26-12-2010, 08:46 PM
Carol Thompson Wrote:"Complete disregard for the critical questions getting to identity and motive."
Evidently you believe that smearing people as holocaust deniers invalidates their scientific evidence.
"Flooding the thread with endless recitations of long-debunked disinformation."
Who debunked it and where? Certainly not in any Surgeon General report, which all evade this evidence by stonewalling.
"Ending erudite if sophistic screeds with gutter language."
Explain any so-called sophistry.
"Most significantly, the all-important challenge to engage, engage, engage ... in other words, prolong the long-settled debate so as to dignify its myriad sophistries and outright lies."
Cite examples of supposed "sophistries and outright lies." (Ha! The truth is that you don't have any. You are merely trying to pretend that disputing the say-so of authority is automatically a lie.) Furthermore, in REAL science, debates are not settled by censoring alternative hypotheses. In REAL science, debates are re-opened by new evidence, which is then freely discussed.
As for Colby, he's a perfect example of a strawman who works for the anti-smokers. All he does is snivel that he doesn't believe, while his fanatical inquisitors froth at the mouth with rage at a mere refusal to submit unquestioningly to their religious dogma. At no time do Colby or any of his ilk attack anti-smoker scientific fraud. Their only purpose is to serve as theater, to deceive the public that the pro-smoker side has no strong arguments to present.
And if someone appears who does have strong arguments, they get banned and censored.
All,
This is a classic iteration -- laughable if it weren't so tragic -- of all that I referenced in the above-quoted section.
I'm convinced. "Thompson" is "Colby." Even the "cite examples" language is lifted verbatim from dozens upon dozens of "Colby" posts.
"Cite examples," to reiterate, is in service to the need to engage, engage, engage. All the enemy wants is to prolong the long-settled arguments. Such is the brief of "Colby" and "Thompson."
It is clear to me that one or more of the individuals posting as "Colby" is/are at it here. Let's let it go a bit longer so as to draw them out. Then let's enjoy their "The DPF doesn't allow dissent" posts on the Ef.
I guess that if you have all the material resources in the world, you can afford to employ idiots.
"Thompson," you are exposed.
Charles