Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths


"JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1133803984.630186.175740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Jim McGinn wrote:
>> JAE wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > > So despite the fact that you are unable to dispute any aspect of my
>> > > hypothesis I'm supposed to take your word for it that somewhere in
>> > > this
>> > > book there's information that will refute my hypothesis. Yeah,
>> > > right.
>> > > Like I haven't heard that toothless assertion a hundred times on this
>> > > NG.
>> >
>> > Well, Jim, I think I realize your problem. You appear dead-set in
>> > repeating a lie. That lie is that I am unable to dispute your
>> > 'hypothesis.' Now normally, repeating a lie would make you a liar, but
>> > since you're not altogether there, since your brain doesn't work right,
>> > it's probably unfair to call you a liar. You're just nuts.
>>
>> Oh, I get it. I'm supposed to take your word for it that there is some
>> dispute of my hypothesis in some obscure book.
>
> You do not have to take my word for it. You can get the book and see
> for yourself; it is not so 'obscure' as to be difficult to obtain. I
> have no faith that you will do this, but you could do so rather easily.
> Now why again is it that you don't seem to be familliar with any work
> actually relevant to your claims?

I just went to the library today. I found the book and read it from cover
to cover, one painstaking chapter at a time. And I didn't find anything in
there that disputes my hypothesis. So it seems, Jason, that you are the
liar here.

>
>> And you are suggesting that *I'm* nuts?
>
> Yes. I'm suggesting that you're nuts.
>

Jim


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
    ... Jim McGinn wrote: ... That lie is that I am unable to dispute your ... You're just nuts. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... That lie is that I am unable to dispute your ... Now normally, repeating a lie would make you a liar, but ... it's probably unfair to call you a liar. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Jasons Dilemma
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... delusional-schmuck, er uh, Jimmy. ... complete enough to dispute in full form or to really bother with at ... but the fractions that squeak through in your various diatribes ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: I note that no one is mentioning Jim Bates this morning!
    ... Wel simply put, that is a lie, whether it's a lie of your own making or ... it's a lie that you're repeating is of little consequnce but it is a lie ... Then we have your husband convicted of having particular hash values ... images of child sex abuse and you're simply repeating the excuses he ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Impeccable
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... >> not the genius that you claim to be. ... > up my solution to human evolution as evidence that supports this ... It would seem, then, that the best way to dispute my, to use ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)