Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #414528 > unrolled thread

Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-03 19:31 +0000
    Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 14:42 -0700

#414528 — Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test

Archimedes Plutonium fails:

<several ad hominems by Archie snipped>

You're the one doing the ad hominem here, Archie. And I still see you
still haven't learned not to attack me.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#414537

On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 12:31:20 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Archimedes Plutonium fails:
> 
> <several ad hominems by Archie snipped>
> 
> You're the one doing the ad hominem here, Archie. And I still see you
> still haven't learned not to attack me.

MM, in a world of critical thinkers 
and it's their opinion you would hold, 
you have nothing to fear from the ad hominem.

Clearly there are many who's critical thinking 
is protecting themselves or projecting onto 
others merits or defects in reputation as to 
the un-critical acceptance of statement, but, 
those aren't critical thinkers and that's not 
critical thinking.  Here there's only one authority 
from which to argue, critical mathematical thinking.

If you'd leave the rabble please don't join it.


MM, you're pretty reasonable, 
don't worry here or about the bemused AP, 
though perhaps you've been around usenet the longest, 
AP is the crank we know, and even though his 
megalomania or persecution complex would see 
him return to his ramblings and away from his 
rantings to be seen in a better light, 
don't worry that other critical thinkers 
don't see through the ad homimen as 
immediately failed as rhetorical device.

So, we can all improve the tone and content 
by not shoveling the burden of tit-for-tat 
into the gentle delicate web of threads, 
of ideas, for critical thinkers.

Then is here my argument from rhetorical authority 
lessening the forum?  I hope not.

Because, we all have better things to 
do than that, even here.  If that's not 
so, that's the same comment.

I enjoy AP, when he's being constructive. 
Bear-baiting or circle-poking the crank 
simply is wasted on those who don't know 
and simply is a waste for those who do.

If it's not constructive it's junk.

And retro-finitist crankety-trolls 
can ... step off and get bent.

Plainly there're many who'd 
rather enjoy than attack.  This kind 
of forum has particularly low barriers 
to attack, but, critical thinkers 
can maintain their own suitably higher.

Get above this stuff, MM.

Good luck.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web