In gnu.misc.discuss Keith Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > Rjack <[email protected]> writes: > [snip] >> You're flat out lying Rahul. I never claimed that. You're a desperate, >> despicable, deleterious desperado indeed. Your mother should wash your >> mouth out with soap for claiming such things.
> [snip] >> If true, such claims are irrelevant. Ad hominen attacks never address >> issues raised in argument. Ad hominen attacks are a mark of >> desperation denoting that you have no rational reply. > [...] > Did Rjack just admit that he himself has no rational arguments? Indeed he did, probably without realising it. Sometimes, you've just got to laugh. :-) His usual trick is never to give a complete systematic account of his thesis. You never get more than, say, 25% of it in a single post, and often that is so prolix as to be unreadable. I doubt he's ever given a systematic readable account of his idea in a post. And if you ask him a reasonable pertinent question which he can't answer, he responds with abuse instead. His notion is pure sophistry. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
