Just when you thought it couldn't get any "better" ...

[oxmixmudd]

Your IQ continues dropping, Jim.
Now, was that "name calling" or was that calling a spade a spade?

Numnuts had written:
"Yes - I am about exposing creationists for what they actually are."

I referred to him as a "MILITANT ignoramus". Why?
"MILITANT" because of his self-declared objective (he stated it, not me).
"Ignoramus" because his posts clearly indicate being clueless about Biblical Creationists.
He is nothing more than a passion/hate-filled individual attacking his ideological enemy.
Kind'a reminds me of several TWebbers, but that's another subject.

Thus, "MILITANT ignoramus" is not name calling; it is a statement of fact.

But I can always -- I mean ALWAYS! -- count on you to judge me in the best light.

Give it up, Jim, on a really bad day I'm still running circles around you.

Jorge

Source: webster

the act of using offensive names to insult someone

© Copyright Original Source

The 'core' element of name calling is the intent to insult Jorge, not the potential applicability of the name to the object of abuse, Jorge. It is, in fact, a form of verbal abuse*. If I call out "FATTY!" to someone that is grossly overweight, your pathetic excuse for boorish behavior is just as 'valid'. But it is in fact name calling all the same. Name calling is the act of purposed insult by moniker, it has nothing to do with whether or not the name used may or may not actually have a a truth element to it.

That said - your particular application is BOTH name calling AND false.



Jim

*Not that in this context Jorge's name calling is going to carry with it any particular weight - sort of like abuse by a Nerf bat.

[Jorge]

Source: webster

the act of using offensive names to insult someone

© Copyright Original Source

The 'core' element of name calling is the intent to insult Jorge, not the potential applicability of the name to the object of abuse, Jorge. It is, in fact, a form of verbal abuse*. If I call out "FATTY!" to someone that is grossly overweight, your pathetic excuse for boorish behavior is just as 'valid'. But it is in fact name calling all the same. Name calling is the act of purposed insult by moniker, it has nothing to do with whether or not the name used may or may not actually have a a truth element to it.

That said - your particular application is BOTH name calling AND false.



Jim

*Not that in this context Jorge's name calling is going to carry with it any particular weight - sort of like abuse by a Nerf bat.

Wow, I wonder who helped you out with that 'scholarly research'?

Regardless, here's what your post meant to me:



Jorge

[klaus54]

Jor,

What's the YEC explanation for these data?

K54

[oxmixmudd]

Wow, I wonder who helped you out with that 'scholarly research'?

Regardless, here's what your post meant to me:



Jorge

I would expect no less from you Jorge.

You are as predictable as afternoon thunderstorms in Florida in the summer.

Jim

[Jorge]

Jor,

What's the YEC explanation for these data?

K54

If I told you, we'd have to make you 'disappear'.

Jorge

[klaus54]

If I told you, we'd have to make you 'disappear'.

Jorge

Legitimate question. Answer it. What's the "creation model" explanation of these data?

K54

[klaus54]

I would expect no less from you Jorge.

You are as predictable as afternoon thunderstorms in Florida in the summer.

Jim

Nor would I expect more.

K54

[rwatts]

Quote Originally Posted by Jorge View Post
If I told you, we'd have to make you 'disappear'.

Jorge

Legitimate question. Answer it. What's the "creation model" explanation of these data?

K54

Ask Jorge a question, and if he doesn't have a rant, then he disappears. It's his modus operandi, either to rant or to disappear.