On 3/19/2012 12:28 PM, dh@. wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 04:29:39 -0700 (PDT), >
> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 13, 8:09 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 22:50:40 -0800 (PST), >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 10:32 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 23:24:37 -0800 (PST), >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 6, 11:55 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 01:03:11 -0800 (PST), >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 8:22 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 06:33:57 -0800 (PST), >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Obviously, therefore, you wouldn't have the least idea of how many
>>>>>>>>>> collateral deaths are associated with one serving of tofu.
>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's because you don't so you can't tell me.
>>>
>>>>>>>> No, my ignorance has no causal bearing on your ignorance.
>>>
>>>>>>> Yet you try to blame me for your own inability to comprehend a significant
>>>>>>> difference between lives of positive and negative value.
>>>
>>>>>> No, I don't.
>>>
>>>>>> There is no reason to think I would be unable to comprehend a
>>>>>> definition that actually conveys some information, if you were able to
>>>>>> offer one.
>>>
>>>>> I did.
>>>
>>>> No. The definition you offered obviously conveys no information.
>>>
>>> That's a lie.
>>
>> It's not. I sincerely believe it to be true, so it's not a lie. And
>> you obviously haven't got any rational grounds for thinking that I
>> don't sincerely believe it to be true.
>
> Yes I do, because I don't believe you are stupid enough to believe it.
>
>> You shouldn't accuse people of
>> lying when you have no rational grounds for doing so. It's unethical.
>
> I don't do it. I don't believe you're stupid enough to believe your claim
> either, meaning I necessarily must believe you're lying, meaning I have very
> rational grounds for accusing you of lying.

"Rational" and "****wit David Harrison" don't belong in the same
sentence, except as negations of one another.