Re: OT: Global warming

On Jan 7, 1:40 pm, "WuzYoungOnceToo" <WuzYoungOnce...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jan 7 2008 3:08 PM, Bob T. wrote:

So far, it was obvious only to you.

And anyone else with a brain.

Apparently no one else but you has a brain.

I apologize for that phrase. I have been trying to stay away from
posting insults. Perhaps it wasn't obvious at all that I was joking
when I asked Travel if he owned land in the 9th Ward.

Yes, you did.  BillB also "explained" that he didn't actually change the
meaning of my quote when he snipped the surrounding context.  That didn't
make it true.

You get me confused with Bill quite often, it seems.

I've never confused you with Bill.  I inadvertently typed the wrong name
once, but I knew who you were.  I also wasn't confusing you with Bill in
the quote above.  Perhaps *you're* confused about what I was saying.

That was a joke. It seems I always have to explain my jokes to you.
Earlier in this thread, you accidentally called me "Bill". Later in
this thread, you compared my explanation of my joke to some
explanation of Bill's sometime in the past that you considered bogus.
Hence "You get me confused with Bill quite often, it seems."

Maybe.  Maybe you don't think any such thing.

Maybe I really did think that Travel owned property in the 9th Ward...
yeah, that's it, I was discussing real estate.

Sarcasm generally isn't literal in content.

I was never in the habit of insulting OrangeSFO every time he posted.  I
was in the habit of quite frequently pointing out that the claims he made
in his posts were bull***.  There's a difference.

Very frequently.  Very very very frequently.

Lately, you're in the habit of very, very frequently posting pointless
responses that you later identify as nothing but an exercise in being a
smart ass.  What impression should we form from that?

I have commented on this a bit elswhere. I have grown bored with
discussing certain subjects in a substantive way because they have
been talked to death. So now, instead of responding to one of
Travel's posts with a serious explanation of the actual facts about
Global Warming, I often respond with a joke.

What was it about my original post that made you think there was
anything there but an exercise in being a smart ass? Travel posted
two quips, I replied with two quips.


I formed the impression
that you were trying to discourage him from posting by replying rudely
to as many posts as possible.

I suppose there are polite ways of telling a habitual liar that he's full
of crap.  But I don't see the point of soft-soaping it.

Well, you rarely soft-soap anything, do you? Charming or not, that's
your posting style. I admit I sometimes find you quite amusing.

You've obviously missed a lot of things.  I haven't responded much to
Orange at all lately.

I had noticed that - that was the sort of thing I was referring to
when I asked why you were reverting to your former style.

You're talking in circles now.  On the one hand, you say my former style
consisted of constantly berating Orange.  Now you say that I'm not doing
that hardly at all, but am still reverting to that former style.  Which is it?

I was not clear above. When you returned after your prolonged absence
last year, it seemed for a while like you were aspiring to more
substance and less snarkiness. More recently, it seems you have
reverted to your pre-absence style.

You're a
smart guy - why do you waste your time trying to convince people that
(for example) I really thought that New Orleans was flooded by melted
pack ice?

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.  I just pointed out the
invalidity of your statements, and cast doubt on your explanation.
Whether or not anyone is convinced of anything by that is irrelevant.

I care whether or not people are convinced when you "cast doubt" on my
truthfulness. Call me over-sensitive if you will.

- Bob T.
.