--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > <jstein@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > <no_reply@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just asking. Unlike you, I don't claim to know > > > > > > > > that my answer to a question about *opinion* > > > > > > > > is true or "factually correct." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And a good thing too, since your "opinion" is based > > > > > > > on nonfacts. > > > > > > > > > > > > Funny you should mention that. I was going to > > > > > > ask you about these "facts" you're referring to. > > > > > > > > > > Too late. You decided to show off your > > > > > ignorance of a whole bunch of other facts > > > > > instead, in two separate posts. > > > > > > > > Did you attend the same school of debate > > > > that Jim did? Your tactics are similar. > > > > > > I won't be the *least* bit offended or outraged if > > > you don't agree with me. I don't *expect* anyone > > > to agree with me just because I said something. > > > > > > But isn't it fascinating how many folks here DO? And > > > how upset they sometimes get when others DON'T agree > > > with their every word? > > > > I never asked you to agree with me. > > > > I merely asked you to clarify one of your > > own statements. You seem upset enough about > > the question to refuse to answer it. > > I was quoting you, Barry.
I was more than aware of that. But you were quoting out of context. No one said anything about wanting to change your beliefs. All that I asked is for you to explain how you were so certain about them as to answer a "Could it be that..." question with the word "No," and then explain that answer with the assertion that it was "factually correct." I didn't see any "facts" in what you were replying to, *or* in your reply. I was curious as to where you see them. It's *fine* with me if you want to duck out on explaining your rather definitive statements, *especially* since you chose to do so in this particular thread. The original question was: > Could it be that people who have spent decades *not* > using their critical faculties, and reacting to > ANYTHING said by the people they have deemed "author- > ities" as Truth Incarnate, seem to feel after a few > years or decades doing this that that is how other > people should react to THEM? I consider the question answered by the nature of your response, and subsequent non-response. Thank you for your participation. You can go back to making similar pronouncements about Hillary and other subjects now. > > Jim did the same thing recently. I was just > > wondering whether you shared the same alma > > mater. > > >
