I received another upset (code loaded) comment from Mr. Burton at my CC blog, he feels very put out that I haven't posted any more of his comments and accuses me of deleting stuff, when his repetitive code loaded comments are sitting in moderation. Though odds are I won't ever post them, I don't do spam either. Which is exactly what he's expecting of me.
I'm posting my latest communication with Dave Burton of the NC-20 so that we're all on the same page. I expect Dave to respond to critique, not simply repeat his mantra.
Incidentally Dave, Citizenschallenge.blogspot has become my non-confrontational, debate free zone. My more assertive, let's debate, activities moved to WhatsUpWithThatWatts.blogspot.com five years ago, which explains why I've moved this to over there. Just in case you are wondering.
Over there the rules of serious constructive debate hold sway!
*That would be as opposed to the lawyerly politician's circus-debate
_________________________________________
citizenschallenge said...
Mr. Burton @ 10:45PM, I have made myself clear. Let me do it one more time. This time please shut down that dialogue in your head long enough to listen to what I'm telling you. This is not a negotiation. You won't even show me the courtesy of writing straight text, you still feel compelled to pack it full of your tricky dick coding, despite my request. You don't kid me, you aren't acting in good faith. You've got a malicious game going, rather than an honorable attempt to communicate with an 'opponent.'
I have made myself clear: Straight text, no tricky dick coding. I'm not your billboard!
Furthermore, I have taken the time to review your first comment and write up my observations. It is your turn to systematically respond to my claims, in a clear good faith matter.
I don't care about your games or how many points you score within your echo-chamber. I deal in the real world! Come on down.
If you have the intellectual integrity you are welcome to continue this dialogue by visiting WUWTW and responding to the thoughtful constructive critique of your claims. We don't need to like each other to have a constructive dialogue.* Respond to the specific and clearly defined critique of the comments I've posted.
Heck, send me an email for a guest post, I'll post it,
So long as you respond specifically to one of those three posts,
I have made myself clear: Straight text, no tricky dick coding. I'm not your billboard!
Furthermore, I have taken the time to review your first comment and write up my observations. It is your turn to systematically respond to my claims, in a clear good faith matter.
I don't care about your games or how many points you score within your echo-chamber. I deal in the real world! Come on down.
If you have the intellectual integrity you are welcome to continue this dialogue by visiting WUWTW and responding to the thoughtful constructive critique of your claims. We don't need to like each other to have a constructive dialogue.* Respond to the specific and clearly defined critique of the comments I've posted.
Heck, send me an email for a guest post, I'll post it,
So long as you respond specifically to one of those three posts,
each of which seriously examines, critiques, and describes your various claims, while providing supporting evidence for why your claims are rhetorically crafted but fundamentally misleading and willfully deceptive.
Can you handle scrutiny sir?
#1 considering malicious mischief in action: ncdave4life
The Seamonster does Dave Burton's sea level claims.
HOTWHOPPER does Dave Burton's sea level claims
Incidentally Dave, Citizenschallenge.blogspot has become my non-confrontational, debate free zone. My more assertive, let's debate, activities moved to WhatsUpWithThatWatts.blogspot.com five years ago, which explains why I've moved this to over there. Just in case you are wondering.
Over there the rules of serious constructive debate hold sway!
*That would be as opposed to the lawyerly politician's circus-debate
June 12, 2016 at 12:25 AM
1 comment:
Yeah, I know. A little puffed up and harsh, but I'm so sick of their cynical disingenuous game I could puke.
Like there isn't a one of them with genuine intellectual integrity. All too wrapped up in their spreadsheets and delusions of endless growth, and blind self-interest.
But that doesn't mean I couldn't pull myself together and have a serious constructive debate with one of these climate science contrarians if any were willing to take up the gauntlet. Like I've always said we don't have to like each other to have a constructive dialogue, just as we don't need to like each other to work on the same job to achieve a common goal.
Post a Comment