Thank goodness you are here now to represent they way, the truth, and the light.

Give us a truth? I have been looking for a truth everywhere and you have them all? Come on, share?



I think it a silly way that you present it but I have never said poor stewardship of the Earth is OK in my book! In fact, I don't think that statement is truthful or ethical! What's up with that?

How about a poll:

Is it moral to deceive people about another individuals position on a topic and then project your perception of their opinion without any discussion on the topic?

I say it is neither moral or ethical!

Of course. How else is the discussion of an off topic dillemna started?

My position is that it's not only immoral and unethical, it's impolite. It's the paradigm used by polititians running for office. It is the lowest, most base form of debate. From my "old school" perspective, the tactics you mentioned don't even rise to the level of what is meant by the term "debate," or at least "civil and intellectual debate."

Just food for thought and self-awareness Doc:

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." ~ Mark Twain

I'm NOT saying anyone else around here knows everything, or close to it. But your mind seems particularly set in its ways and unwilling to consider new possibilities. When something you believe to be true is challenged, you become very defensive rather than contemplative. I'm not judgin', I'm just sayin'........

Kevin,
Anyone can join in and kick someone who's being kicked. I really think your rhetoric leans in the direction of the cliche. I don't think there's a single post of yours that actually discusses the merits of one of mine. They always stray into an attack on me as a person.

I find that to be laden with hypocracy and such is a profound antithesis of ethics and morality.

I thought Kevin made a good point?

http://www.drchamaillischroniclesofthet ... /index.php

This is what it's like a LOT in this little cliche that most seem to steer clear of:

1. Cliche members lament about something.

2. I point out a possible cause of the lament.

3. I get implications that I'm lying or not contemplating the symptom, thus unethical.

4. Everyone rallies around the dominant cliche member.


I experimented with commenting second hand, prior to watching the video. I made my comment that was cynically based upon how stupid people eliminate themselves from the gene pool. That wasn't good enough.

I watched the video first hand and drew the same reflection. I stated that. That wasn't good enough.

If the dominant cliche member rejects what I say, it's no good. That makes the entire thread, video included, nothing more than an offering to the sacred dominant cliche member. That's ethical? I've got to be on the wrong planet.


I found myself a bit inspired by the video to look into the root of the symptoms it portrayed. It took me back to the 5th and 6th centuries when the dissent was first orchestrated by the Vatican. I found it was good material to point out in a novel I've been writing. It's funny that this cliche is the only place I get feces thrown at me concerning my take on it all, novel included.

Is Kevin purring on your lap right now?

That seems a proof of Kevin's point!

You hit the nail on the head, Doc. Most of your posts seem to lack merit.

As if yours do. Merit this, Colorado Springs just got hit with what amounts to a "snow cone." A foot of hail dumped along with a tornado, inclusive of twisters in the area. Coincidence that the sun split into 4 poles last month according to the Hinode team.

I lived out on the plains for most of my life. Thunderstorms with tornadoes and huge amounts of hail, hmmm, out there this time of year. Not going to get too excited.