Comments for sursumcorda.salemsattic.com/post/talking-points-part-5

Comment #4600

2016-07-16T12:33:11Z

I thought "opposing" worked fine in the situation, anyway. That's how much I trust your language abilities. :)

Comment #4599

2016-07-16T12:13:29Z

Leave them both. I could pretend it was an intentional mistake to prove a point, but it was neither that nor a typo - it took my brain about half a day to notice the mistake. (I marvel at how the human brain works.)

Comment #4598

2016-07-16T01:02:42Z

I'd gladly fix the typo for you, but then I'd have to delete the second comment, which is a good point as well.

Comment #4597

2016-07-15T21:52:23Z

Of course that should have been "opposable thumbs" - oops!

However, my mistake illustrates my point quite nicely. If your argument is based not on reasoning, but on insults and bullying, then unless you're Mr. Trump even small factual errors destroy the aura of superiority you're trying to create around you. Instead of looking like someone competent enough to pass judgment, you'll look like a judgmental wannabe.

Even if you reply to your own comment explaining your mistake. :-)

Comment #4596

2016-07-14T20:09:20Z

Once again, he's not going to convince anyone with that tone of voice. Or do you think he'd listen if I replied like this:

Mr. Fowler, of course science is real. Anyone who thinks there are people out there who think science is imaginary probably doesn't have opposing thumbs. I'm pretty sure I don't want anyone as my unqualified friend who bequeaths me with nuclear bombs, oil spills, GMOs, or Tamagochis. Besides, any personified abstractum is no more real a friend than my son's imaginary dogs. I'll believe that people consider science their friend when they talk to it, and that's also when they should be committed.

As for climate change: blame your imaginary friend, science. If you continue to insist on closing your eyes to this inconvenient truth, you're probably the kind of person that also can't see the benefit of wiping their bottom.

I doubt it.