The Argument Clinic

[Tim]

@Eddie

A petty, caviling objection to my point.

Given that your “point” gave every appearance of being nothing but yet more of your signature petty point-scoring, I find this rich.

@Eddie

I was perfectly aware that Rumraket was quoting someone else, and I’m also perfectly aware that someone can quote something without agreeing with it.

So you were willfully misrepresenting @Rumraket? Why am I not surprised.

@Eddie

But context strongly suggested that Rumraket thought the procedure recommended by Scott Minnich was good.

Yes, and even a broken clock is right twice a day.

That a Discovery Institute Fellow gets something right once every few years is hardly a ringing endorsement.

I cannot help but notice a pattern here. Scott Minnich gets a passing mention in a quote, so @Eddie makes a song and dance about it. Francis Collins mentions Fine Tuning, so @Eddie has to make it about Michael Denton (in spite of every evidence being that few outside the ID-Creationism echo chamber would associate him with Fine Tuning – it is also amusing to discover how much Eddie likes to talk about Denton). When somebody points out that a virology postgrad (now virology doctorate) demolished Michael Behe’s claims about the subject, @Eddie calls her “an arrogant young twit”.

I would venture to suggest that it might be appropriate to replace Eddie’s sobriquet of “Religious Studies and Natural Theology” (claiming expertise he has never substantiated) with “the Discovery Institute Fellows’ biggest fanboy” (which he seems to substantiate with every other breath).

@Eddie

And it was offered in the spirit of play, the joke being that one of the inveterate disrespecters of ID scientists around here had (perhaps unwittingly) paid a Dover Trial witness a scientific compliment. I was trying to get a smile out of people. But apparently wit by itself is not sufficient around he

Any claim of ‘playfulness’ is undercut by the denigration of calling the person you were purportedly sharing a joke with “one of the inveterate disrespecters of ID scientists”, particularly when it comes from somebody who could equally be termed one of the inveterate defenders of the bunch of charlatans and incompetents that are ID apologists.

I would note that it is not uncommon on the extremist Right, when caught talking utter balderdash, to claim ‘I was only joking’ (when no humor in the purported ‘joke’ is readily apparent).

If you don’t want your ‘humor’ mistaken for serious intent, I would suggest another forum convention:

I am sure @Eddie doesn’t see any of it this way however, and will no doubt tell me why at excruciating length. To save time, I will give him my response to this upcoming rant in advance:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯