I was about to go to sleep after a particularly heavy day when I read this comment. The result was to shoot enough adrenalin into my veins to probably keep me up all night.
Your second paragraph merrily trashes a lifetime of work on my part and displays the happy superiority complex of the terminally ignorant. I am currently 45. I began to seriously work on the body of studies that has been my life's work when I was sixteen, which, unless I miss my calculations, means that I have been doing my research longer than you have been alive. For a comparatively small amount of what that research amounts to, have a look at this:http://www.geocities.com/vortigernstudies/fabio/contents.htm. You may want to make time if you want to actually read it - it's about half a million word long.
I am not saying that this certifies that I am right. I am saying that I spent a lifetime perfecting a certain skill, and that I think that entitles me to have it treated with a minimal amount of respect. When I found that a person who disagreed with me on a scientific matter had scientific training, I deferred. I did not altogether change my mind, but I acknowledged his superior right to disagree with me due to his experience. You, on the other hand, deliver your unimaginably arrogant notions of what is evidence and what is not without any notion whatever that you are actually insulting my own hard-won skill by doing so. Ignorance excuses you to some extent, but only to some extent; for you should not be ignorant that you are ignorant; and if you had the sense to know that you do not know, you would at least be willing to pay attention to others.
Indeed, you should not be ignorant that to deny the value of any evidence in this field is an insult not only to me, not only to my work, but to the very possibility of rational argument. You insulate yourself from argument if you insulate yourself against evidence. And since you cannot have it both ways, I can turn it against you: I have no intention of having anything to do with anyone who does not have any intention to submit her own arrogant views to debate.
This is only the start. The unbelievable amount of nonsense you manage to discharge in the rest of a rather short comment would give me work till tomorrow merely to ridicule it properly. But apart that I am, as I said, at the end of an exhausting day and in dire need of sleep, there would be no point in even starting out on it unless we first establish that argument can be made at all.
no subject
Your second paragraph merrily trashes a lifetime of work on my part and displays the happy superiority complex of the terminally ignorant. I am currently 45. I began to seriously work on the body of studies that has been my life's work when I was sixteen, which, unless I miss my calculations, means that I have been doing my research longer than you have been alive. For a comparatively small amount of what that research amounts to, have a look at this:http://www.geocities.com/vortigernstudies/fabio/contents.htm. You may want to make time if you want to actually read it - it's about half a million word long.
I am not saying that this certifies that I am right. I am saying that I spent a lifetime perfecting a certain skill, and that I think that entitles me to have it treated with a minimal amount of respect. When I found that a person who disagreed with me on a scientific matter had scientific training, I deferred. I did not altogether change my mind, but I acknowledged his superior right to disagree with me due to his experience. You, on the other hand, deliver your unimaginably arrogant notions of what is evidence and what is not without any notion whatever that you are actually insulting my own hard-won skill by doing so. Ignorance excuses you to some extent, but only to some extent; for you should not be ignorant that you are ignorant; and if you had the sense to know that you do not know, you would at least be willing to pay attention to others.
Indeed, you should not be ignorant that to deny the value of any evidence in this field is an insult not only to me, not only to my work, but to the very possibility of rational argument. You insulate yourself from argument if you insulate yourself against evidence. And since you cannot have it both ways, I can turn it against you: I have no intention of having anything to do with anyone who does not have any intention to submit her own arrogant views to debate.
This is only the start. The unbelievable amount of nonsense you manage to discharge in the rest of a rather short comment would give me work till tomorrow merely to ridicule it properly. But apart that I am, as I said, at the end of an exhausting day and in dire need of sleep, there would be no point in even starting out on it unless we first establish that argument can be made at all.