The difference is that you have, once again and without support, leveled the charge that I am lying. Usually this is just typical hyperbole from you anytime you claim that I misinterpret a point or misunderstand an argument. But this time you have gone too far and have yourself lied in order to try and attack my character.

It is there for all to see Om. Even your fellow skeptics can clearly see that you have "invented" scholarly support for your ideas. The fact that you refuse to discuss it because you don't think I have adequately responded to this or that point is obvious stonewalling and evasion.

Why not just withdraw the accusation and admit you were mistaken in your references? Or, show hos Eisler supports a position which he explicitly rejects in the only reference you provided? Or that Pines and Charlesworth support a position which is not accredited to them in the article you referred us to?

Can you? Will you?

And if you won't, why should I continue to attempt a dialouge with you? When you will invent references, accuse me of lying, then lie to cover it up?

Of course it's possible you just made a mistake.

Which was it?

[This message has been edited by Layman (edited April 16, 2001).]

So calling you a liar is the difference here? Funny; I don't see how. You have also called me a liar, as well as calling me a coward.

You'll have to excuse me if I am not exactly worried about people who complain about the treatment they get, while doing exactly the same thing to others.

And whether or not I have called you a liar doesn't really excuse your tardiness, does it? I mean, really deLayman - you have evaded doing repairs to your busted Miracle Worker thread for two months now.

One more thing: the objections that were raised to your Miracle Worker post were not even raised by me; they were raised by Single Dad and turtonm. So what does me calling you a liar have to do with it anyhow? You owe your answers to SingleDad and turtonm; not to me.

But for some reason, you seem to want to hide behind hurt feelings derived from our exchange, and pretend that those hurt feelings justify a failure to fix the gaping holes in your lame arguments.

You will be happy to know that my feelings are fine.

There is no point in further discussion because you have demonstrated that you have no interest in discussion. But more importantly, you have demonstrated that you will invent material in an attemp to discredit your opponent. Moreover, you will lie to cover it up and refuse to admit what has clearly been shown to the board.

I do not have the time or interest to keep you honest.

[This message has been edited by Layman (edited April 18, 2001).]

Thanks, but I wasn't asking.

Really? And just how did I demonstrate that?

By pointing out that you call other people liars and cowards, and then storm out in a huff when the same thing happens to you?

You were offered the chance to have civil discussion, and you didn't want it.

You're more than a coward, deLayman. You're a crybaby and a sore loser.


Indeed. Judging from your postings, I'd say that just keeping yourself honest is more work than you can handle.