Quote:
Originally Posted by BobDylan
I just spent a stinking hour, offering a detailed response to your last rebuttal... and I stinking lost it becuase of my internet connection! I am stinking frustrated right now! lol...
I am not attempting an overt obfuscation... I think the terminology "holy magic hair" is clearly overt obfuscation. But my disagreement with yours and DA's analysis is more than obfuscation. In lieu of more detalied rebuttals, obfustcation is an easy response. I don't have time to detail everything, although I have attempted, and my detalied responese, reasoning, and analysis are regarded as non-sequitor, or disregarded althogether. When you are doing the same thing. The only issue is, because of human nature, there is a human tendency you have tapped into in people that seems to need to believe the worst about people. As is often said, it takes ten positive things to refute one negative thing that is said. I am under no illusion that my singular effort to respond to yours, DA's, or other unreasonable assertions will significantly sway opinions, but I do like the challenge nonetheless... part of my "human nature".
|
Obfuscation is the word because you are arguing ad nausuem that nobody teaches "magic hair".
and every time you have done that 3-4 of us have reminded you...reminded you, we are not saying LS or RR says "magic hair".
Over and over like repeating yourself "wins" the argument you fall back to the same thing "they never say magic hair"...ok why do you do that? We got it. You disagree with the term "Holy Magic Hair"..that is a non-sequitor to our argument.
Threaded Mode
