Re: Evidence - Re: I agree, enough is ENOUGH! Re: bring it

I have to say--half of the examples you cite here, as much as they must have been unpleasant to read, I don't think they were out of bounds.

LOL!!! When did I ever say the common bile duct? I am really surprised that someone who at least makes an attempt to post evidence was not smart enough t realize that there is more than one duct involved! Luckily there are other people who know how to do research and realize that there are more than one duct

Commenting on the other person's inteligence (when debating on the internet) is one of those things that, try as we might, is never going to be eliminated. We're humans and it's just endemic to the process.

(Second in line behind that is pointing out that someone contradicted themself. That's not personal. If you want to make it somewhat personal you call them a hypocrite. (I say "somewhat" personal b/c even if you use that word you probably mean "with respect to the case you are making," as opposed to a hypocrite in your real/personal life.) If you go so far as to say they "have no integrity," most people would call that a personal attack. Though again, I could imagine a scenario where someone uses that phrase but means it "with respect to the case you are making.")

Maybe if they actually research the subject then they will also realize why the study posted by "U" was really irrelevant. Of course she would have known that if she understood what she was reading in the first place and realized that there are more ducts than just the common bile duct.

Called something "irrelevant." Questioned whether she "understood" what she was reading.... Offensive?

The fact is that all anyone has to do is to read through these threads to see you you and "U" have been making things up as you go along in a desperate attempt to try and win a debate you cannot win since you clearly cannot present even one piece of credible evidence to counter the evidence I already presented.

I don't think accusing someone of making things up is particularly vicious.

I did not even POST in the thread above

That's why he said "these threads."

I think Hv feels outnumbered in these debates like he's taking on a pack of wolves, and ascribes qualities to "the gang" as it gangs up on him.

Read my response to that post. "U" did a great job of providing the proof that the argument you and she are using is bogus!

But I didn't present an "argument" and I made no claims...I only presented information and sources that show the size of the CBD and the size of endoscopic balloons & the stones passed by using them

So he twists things and turns things: Don't let him get away with it!!

and "U" are a couple of other big offenders as far as starting attacks and posting posts that are not on topic but rather nothing more than attacks.

So he accused you of starting attacks--and that in itself is an attack.(?) But what if that's the way it really seems to him?

 
Using "U's" line of reasoning then we can also conclude that she believes chemotherapy and radiation therapy are effective for cancer. And that vaccines and fluoride are perfectly safe. After all so many people claim these are true, so according to "U" they therefore must be true!!!

Critiquing someone's logic and reasoning... that's the stuff debates are made of, no?

Therefore, if you choose to keep making up lies about me you are simply going to discredit yourself even further!!!

Sounds like a guy defending himself.

Now, what is debate? Debate involves taking a position and providing evidence to back that position. Debate is not personal attacks, it is not making up lies about the other person,

I don't find this offensive.

it is not looking through other forums to find anything to twist in a poor attempt to try and discredit someone. . . . Interesting though how you keep TROLLing around my forum looking for things you can use to attack me with.

Some of his opponents have done this.

  
Also interesting how the LF trolls keep to turn this forum in to a debate me forum rather than keeping it a "liver flush debate" forum.

Reading through some of the threads, it does feel that way.

One other thing I'd like to add. "Freedom of Speech" is one thing, but whoever said we have the "Right to Win the Debate?" Seems like those things are getting confused. If two people go back and forth in an argument and one writes 19 posts and the other writes 20, thereby having the last word, what's that got to do with "Freedom of Speech?" This being the internet there are no time limits on these debates, so yes, it is a matter out "outlasting" your opponent. Doesn't mean you're shouting them down. But some people do run out of ammo, myself included at times. If someone keeps rambling on and it bugs you that they're getting the last word, just write a post that says, "You're wrong. See above."

Lastly... ahh, the good ole days:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1472388#i