Sunday, February 20, 2005

And again...

This fellow just keeps making ignorant and stupid arguments. He makes arguments which are refuted and then says, "I did not make that argument." Then he goes back to his front page and makes the same ignorant and stupid arguments again. It seems he gets a little frustrated with it all, soon enough, so there are the sweaty little hands of the censor.

"Well mynym, I gave you a chance to actually give substantive responses, and you failed miserably, doing the same thing you did before. 9 comments in less than an hour and a half, none of them substantive."

As if your ignorant assertions are "substantive"? For one thing, I slowed down for his little blog. Another, there were ten or so nit wits commenting on the side of moral degeneracy. Yet nothing seems to make this lil' fella happy. His "balance" or "equality," is his own totalitarian control, with all his nit wits agreeing.

"You didn't engage any of the actual analysis on the various studies...."

Judge for yourself, and if you really agree with such "studies" then comment here on a free forum that does not rely on censorship. It is interesting to note that if these social Leftists ever got into power it is almost certain that they would continue their pattern of censorship, if they can get away with it. In areas that they control, like the university, they still use censorship.

"....and why the criticisms you cited don't invalidate them, you just repeated the charge of being 'agendized.'"

First I refuted them, then I noted that the reason they were wrong is because they are agendized.

"And of course, the inaccurate claim that I'm "illiterate" for pointing out that the words "agendized" and "complimentarity[sic]" don't exist."

Those are the small points that an Leftist intellectual must rely on, I suppose. But ironically, they are ignorant on that too.

Main Entry: com·ple·men·tar·i·ty
Pronunciation: "käm-pl&-(")men-'tar-&-tE, -m&n-
Function: noun: the quality or state of
being complementary

Main Entry: -ize
Function: verb suffixEtymology: Middle English -isen, from Old French -iser, from Late Latin -izare, from Greek -izein1 a (1) : cause to be or conform to or resemble : cause to be formed into (2) : subject to a (specified) action (3) : impregnate or treat or combine with b : treat like c : treat according to the method of 2 a : become : become like b : be productive in or of : engage in a (specified) activity c : adopt or spread the manner of activity or the teaching of usage The suffix -ize has been productive in English since the time of Thomas Nashe (1567-1601), who claimed credit for introducing it into English to remedy the surplus of monosyllabic words. Almost any noun or adjective can be made into a verb by adding -ize ; many technical terms are coined this way as well as verbs of ethnic derivation and verbs derived from proper names . Nashe noted in 1591 that his coinages in -ize were being complained about, and to this day new words in -ize are sure to draw critical fire.

"But I was right about that. Plug them into, which offers definitions from a dozen or so different dictionaries and it comes up snake eyes on both of them."

What a nit wit! is not as if I was planning on keeping up with a blog where he records his own stupidity and ignorance all the time. I was just having some fun with some lil' minds.

"So your entire strategy goes like this....invent words, then accuse people of being illiterate for pointing out that they're invented...."

Or a half-wit....he seems lacking in wit, one way or another.

"....quote from people on your side, then completely ignore all substantive criticism of the claims in the quotes...."

This lil' fella calls what he did "substantive"? That's pretty funny.

"...accuse everyone else of "bias" without actually pointing out any factual errors in the arguments..."

The factual and substantive errors in the "research" is doing things like comparing a self-selected sample of wealthy lesbian moms intent on using their children to make some political point (leaving out gay men altogether) to compare to poor single moms and then concluding, "Well, there's no difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality when it comes to parenting!" You've carefully excluded the impact of fathering from the study, that whole "hetero" part of heterosexuality.

Yes, that is substantive. And I cited the peer reviewed literature where such researchers say exactly what they are doing, to "provide lesbians with information for their custody battles."

That is agendized, even if you are too illiterate to understand the term.

"...and of course, spam the blog with as many comments as you can until they ban you."

There's ten or so people writing on his side, yet he just can't stand the truth.

"I'll stop you from dropping this insubstantial drivel on my webpage, so you can now go back to yours and puff yourself up and say, "A-ha, those socialists just can't handle the Truthtm, so they have to censor me!" Crow to your heart's content, it doesn't budge reality one little bit. Goodbye."

Hehe, those socialists just can't handle the truth. But it is best to get them to illustrate that their textual degeneracy is their moral degeneracy, which is why they must rely on censorship.

Quit being such a crybaby about it all. Now you will always know that those "studies" are agendized garbage, even if you cannot allow yourself to admit it thanks to an obstinate sort of bigotry.