30-07-2011, 01:38 AM
Again, it should not be the persons nor the organizations that we are discussing here. That is a different topic. The topic of this thread has to do with substance: the merits of the arguments being offered and the validity of the evidence offered in support of those arguments. It has nothing to do with who is offering the evidence if the relevance of the evidence can be--or has been--independently verified.
Whenever this topic is raised the main arguments offered by MMGW apologists seem to revolve around pointing out flaws in the personalities, background, affiliations, etc., of the skeptics themselves--not the arguments that the skeptics have offered. The pattern is familiar: arguments are left unaddressed; ad hominem is leveled against the skeptic; the MMGW mantra is re-stated.
Whenever this topic is raised the main arguments offered by MMGW apologists seem to revolve around pointing out flaws in the personalities, background, affiliations, etc., of the skeptics themselves--not the arguments that the skeptics have offered. The pattern is familiar: arguments are left unaddressed; ad hominem is leveled against the skeptic; the MMGW mantra is re-stated.
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)