At 03:44 AM 6/30/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Rich Murray
<<mailto:rmfor...@gmail.com>rmfor...@gmail.com> wrote:
Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad
Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error
and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and
judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we
all get tangled up in the Rossi web.
Lomax hasn't called me anything worse than a liar and a
pseudo-skeptic, and I think he'd argue those were supportable
labels. Water off a duck...
I've called him a CF advocate, and a pathological believer, and
probably dishonest too, and I'd argue they are supportable too.
No harm either way, as far as I can see. It adds a little color to
some pretty dull gibberish.
Thanks, Joshua. I agree completely, though "dull" is not an objective
evaluation, whether it's true or false depends on the individuals involved.
Your account is not complete, though. I recently said I'd be willing
to drop "pseudo" from skeptic, based on some things you said, and
"liar" was referring to old stuff, and I'm not interested in going
back to check out the basis, so I'm *not* arguing that those labels
were supportable. Maybe they were at the time, and maybe not, and so what?
If you were upset, or someone else was upset, I'd be willing to look
back. You don't sound very upset.
You've here asserted, de novo, CF advocate, pathological believer,
and "probably dishonest" to boot, but if you want to believe these
stories, so what? Believing your own stories would be your problem,
not mine. Good luck with it.
