Revolutionary Scientific Finding

[Good Ole Jim]

You didn't offend me at all. You need to realize that Obama was given the award 9 months after he took office. Even if you give him credit for anything that he has done while president, he was given the award less than a year into his presidency, so there is no way he could have accomplished enough to deserve it. Yes, he got us out of Iraq, but that was after he was given the award, so it wasn't a factor in the award. Anything notable that he accomplished was accomplished after receiving the award which makes it nothing more than a ceremonial PR award.

Many individuals have been given this award for the hope of accomplishing great things. I would say the only reason it's such a hot-button now is because the man that got it is the leader of the Free World. I understand your point, but the prestige of the award stand for not just accomplishment, but hope for peace as well.

[Wickabee]

I can kinda see where this is heading. I could offer a counter-argument, but when we start using sarcastic rhetoric like asking me if your example is sufficient, it's usually a sign of things going south. That is, in all due respect, what I've noticed with your debates on this forum. It's just not something I want to be a part of.

Well, then don't get stuck on particulars of an example when we're discussing the principle of the thing. I apologize if you took my pointing this out as sarcastic rhetoric, I assure you that was not my intent at all.

My intent was to ask you to stop arguing semantics and actually try to find the point made instead of getting stuck on irrelevant details of my example. I see that sort of things as often being deliberate, and for the purpose of stopping actual discussion based on prejudices.

I've also asked you, and the people I suspect are in your ear on these boards, about rainbow universe and your thoughts on it several times, with no response.

So you've deflected one point with semantics, and completely ignored my question several times. I'm starting to see a pattern here that is contradictory to your claim of hating biased, prejudiced, rhetoric, and very in line with a couple hypocrites I know. Right down to the "Oh. I get your point, but don't like that you pointed out my argument of semantics, so I'm going to say something about that, rather than respond to the actual point" and the "I'm going to argue with someone about Obama now."

But hey, science over politics, unless you have biases against the guy discussing science.

[Good Ole Jim]

Well, then don't get stuck on particulars of an example when we're discussing the principle of the thing. I apologize if you took my pointing this out as sarcastic rhetoric, I assure you that was not my intent at all.

My intent was to ask you to stop arguing semantics and actually try to find the point made instead of getting stuck on irrelevant details of my example. I see that sort of things as often being deliberate, and for the purpose of stopping actual discussion based on prejudices.

I've also asked you, and the people I suspect are in your ear on these boards, about rainbow universe and your thoughts on it several times, with no response.

So you've deflected one point with semantics, and completely ignored my question several times. I'm starting to see a pattern here that is contradictory to your claim of hating biased, prejudiced, rhetoric, and very in line with a couple hypocrites I know. Right down to the "Oh. I get your point, but don't like that you pointed out my argument of semantics, so I'm going to say something about that, rather than respond to the actual point" and the "I'm going to argue with someone about Obama now."

But hey, science over politics, unless you have biases against the guy discussing science.

I have limited time to come on this site. I don't always have the sufficient time to address every question I get asked. First off, I won't have someone that doesn't know me outside of forum posts call me a hypocrite. Next, your suspecting of "people being in my ears" is baseless and misguided. Outside of maybe trading with someone, I have no lines of communication with any one of you outside of the forum posts that we can all see. Also, I assure you that there was no deflecting going on, more so that I thought was an inaccuracy in your post, and decided to present a counter-argument on the matter.

I replied to Duane because he has a fair argument, and didn't resort to sarcasm in order to make is point. I felt we could have a good discussion on it.


Again, I see where this is going, and I have much better uses of my time than to spend them arguing with someone on a forum.