm going to go for a "bot" instead. Someone decided to write a programme which trots out a theory that doesn't make sense, then reacts to all criticism with a few canned responses. Even his name is suspiciously similar to ELIZA! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
