OK , Lomax, you are an expert in deception and twist and spin. I bow to
your skill and go away.
The entire list can document this time that I am letting Lomax have the last
word. I will no longer post unless asked a specific question or insulted
whether directly or in reference.
Please let this escalating round of insults end. I'm tired.
One of my new year's resolution is not to engage with Lomax anymore. Can't
win with liars? (I know I know, but you may insult me back one more time
and I will not respond. But I will respond to further insults beyond one.)
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:List integrity
At 12:45 AM 12/31/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Herein is the fallacy of your comments.
You claim that the insults are "mild", and that I do not have the right to
respond to "mild" insults.
Beautiful. My post is quoted below. I did not claim that Jojo did not have
the right to respond. I don't see that I called "the insults" "mild." Some
comments that Jojo responded to were mild, one was essentially "Fuck you."
This is the lie you keep on propagating. Whether the insult in "mild"
or "grave" is not for you to decide.
I didn't say "mild." But I do have the right to my opinions. Opinions like
"mild" or "grave" are not fact.
The person that the insult is directed at is the person that has the
right to decide whether the insult was mild or grave. You have no right
to claim that I "should not" be offended because in your eyes, the insult
is "mild". That's bullcrap.
I did not say that Jojo "should not" be offended.
Heck, in my eyes, calling allah a moon god and calling muhammed a sex
pervert is a "mild" insult; yet I do not go around and lie that your
response to me was improper because I only "mildly" insulted you. The
graveness of the insult is the gravenes of how the recipient have
percieved it. The recipient's perception is the only valid basis for
deciding whether an insult is mild or grave.
By this standard, then, given that many *would* respond to those
statements as highly offensive, and given that one list member was
obviously so highly insulted by Jojo's comments that he responded with
"fuck you," Jojo has just condemned himself as having issued grave insults
without grave provocation. Jojo's comment in that case was actually
mild -- my opinion --, by comparison with others, but it had an effect
that could have been predicted.
All my insults have always been a response to an insult, whether personal,
as in "F*** yourself" or general as in "the Bible is a fairy tale" or "The
Bible is written by illiterate goat herders." Both statements are false,
and insulting whether they are personal or general. For the same reason
why you feel that I have insulted you by calling muhammed a sex pervert.
No, you did not insult me by saying that. You insulted friends of mine,
and you insulted me by calling me a liar when I described what you had
done *accurately,* often with links, and by dismissing the product of my
sincere research as "lies," without actually pointing out *one lie,* and
totally disregarding evidence.
You seem to think that my vigorous response to an insult is unwarranted
because the initial insults are "mild".
"Seem" is the operative word here. It seems so to Jojo. I don't think
Jojo's response was "unwarranted," but I'll say right now that it was
insane, it was excessive for Vortex, which is a *social judgment.*
That is not for you to decide my friend. You have no right to dictate
the level of response I give out.
That's correct. Jojo decides, and Jojo is responsible for what Jojo does,
and cannot shift responsibility to others because he perceives them as
"insulting" him.
But I can assure you, I take great pains in deciding the level of
nastiness I give back. I take considerable consideration that it is
always calibrated to the level of nastiness directed my way.
Jojo
From this mail, as is common here, the judgment is deranged. Insults have
been perceived when there was none. Jojo fantastizes about what has been
said about him. When the truth is written, he *reads contempt into it.*
That reveals how he actually thinks about himself. A "turd," he called
himself in several posts.
It's all made up. He is not a turd. Satan tells him he is, and he fights
with Satan, something that Jesus advised against. He projects this war all
over us.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax"
<[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 4:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:List integrity
I this post I review the early history of controversy involving Jojo Jaro
on this list. Jojo began with clearly relevant postings on alternative
energy research. That went on for some time, until May, 2012, when a
problem appeared.
Ultimately, this study leads to a clear example of what Jojo does. He
imagines insult, then insults "back," initiating a cycle of insult,
escalating. At the same time, he holds a series of strong beliefs,
apparently not suscpetible to evidence or genuine discussion, on topics
that are likely to be inflammatory if brought here (and just about
anywhere on the internet, except for certain odd corners), and he readily
drops these into discussions.
At 04:46 AM 12/30/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Yes, I stand corrected.
If calling for the open, transparent and proper accountability of his
qualifications is an insult, then yes, I've insulted Obama.
I will separately address this in another post.
I decided to look back and see if I could find the origin of Jojo's sense
of Vortex and the Vortex community, so I reviewed the contributions of
Jojo to this forum. Jojo has repeated claimed that he doesn't "start"
insulting, but that others insult him, and he responds with insult.
He made comments early on that could indicate a certain combativeness,
but that is not unusual here. In a post, resent 26 Apr 2012
20:33:31 -0700, in which he complimented Jed Rothwell, he mentioned that
he disagreed on "Darwinian Evolution." (By the way, source time confirms
location in the Philippines, I think.)
However, the post to which he was responding, apparently, did not mention
"Darwinian Evolution," so this must have been a reference to some other
post. Another list subscriber chimed in with some support for Jojo, but
nobody started debating evolution.
But on Fri, 25 May 2012 14:37:50 -0700 (resent time), Jojo sent an
extensive post on "Darwinian Evolution."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66036.html
Jojo might think that this post did not insult anyone. But it did. It was
in response to a casual comment by James Bowery:
I hate to think what would have become of Newton or Darwin had they not
been
among the relatively independent British middle (yeoman) class.
This comment is, in no way, propaganda for Darwinian Evolution. Yes, it
assumes a certain importance to Darwin, but we need to understand this:
that importance is a routinely accepted fact, tantamount to a belief,
among most people interested in science. Were there some necessity to
attack Darwinian evolution --
difficult to understand for Vortex-l --
okay. But there was not. The subject was not Darwinian Evolution.
Jojo escalated, with a rant on Darwinian Evolution that connected it with
*everyone who accepts Darwinian Evolution.* Read the post! Jojo knew that
he was changing the subject. He knew that it would be highly
controversial. He anticipated "shots." He implied that he'd not be
responding.
Resent Fri, 25 May 2012 16:05:54 -0700, Jojo wrote this:
I hesitated to post my original critique of Darwinian Evolution; and it
is the reason why I refrained from responding about Darwinian Evolution
for so long - that is; that I value this forum so much, that I do not
want to involve other topics in this forum other than Cold Fusion. I
wish people would not use this forum for propaganda of their beliefs and
then exclude other points of view; just like what Parks, Huzienga, and
others are doing wrt to Hot fusion.
However, he then proceeded to "challenge" Jed Rothwell, who had responded
civilly to Jojo. However, Jed noted that Jojo was "ignorant." That kind
of comment is typically taken by Jojo as an "insult." Rothwell promised
to let Jojo have the last word. He kept that promise for that thread. The
discusion of evolution continued a little, but other readers started to
complain about off-topic.
A thread on a cold fusion topic had been hijacked by the insertion of a
discussion of "Darwinian Evolution," based not, as Jojo has often
claimed, on "propaganda," but a mere reference to Darwin as a man with
ideas that were not popular in his time, dicta. In the process, Jojo set
up a *political argument.* Read the post!
Then Jojo started a new thread, specifically on Darwinian Evolution,
resent Sat, 26 May 2012 02:22:30 -0700.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66051.html
He did not keep to his intention. He continued to poke at Jed. Jed had
answered, and indicated intention not to respond further, and had not
responded further. Others had made small comments. Yet Jojo's post
mentioned Jed five times, in addition to continuing to quote Jed's
original response. The mentions were not complimentary.
Jed Rothwell did not bite. However, James Bowery did, becoming incensed
that Jojo apparently would not consider an experiment to distinguish
between Intelligent Design and Darwinian Evolution. The interchange
revealed clearly that this was a *religious* argument.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66108.html and the
incivility was quite what can be expected when people argue religion
*without listening.* So now there was a reader who had "insulted" Jojo,
though this was still somewhat within normal forum behavior. The topic,
though, generated a lot of posts, and this was now heavily off-topic.
Vortex-l allows limited off-topic discussion, and this was straying
outside that.
Dave Roberson, who is perhaps sympathetic to Jojo's view on Darwinian
Evolution, objected to the uncivil comment, but also suggested that Jojo
move the discussion elsewhere.
In a post resent Sun, 27 May 2012 10:10:57 -0700, Jojo wrote:
This will be my last response to you. You're welcome to have the last
word.
Jojo, however, continued to respond in the thread. I jumped in with
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66144.html
Ah, I do write lengthy posts! However, this did not insult Jojo, unless
my pointing to his self-revelation in his post would be an insult. It
wasn't. I took Jojo literally and looked at what his posts implied about
him, and described it.
Just be aware, Jojo, that you are describing yourself, better and more
accurately than you are describing Jed, whom you do not really know.
Jojo responded to me, resent Mon, 28 May 2012 02:47:05 -0700. He sought
to move the discussion with me off list. He responded again, Tue, 29 May
2012 04:39:16 +0800
First you criticize me for "hijacking" this thread (which was not a
hijack because I was trying to draw a parallel and I renamed the
thread.), then you continue to criticize me for hijacking even though I
have stopped responding, then you continue to keep this topic alive even
though I and others have given it a rest.
Here we can start to see a pattern. I had not "criticized" Jojo for
hijacking the thread. The thread, regarding which I'd mentioned
hijacking, was the *prior* thread. Jojo had renamed it (which was proper,
but he left out the OT tag.) What I had done was to respond to a series
of Jojo posts, not yet to the latest one. Now that I'd seen that, I
responded Mon, 28 May 2012 21:16:16 -0400
Jojo, you make up fantasies about what shows in this record. Why would
I expect you'd have anything of substance to discuss elsewhere?
I did not criticize you for hijacking the thread. This is a great
example of meaning created in the mind of the reader.
We were now discussing what happened on-list. Not Darwinian Evolution,
about which we could argue forever. I declined Jojo's invitation to take
it elsewhere. I indicated that I thought the dicussion was not likely to
have value for me.
(By the way, that could be considered my Favorite Debate Tactic, for
on-line discussion, where there is a *complete and accurate record* of
the discussion. It could be considered a test. If someone is going to
firmly insist on allegations regarding the record, and neither verify
them by reference to the record, nor acknowledge error -- or show
alternative interpretation *that respects the record,* it's hopeless to
imagine that we might come to agreement on difficult and abstract topics.
As a "debate tactic," it establishes the lack of credibility of the other
writer. I'd prefer they not do this. I don't like to "win debates"
through the stupidity of the other. And this tactic can backfire in some
contexts where people simply assume that anyone asserting a strong
position will post false evidence. They take compilations of evidence as
proof of obsession. That happens on Wikipedia.)
Jojo replied, resent Mon, 28 May 2012 20:04:11 -0700
OK Whatever. This will be my last response to you ever. You are
welcome to have the last word and deliver some parting insult or snide
remark.
No sense in arguing with Darwinian Evolution fanatics; who's only
interested in blaberring about things he does not know. It's akin to
arguing with Parks regarding cold fusion.
It's quite visible here how Jojo created a highly contentious discussion,
then took offense when it was described dispassionately. He completely
ignores what he did: perceive a criticism where there was only a
description, and then solidify that perception as if it were a fact,
which he will remember, as people often do when they do this, as a
"fact." To be repeated and relied upon. It's a variation on what James
Bowery saw and responded to. Not interested in *evidence*. I know what's
true, and even if I can look at the evidence by just looking at my own
email, I won't. Not needed. I already know the Truth (TM). This was
guaranteed to end badly, unless Jojo wakes up, which doesn't happen very
often.
I did not respond again in that thread. Jojo did twice, tossing in claims
likely to set off anyone with strong opinions about Bible archeology
(what does this have to do with Darwinian Evolution, the subject?),
Gnostic Christians, and just about anyone with knowledge or established
opinion on a wide variety of topics, that happen to be topics that
*often* lead to useless flame wars in internet fora. What's amazing is
that relatively few readers took the bait. Jojo had the last word in the
topic for over two months, when it was reawakened by Axil Axil.
The last word in this topic was
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg68373.html Jojo would
doubtlessly not like that post, but it probably represents a very common
view among Vorticians. He did not respond.
But he continues to argue Darwinian Evolution, with claims that anyone
who accepts it is naive, ignorant, and hoodwinked. Which is the large
majority of us on this list. Yet he thinks he isn't insulting people!
